Now that single payer is dead...

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

ThinkTooMuch

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
339
Reaction score
2
everyone happy? Just saw the white house domestic policy director on CNN saying the white house while hearing the arguments from single payer supporters, believes the best thing to do is to "build on the current employer based system."

Members don't see this ad.
 
Nope... not in the least. Any expansion of MC, MA, or the creation of a new federal health insurance program will erode our bottom line. This just worsens the cost shifting that is already occurring, placing more of a burden on private practices.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Oh, I don't know... perhaps raising the retirement -- read SS & MC age eligibility in a responsible fashion reflective of the advances in life expectancy... turn these back into safety nets rather than foundation retirement programs. Appeal the SGR and budget neutrality methodologies in favor of a system that reflects the costs of providing the services (they already have the metric for this in place, the MEI). MC shortfalls will have to be addressed in one of two ways: increase revenues (taxes) or curtail the amount of services. Go forward with the funding for comparative effectiveness / value based research; at the same time you must either find some way to incentivize continued innovation or accept the stifling of innovation that would occur under the decreased monetary return model that would result from this. Novel drugs should retain the long patent protection period.... Make health insurance individually owned so that it may be portable between jobs; tax health insurance benefits equally regardless of who is paying for it... eliminate in-network/out of network barriers from patients choosing who their provider will be, on and on.

Distilled down -- we, as a profession, need to determine what treatments work and be sensitive to the costs associated with the treatment. Payors need to decide what services they are willing to cover, have this list of services clearly enumerated and posted for everyone to see, and then pay appropriately based upon the risk, time, work, and resources consumed in providing said care (one of the strengths of the RBRVU system I must admit is that it affords some subjective, quantifiable rationale for our charges).

Or we could just go to a cash system where we are paid what the market is willing to bear, we pay our staff what we can afford to pay them, and let the chips fall where they may...... (said partially tongue in cheek) Patients could still have insurance that helps reimburse them after the fact..... but that would never fly (and I would probably be poorer because my charges would more than likely go down if I believed that folks were having to pay out of pocket).
 
It certainly isn't dead. It will continue to rear its ugly head as we progress to a slow defacto single payer concept with Medicare or some equivalently unsustainable program controlling the money.
 
Top