The Cellar - Impeding changes to our Health Care system

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Impeding changes to our Health Care system (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=16747)

Overly sensitive was not in reference to anyone's member, but a state of mind. ;)

What the fuck, dude?

And don't worry everyone, dude knows what I'm talking about. :eyebrow:

He was making a little funny...get it...little? :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 739215)

Competiton breeds savings and comes from insurance companies competing for millions of new customers.

As I stated, insurance exchanges in the form proposed do not exist and have not been tested. We have bet the whole Goose on an unproven fantasy of how Obama and his cronies want it to work. That is a failure from the beginning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 739505)

The FEHB program is a pretty good model. It covers 4-5 million govt employees, with 15-20 private insurance companies offering over 200 different plans, so I certainly wouldnt call a program based on this model a fantasy.

We didnt test the major environmental regulatory programs in the 70s, with new required standards that had never been tried before; there was no guarantee they would work. Hell, many conservative opponents claimed it would lead to the economic downfall of the US. It didnt. The new regulatory programs werent perfect and needed tweeking along the way, but they worked to the country's benefit.

We didnt test the major welfare reform program in the 90s. Liberal opponents of the reform who never forgave Clinton and claimed it would lead to a return to poverty levels from 50 years ago. It didnt.

To call a program a failure because it is untested seems a bit premature. We have a history of trying untested programs that we think are good for the country- "to the moon, alice!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 739510)

It is a total fantasy. There are no true Insurance Exchanges anywhere in the US. Dream on.... :lol: Fail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 739526)

It is a total fantasy. There are no true Insurance Exchanges anywhere in the US. Dream on.... :lol: Fail.

*shrug* Good thing your grading system doesnt really mean anything other than your own bias.

IMO, the FEHB model is a good model of public/private "managed competition."

In any case, the day we stop trying new ideas or new programs because they are untested (or even based to some degree on other programs) is the day we stop innovating and IMO, it will be a bad day for the country.

A critical part of Obamacare and Mayo isn't playing....

Quote:

The prestigious Rochester clinic is raising questions about accountable care organizations, or ACOs, which are supposed to be updated -- and better -- versions of health maintenance organizations. Approved as part of the 2010 health care law, they are designed to improve care and cuts costs by over half a billion dollars a year.

http://www.startribune.com/business/123668729.html

ACO's fail to deliver....

Quote:

A key government experiment that set out to lower costs and coordinate care for Medicare patients — now the blueprint for an innovation the Obama administration is trying to move to a national scale — has failed to save a substantial amount of money.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...nGH_story.html

If the healthcare industry as a whole (pharm, drs, nurses, insurance) had done a better job at a lower price, and if Americans weren't obsessed with their health, there would be no need of any kind of reform.

don't forget the medical suppliers. They are a HUGE part of the problem as well.

An interesting little blog piece comparing experiences of American and British healthcare.

http://jontillman.com/2011/02/22/us-...al-comparison/

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 740294)

don't forget the medical suppliers.

I won't

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 740208)

A critical part of Obamacare and Mayo isn't playing....

http://www.startribune.com/business/123668729.html

Quote:

...A bigger sticking point could be antitrust rules that are part of the ACO proposal. Mayo already provides most or all of the health care in many of Minnesota's rural counties, and Wood believes it could not operate ACOs in those areas without violating the proposed regulations.

Another issue is the way the government plans to measure effectiveness and its way of assigning patients to ACOs. The effectiveness measures proposed by the government are such things as 30-day mortality statistics and the number of diabetes treatments, Wood said.

"They don't get you close to measuring health," he maintained. "The simplest measure for consumers is: How effectively did the organization keep me functioning. People feel strongly that they want to be able to do what they need to do so that people who depend on them can continue to depend on them."

Mayo is confident enough in its current approach to accountable care that it has asked CMS "to take an entirely different approach to implementation of ACOs in the country." Mayo would like the government to contract directly with groups that are already providing programs.

CMS declined to comment on Mayo's concerns.

"This is a proposed rule," a spokeswoman said. "We will review the comments [provided by all organizations] and issue a final rule. We're confident providers will decide to participate based on the final rule, not the proposed rule."

Wood said Mayo is only interested in working in ways that are proven.

"We're not looking to intentionally give [health care reform] a black eye," Wood said. "We're working to implement accountable care."

Jim Spencer • 202-408-2752 • jim.spencer@startribune.com

A couple observations here.

It's a proposed rule, not a final rule. This is a perfect example of how and why such an enormous problem like the runaway costs for healthcare needs to be addressed in a sensible way. By sensible, I mean in a thoughtful way. In this case, the government is including the thoughts of the provider, working for the interests of the citizens. I like that configuration. *And*, I think the ideas behind this part of the rules are good ones. I want Accountability. Including input from those outfits that will deliver it is sensible.