Peter Bach, a pulmonary specialist at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, has an interesting solution for some of Medicare’s problems. In an op-ed column in Wednesday’s New York Times, Bach claims that while medical specialists increase in a given area, medicare costs go up but but patient satisfaction, quality of care and convenience remain the same. In other words, in a place like Manhattan where there are double the amount of specialists as there are in Albany, medicare costs per individual are more than double . However, patient satisfaction and treatment are reported to be the same. The simple solution that Bach poses for this issue is that medicare should use a bidding system in which Medicare should start to offer doctors a reimbursement rate lower than the current rate and see how many doctors sign up. Obviously, if enough doctors do sign up, Medicare would save its users and taxpayers much money. Worst case scenario, Bach argues, is that specialists may leave the system and patients may not be able to get their preferred. However, as Bach notes, the loss of specialists should not result in less quality care.
Bach’s argument makes sense if it is true their is not a difference in quality of care between specialists and general doctors. While many people may not report a difference in the quality of care between specialists and general doctors, I do believe people feel very comfortable with their specialists and would have a difficult time getting a replacement general doctor. While the actual care may be the same, I still feel people many people feel more comfortable with their specialists.
Archive for June, 2009
Medicare as Auctioneers?
Thursday, June 4th, 2009Obama “Will” Control Medicare Costs
Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009At a recent meeting Senate sources confirmed that President Obama plans to undertake a major Medicare reform. The White House hopes that a large part of the changes will be centered on MedPAC, the Medicare Payment Advisory Committee. MedPAC is an independent congressional agency formed to help Congress deal with Medicare issues. Every year the agency releases a report to Congress that analyzes the payment policy of Medicare and gives recommendations and every year the report is ignored.
There are currently two plans to reform Medicare under consideration that involve MedPAC. Under Jay Rockefeller’s MedPAC Reform Act, MedPAC would move into the executive branch and be given control over things like Medicare payment rates. The other plan consists of taking MedPAC’s yearly recommendations and putting them through a yes-or-no vote in Congress. This plan would call for fast track, episodic reform. However, healthcare reform is a continual process and as such should consist of continual reform.
Despite obvious reasons that the second plan would do more harm than good, all the healthcare reforms being discussed by government need a reality check. Before trying to even promote universal healthcare or make more people Medicare-eligible, Obama should eliminate all of the fraud and abuse that already exist in programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
The largest problem of all surrounding healthcare reform is that America does not have the money for it. Obama wants to spend money that we do not have in order to fix something that government shouldn’t be involved in. The government should really just stop spending money on programs like Medicare because it doesn’t have the money to do it. Out government is already trillions of dollars in debt. The sad truth is that Obama will not be able to control Medicare costs with any plan that is under consideration. You can’t spend money you don’t have and expect to get away with it. If we follow Obama’s plans we may be the first country in the world to universalize healthcare while already being bankrupt.
Kennedy Anticipated to Propose Healthcare Changes
Monday, June 1st, 2009The plans to restructure the U.S. healthcare system have now begun to collect momentum. Senator Edward Kennedy, also the chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee will soon announce a health system in the United States. Recently, Kennedy gave a rough outline of his healthcare bill to the Boston Globe.
Kennedy’s support of universal healthcare coverage is strongly reflected in his proposal. Some key aspects of the proposal include a new government-subsidized program which would provide medical coverage and make an order that all Americans must have some type of healthcare coverage. Kennedy insists that through his plan he can negotiate with insurance companies to keep premiums and copays low and affordable for those who have payment problems.
These aspects have sparked a lot of controversial debate within congress and amongst the public since President Obama wants to begin reforming the U.S. healthcare structure by the end of 2009. Republicans and insurance firms are concerned that private insurers would not be able to contend with government in the market for healthcare and would thus be driven out by a government monopoly in healthcare. Experts also predict that Kennedy’s plan will expand Medicaid programs to the poor and change Medicare benefits requirements by lowering the eligibility age from 65 to 55 years old.
Senator Max Baucus from Montana, the chair of the Senate Finance Committee is making another version of the bill which he hopes will be supported by Republicans and Democrats. Both Kennedy and Baucus have agreed that their committees will draft bills that complement each other.
