October 30, 2009
3:03 pm
There is a great deal to analyze in the more than 1,900 pages that make up the proposed health reform legislation unveiled by House leaders this week, and we’ll be discussing different components of the bill in this space in the days ahead. There’s at least one provision in the bill, though, that has already been discussed at great length and doesn’t warrant revisiting.
The House legislation would change the Medicare Part D prescription drug program to have the Department of Health and Human Services, rather than private companies, negotiate prices for pharmaceuticals used in the program. This is an issue that was furiously debated during and in the immediate aftermath of congressional passage of the Medicare Modernization Act, which created the Part D program. Let’s review why government “negotiation” of drug prices is a bad idea. Read more
October 27, 2009
2:19 pm
They’ve been called “immoral,” “skyrocketing” and “obscene,” but the fact is that health insurer profits don’t match the rhetoric coming from proponents of a government health plan option.
Unfortunately, health reform debate is degenerating into us-versus-them rhetorical warfare. Those who want a larger role for the federal government in the health insurance markets are trying to rile populist anger by talking about the insurance companies making outrageous profits at the expense of American consumers.
The numbers, though, don’t back up the accusations. According to a report this week in the Associated Press, health insurance profit margins last year were 2.2 percent, which placed the industry 35th in profitability among 53 industries on the Fortune 500 list. Read more
September 03, 2009
1:04 pm
One of the more interesting discussions within the larger health reform debate concerns the financial impact of wellness and disease prevention initiatives. Logic says that doing a better job of preventing disease and keeping people healthier will save money in the long run through fewer lengthy hospitalizations and emergency room visits.
The Congressional Budget Office says otherwise, asserting that any savings would be negated by the costs of extending prevention initiatives to the full U.S. population.
A new study, though, says the problem lies in the expanse of time over which government budget counter measure the financial effect of federal programs.
A study by University of Chicago researchers, sponsored by Novo Nordisk and published in the Health Affairs journal this week, says that cost estimates for healthcare legislation should be examined over a period of 25 years in order to better ascertain how having healthier, longer-living patients would affect costs. Read more
August 26, 2009
11:12 am
It is difficult to imagine a United States Senate without Ted Kennedy.
Americans today are saddened by the news that Senator Kennedy has passed away after his difficult struggle with brain cancer. It goes without saying that he leaves behind an unparalleled legacy of legislative achievement, leaving his mark on a plethora of issues that affect the lives of every American.
Not to take anything away from the able lawmakers who are currently working on health issues, but I can’t help but think today’s problematic health reform debate would have been progressing more smoothly if Senator Kennedy had been in good health. He served as a reminder of a day when legislating in Washington was less partisan and tinged with less venom than it is too often the case today. Read more
August 21, 2009
11:13 am
Three particular items of interest in Yesterday’s Washington Post:
In its editorial yesterday, the Post, which has previously expressed skepticism about the proposed government health plan option, is now saying that the idea needs to be jettisoned before it drags down the entire health reform effort. As talk is heating up that Senate Democrats may try to push health reform legislation through the budget reconciliation process, which would require only 51 votes for passage, the Post accurately makes the point that reconciliation provisions could result in important aspects of reform, such as creating new health insurance exchanges, being lost. And, as the editorial states clearly, “there’s no way to amass 60 votes with a public option in the bill.”
On the op-ed page, David Ignatius shares a lengthy conversation he had with Mayo Clinic CEO and former Healthcare Leadership Council chairman Denis Cortese. Dr. Cortese makes the point that, rather than create a new federal health bureaucracy, it would make far more sense to use the existing government programs like Medicare and Medicaid as laboratories for reform. Read more
CATEGORIES: