More CMG turmoil- Envision CEO stepping down

[oldtown]

---

Members don't see this ad.

It sure is getting ugly in CMG land. Will be interesting to see what happens with Envision and TeamHealth, both seem to be on the slow road to bankruptcy. Should be a lesson to any entity entertaining selling to Private Equity

Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden stepping down

Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden will step down, the physician staffing giant announced Wednesday. | Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden will step down, the physician staffing giant announced Wednesday.

www.fiercehealthcare.com

 

[EctopicFetus]

It sure is getting ugly in CMG land. Will be interesting to see what happens with Envision and TeamHealth, both seem to be on the slow road to bankruptcy. Should be a lesson to any entity entertaining selling to Private Equity

Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden stepping down

Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden will step down, the physician staffing giant announced Wednesday. | Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden will step down, the physician staffing giant announced Wednesday.

www.fiercehealthcare.com

Actually if you are gonna go bankrupt selling is ideal. Holden probably earned 100m in his time.

 

[deleted941485]

It sure is getting ugly in CMG land. Will be interesting to see what happens with Envision and TeamHealth, both seem to be on the slow road to bankruptcy. Should be a lesson to any entity entertaining selling to Private Equity

Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden stepping down

Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden will step down, the physician staffing giant announced Wednesday. | Envision Healthcare CEO Chris Holden will step down, the physician staffing giant announced Wednesday.

www.fiercehealthcare.com

The house of cards is gonna start to fall.

Single payor prospects are certainly high. This WILL be on the docket

Balance billing legislation

Commercial insurers simply saying NO!

They’ve squeezed all they can and now it’s time for them to die

CMGs have been daisy chaining it along now for a while now. KKR probably has had enough of them too.

 

[Vandalia]

You left off the biggest factor in my opinion: "non-profit" healthcare giants that can squeeze everyone else out. My medical school owns or operates about half of the hospitals in my home state and is rapidly gobbling up the rest. Their "non-profit" physician corporation provides and controls physician employment. The CMGs are being squeezed out by a much more powerful entity. The "non-profit" has the muscle, the money, and the "good ol' state u" cachet.

The specifics are different elsewhere but they dynamics are the same. The 'non-profits' are corporations that don't have to pay their shareholders; with that they are invincible.

 

[Buckeye1992]

We are not that close to single payer.

 

[Rekt]

We are not that close to single payer.

I find it hard to believe insurers would ever let it happen.

 

[deleted941485]

I find it hard to believe insurers would ever let it happen.

Its gonna happen. Public option, M4A, nationalization...pick one and in 2-3 years we will probably have it

And to continue from my post above. "academic" medical centers are terrible offenders as well. They plead poverty underpay the staff and are consistently in the black year after year. If people in the FTC wanted to make a career out of it, they could start denying merger applications left and right and start going after them. If you dont like it, you better leave town! They need to be "Right Sized" as the industry puts it.

 

[DrDuck2]

I find it hard to believe insurers would ever let it happen.

I doubt they will have much say in it if Congress deems it so. I can imagine them making private insurance "against the law" or somehow making it the law that all hospitals and doctors accept the Medicare for all plan.....crazier things have happened....I mean some states are trying to make abortion essentially illegal....

 

[ShockIndex]

You left off the biggest factor in my opinion: "non-profit" healthcare giants that can squeeze everyone else out. My medical school owns or operates about half of the hospitals in my home state and is rapidly gobbling up the rest. Their "non-profit" physician corporation provides and controls physician employment. The CMGs are being squeezed out by a much more powerful entity. The "non-profit" has the muscle, the money, and the "good ol' state u" cachet.

The specifics are different elsewhere but they dynamics are the same. The 'non-profits' are corporations that don't have to pay their shareholders; with that they are invincible.

I think you are exactly right and I’ve been saying this for a while. There is a $4 billion non-profit, academic healthcare system in my former neck of the woods with one of the oldest EM residencies in the nation that is functioning like a CMG. Of course they staff the handful hospitals in their system, but also 2X as many across several other unaffiliated systems and a 100-mile radius of the academic mothership. They have taken over contracts from SDGs and CMGs alike over the past 5 years. Meanwhile, the EM residency pumps out graduates that often stay in the system that is ever growing and part of the academic population health emphasis that garners even more research dollars. They are able to do this by offering employee contacts that are at least as lucrative (if not more) than what ApolloMD, USACS, et al can offer...for now. However, the real attraction is that employees can float between academics vs. community, EMS directorships, admin, etc. The department leadership is also more stable and physician friendly than the nearby alternatives, IMHO.

Interestingly, the academic system is about to merge with an even larger, $9 billion non-profit system with its own, more community-based GME programs (although their EM residency at the hub has an even larger national reputation). While this larger entity has community hospitals across 3 states that employ CMGs for their EDs, those contracts are being threatened by this mega non-profit system that is emerging and about to have $300+ million in operating income to play with and can churn out 30+ EM graduates a year.

 

[deleted941485]

I think you are exactly right and I’ve been saying this for a while. There is a $4 billion non-profit, academic healthcare system in my former neck of the woods with one of the oldest EM residencies in the nation that is functioning like a CMG. Of course they staff the handful hospitals in their system, but also 2X as many across several other unaffiliated systems and a 100-mile radius of the academic mothership. They have taken over contracts from SDGs and CMGs alike over the past 5 years. Meanwhile, the EM residency pumps out graduates that often stay in the system that is ever growing and part of the academic population health emphasis that garners even more research dollars. They are able to do this by offering employee contacts that are at least as lucrative (if not more) than what ApolloMD, USACS, et al can offer...for now. However, the real attraction is that employees can float between academics vs. community, EMS directorships, admin, etc. The department leadership is also more stable and physician friendly than the nearby alternatives, IMHO.

Interestingly, the academic system is about to merge with an even larger, $9 billion non-profit system with its own, more community-based GME programs (although their EM residency at the hub has an even larger national reputation). While this larger entity has community hospitals across 3 states that employ CMGs for their EDs, those contracts are being threatened by this mega non-profit system that is emerging and about to have $300+ million in operating income to play with and can churn out 30+ EM graduates a year.

And the FTC just lets it happen. then they complain about the cost of HC. Its not convincing that a 4 bln dollar system coordinates care any better than a 13bln system versus its costs.

 

[Buckeye1992]

Congress would have to find a way to fund it first.

 

[deleted941485]

I doubt they will have much say in it if Congress deems it so. I can imagine them making private insurance "against the law" or somehow making it the law that all hospitals and doctors accept the Medicare for all plan.....crazier things have happened....I mean some states are trying to make abortion essentially illegal....

You bet your ass youll be taking whatever the govt wants to pay you. Make no mistake congress reserves the right to destroy your livelihood.

 

[deleted941485]

Congress would have to find a way to fund it first.

Simple just low ball the expected expenditures to make the taxes levied look modest and then force the stakeholders to accept that rate. The rest will fall in line. which should be a cake walk once the Dems take the senate and the white house.

 

[EctopicFetus]

Real issue with m4a is you would destroy about $1T in market cap. Tons of lost jobs.
The insurers aren’t dumb like us doctor types. Also hca tenet chs and even the non profits don’t want m4a. The aha is strong. The insurers are strong too.
I could see steps toward m4a. But a full on m4a won’t happen in my lifetime.

 

[bravotwozero]

And the FTC just lets it happen. then they complain about the cost of HC. Its not convincing that a 4 bln dollar system coordinates care any better than a 13bln system versus its costs.

Lol man where have you been? Since when has our government actually enforced anti trust legislation that’s been on the books for decades? If they did, we would actually have a truly free market economy instead of one that’s completely rigged by a glut of monopolies and oligarchs.

No wonder why we have internet speeds in the Stone Age whereas South Korea is like 300x faster!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ShockIndex]

And the FTC just lets it happen. then they complain about the cost of HC. Its not convincing that a 4 bln dollar system coordinates care any better than a 13bln system versus its costs.

The FTC reviews these mergers but has very little authority to regulate anticompetitive practices of non-profits once the merger has occurred. Moreover, the FTC doesn’t have the budget to challenge every merger and has to pick its battles. The one I referenced is a “strategic partnership” which, in theory, means no ownership of property or assumption of liability. However, once partnered the entities have a lot of wiggle room under current law because they’re both non-profits and largely shielded from FTC regulators. Having said that, not all of these mergers are bad. Yes, on average they probably increase costs. However, they may also keep some facilities afloat that would otherwise close.

 

[KGflyboy]

I don't think single payer will happen any time soon. Congress can't pass anything big these days due to hyper partisanship.

If the House, Senate, and Presidency were all held by Democrats, then maybe something would pass. But I still think they would struggle to get it done.

 

[EctopicFetus]

I don't think single payer will happen any time soon. Congress can't pass anything big these days due to hyper partisanship.

If the House, Senate, and Presidency were all held by Democrats, then maybe something would pass. But I still think they would struggle to get it done.

That balance billing legislation is about to show you otherwise. I hope I’m wrong.

 

[bronx43]

M4A will pass during the next financial crisis - whichever form it takes. Unless a shock of that magnitude comes, the political system won’t disrupt the biggest industry/employer in this country.

 

[ShockIndex]

M4A will pass during the next financial crisis - whichever form it takes. Unless a shock of that magnitude comes, the political system won’t disrupt the biggest industry/employer in this country.

The next financial “crisis” is going to be brought about by the unwinding of our growing debt bubble - government, private, and institutional. If our country’s answer is to take on another $3 trillion in debt each year, well...

 

[bronx43]

The next financial “crisis” is going to be brought about by the unwinding of our growing debt bubble - government, private, and institutional. If our country’s answer is to take on another $3 trillion in debt each year, well...

I don’t disagree. It’s coming in one shape or another.

 

[ShockIndex]

I don’t disagree. It’s coming in one shape or another.

The people most desiring of the socialist utopian fantasy happen to be the least equipped to live in the socialist dystopian reality.

 

[GeneralVeers]

I don’t disagree. It’s coming in one shape or another.

I agree but we don't know when. As part of being a conservative, I acknowledge that we are going to lose.....eventually. We may not get single-payer next year, or 10 years, or 20, however our opponents are relentless and laser-focused on this goal. They just need to one year of the right environment where they have the Presidency, 60 votes in the Senate and enough public discord to pass it. Once it's passed into law, it will remain forever, like all of the other disastrous entitlements that are destroying our country.

The role of conservatives is to fight, and delay the inevitable as long as possible. I hope this can be resisted at least until I retire or hopefully until after I'm long dead.

 

[EctopicFetus]

I agree but we don't know when. As part of being a conservative, I acknowledge that we are going to lose.....eventually. We may not get single-payer next year, or 10 years, or 20, however our opponents are relentless and laser-focused on this goal. They just need to one year of the right environment where they have the Presidency, 60 votes in the Senate and enough public discord to pass it. Once it's passed into law, it will remain forever, like all of the other disastrous entitlements that are destroying our country.

The role of conservatives is to fight, and delay the inevitable as long as possible. I hope this can be resisted at least until I retire or hopefully until after I'm long dead.

You are so right. It’s sad but you are right..

 

[Siggy]

I agree but we don't know when. As part of being a conservative, I acknowledge that we are going to lose.....eventually. We may not get single-payer next year, or 10 years, or 20, however our opponents are relentless and laser-focused on this goal. They just need to one year of the right environment where they have the Presidency, 60 votes in the Senate and enough public discord to pass it. Once it's passed into law, it will remain forever, like all of the other disastrous entitlements that are destroying our country.

The role of conservatives is to fight, and delay the inevitable as long as possible. I hope this can be resisted at least until I retire or hopefully until after I'm long dead.

Yea... "conservatives" care about the "deficit" only when the others are in control. Your boy Trump is racking up more debt than Obama ever could have, despite being in "boom times." The auto bailout? Laughable compared to what the government has given the bootstrappy farmers because of the tarifs (remember when "conservatives" were for free trade?). Also, where are the Tea Partiers? Oh, wait, a R is in office... so they've gone back to the hole they came from.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Yea... "conservatives" care about the "deficit" only when the others are in control. Your boy Trump is racking up more debt than Obama ever could have, despite being in "boom times." The auto bailout? Laughable compared to what the government has given the bootstrappy farmers because of the tarifs (remember when "conservatives" were for free trade?). Also, where are the Tea Partiers? Oh, wait, a R is in office... so they've gone back to the hole they came from.

Wrong. Conservatives and Liberals both don't care about the deficit. There is zero appetite in either party to control the growth of entitlements which is mostly to blame for the deficit. Both establishments are corrupt officials who've reached a bargain whereby they have slight policy differences around the edges, but agree to keep feeding the "blob" which is the massive lobbyist/administrative state that doles out billions of tax dollars to corrupt former Republican and Democrat office-holders.

The reason Democrats want Single Payer, is not because it will "help" people or that they are kind, generous politicians. They want this terrible policy because it is a way to massively expand their power, and use it to take $trillions from the private economy to fund their corrupt ecosystem.

 

[ShockIndex]

Wrong. Conservatives and Liberals both don't care about the deficit. There is zero appetite in either party to control the growth of entitlements which is mostly to blame for the deficit. Both establishments are corrupt officials who've reached a bargain whereby they have slight policy differences around the edges, but agree to keep feeding the "blob" which is the massive lobbyist/administrative state that doles out billions of tax dollars to corrupt former Republican and Democrat office-holders.

The reason Democrats want Single Payer, is not because it will "help" people or that they are kind, generous politicians. They want this terrible policy because it is a way to massively expand their power, and use it to take $trillions from the private economy to fund their corrupt ecosystem.

This is pretty much spot on. Here is the math:

75% of our revenues are eaten-up by the so called non-discretionary spending such as SS, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Trump Tax Cut was a $150 billion rounding error on our $4 trillion dollar budget, and was likely offset by increased economic activity as tax revenues have gone UP over the past 2 years. The fact that revenues into the government increased after a tax cut is called a clue to those who think that we can tax “the rich” to balance the budget.

There is absolutely no way to balance the budget unless you are willing to kill some sacred cows in the form of Medicare and Medicaid. Although it would be to my financial detriment to do so, I’d gladly vote for someone who runs on a platform of massively cutting Medicaid (I’d only support some kids and a limited number of chronic conditions like ALS, T21, some cancers, etc.), gradually phasing our Medicare, and privatizing SS.

 

[GeneralVeers]

There is absolutely no way to balance the budget unless you are willing to kill some sacred cows in the form of Medicare and Medicaid. Although it would be to my financial detriment to do so, I’d gladly vote for someone who runs on a platform of massively cutting Medicaid (I’d only support some kids and a limited number of chronic conditions like ALS, T21, some cancers, etc.), gradually phasing our Medicare, and privatizing SS.

Old people vote in the highest proportion, and they gobble up the majority of dollars spend on social programs. Any politician proposing serious cuts to Medicare/SS is a dead-person-walking. Even Trump has known better than to stay away from this issue.

Greedy Boomers will be the death of us all.

I think most Tea-partiers have given up on this issue, and now our main fight is to slow the expansion of government and resist the administrative state wherever possible. We are fighting a rear-guard action as we slowly, but surely retreat to inevitable defeat.

 

[bravotwozero]

If the government cancels medicare and social security, you can bet your bottom dollar that you and I will NEVER get back the thousands of dollars the government has already taken out of paychecks already in the form of SS and Medicare taxes.

 

[EctopicFetus]

If the government cancels medicare and social security, you can bet your bottom dollar that you and I will NEVER get back the thousands of dollars the government has already taken out of paychecks already in the form of SS and Medicare taxes.

Right but something needs to change and soon. Our entitlement spending is out of control. Fwiw I support a strict balanced budget and let’s all be serious. To think we can’t cut Medicare and Medicaid is insane. He’ll just controlling drug costs would be a huge first step. I digress because the policy makers are free spending clowns.

 

[RustedFox]

Greedy Boomers will be the death of us all.

Quoted for truth.

I work in the United States Capital of Old People.
97%+ of them are overweight and unrepentant diabetic, smokey, hypertensive vasculopaths with an entitlement complex.

Nevermind personal responsibility and general overall conditioning when you can just guzzle white zin and munch on fried foods all day.

I hate seniors.
They used to be fonts of wisdom and knowledge.
Not anymore.
'Merica.

 

[EctopicFetus]

Quoted for truth.

I work in the United States Capital of Old People.
97%+ of them are overweight and unrepentant diabetic, smokey, hypertensive vasculopaths with an entitlement complex.

Nevermind personal responsibility and general overall conditioning when you can just guzzle white zin and munch on fried foods all day.

I hate seniors.
They used to be fonts of wisdom and knowledge.
Not anymore.
'Merica.

I’ll also say they take and take. The greatest generation is essentially all dead. Boomers are greedy bastards who will destroy us financially.

 

[ShockIndex]

If the government cancels medicare and social security, you can bet your bottom dollar that you and I will NEVER get back the thousands of dollars the government has already taken out of paychecks already in the form of SS and Medicare taxes.

Assuming you are under 45 years old, do you actually think that you are going to see any of your SS/Medicare deductions the way things are headed? Medicare and SS are simply taxes that the government is free to spend on whateverthehell; there is no lockbox. Those dollars were collected from you and promptly spent on roads, bridges, and NIH studies investigating the mating habits of transgendered dolphins. They’re gone...poof.

On their current trajectories, the only way that Medicare and SS do not have a sudden collapse in about 20 years under the weight of the $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities is if they are somehow eventually means tested. That involves some combination of raising Medicare premiums on those who cross certain net worth thresholds, reducing Medicare/SS benefits on those same high net worth individuals, or raising the eligibility age. Guess what - if you’re a GenX or Millennial physician, you will most certainly be considered high net worth by the time the excrement hits the fan in about 15-25 years, or you will be eligible for your benefits when you hit age 85.

The most equitable way to to do this so that the least number of people are screwed would be a phased withdrawal of SS/Medicare. People in the system now or in the next 10 years would see no change (except perhaps raising eligibility age), but younger generations would incur progressively more responsibility for their future medical and retirement costs.

However, like @GeneralVeers said, there is zero political will to fix this problem for a lot of reasons. Therefore, we are going to have a hard landing in about 20 years when benefits must be curtained and relatively few have the savings to make-up the shortfall because they too believed in a SS/Medicare “lockbox.”

 

[deleted941485]

I agree but we don't know when. As part of being a conservative, I acknowledge that we are going to lose.....eventually. We may not get single-payer next year, or 10 years, or 20, however our opponents are relentless and laser-focused on this goal. They just need to one year of the right environment where they have the Presidency, 60 votes in the Senate and enough public discord to pass it. Once it's passed into law, it will remain forever, like all of the other disastrous entitlements that are destroying our country.

The role of conservatives is to fight, and delay the inevitable as long as possible. I hope this can be resisted at least until I retire or hopefully until after I'm long dead.

Basically all of conservatism in a nutshell

 

[southerndoc]

Gets even worse... Anthem is developing "high performance networks" with double-digit cuts to physician/hospital reimbursement to target large employers in major metropolitan areas. Basically this will limit in-network facilities to only one or two per major metro area. It's either take a 30% cut in reimbursement or fare your chances of survival without it.

It's all about the insurance companies' profits.

 

[deleted941485]

Gets even worse... Anthem is developing "high performance networks" with double-digit cuts to physician/hospital reimbursement to target large employers in major metropolitan areas. Basically this will limit in-network facilities to only one or two per major metro area. It's either take a 30% cut in reimbursement or fare your chances of survival without it.

It's all about the insurance companies' profits.

Hey if they accept it then in a few years they just make more cuts.

 

[Siggy]

Wrong. Conservatives and Liberals both don't care about the deficit. There is zero appetite in either party to control the growth of entitlements which is mostly to blame for the deficit. Both establishments are corrupt officials who've reached a bargain whereby they have slight policy differences around the edges, but agree to keep feeding the "blob" which is the massive lobbyist/administrative state that doles out billions of tax dollars to corrupt former Republican and Democrat office-holders.

The reason Democrats want Single Payer, is not because it will "help" people or that they are kind, generous politicians. They want this terrible policy because it is a way to massively expand their power, and use it to take $trillions from the private economy to fund their corrupt ecosystem.

Remind me where the "fiscal liberals" that are claiming every 4 years to "balance the budget." Does anyone else remember Trump's campaign promise that he would balance the budget quickly? Hmm... he had 2 years of a Republican House and Senate and did... the exact opposite. So remind me, where do "conservatives" get to even speak about a balanced budget when they do absolutely nothing to get there when they are in power?

 

[Siggy]

75% of our revenues are eaten-up by the so called non-discretionary spending such as SS, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Trump Tax Cut was a $150 billion rounding error on our $4 trillion dollar budget, and was likely offset by increased economic activity as tax revenues have gone UP over the past 2 years. The fact that revenues into the government increased after a tax cut is called a clue to those who think that we can tax “the rich” to balance the budget.

There is absolutely no way to balance the budget unless you are willing to kill some sacred cows in the form of Medicare and Medicaid. Although it would be to my financial detriment to do so, I’d gladly vote for someone who runs on a platform of massively cutting Medicaid (I’d only support some kids and a limited number of chronic conditions like ALS, T21, some cancers, etc.), gradually phasing our Medicare, and privatizing SS.

I didn't realize that 3% is meaningless. Can I take a rounding error out of your paycheck?

Oh, and the claim that it was offset by increased economic activity lies contrary to... well... facts.

The GOP Tax Cuts Didn’t Work

Republicans said the reform would grow the economy by up to 6 percent, stimulate business investment, and pay for itself. None of that happened.

www.theatlantic.com

Trump tax cuts did little to boost economic growth in 2018, study says

The Congressional Research Service indicated that the cuts delivered the most benefits to corporations and the rich, with little boost to workers.

www.cnbc.com

 

[ShockIndex]

Gets even worse... Anthem is developing "high performance networks" with double-digit cuts to physician/hospital reimbursement to target large employers in major metropolitan areas. Basically this will limit in-network facilities to only one or two per major metro area. It's either take a 30% cut in reimbursement or fare your chances of survival without it.

It's all about the insurance companies' profits.

Anthem’s high-performing networks have been a round and are not new. I think that you may be referring to their planned expansion to all 150ish million subscribers by 2021. My understanding is that the reimbursement model is more complex than a pure 30% cut to non-network providers. Perhaps you have a website with more info as to how this will pertain to ED care?

 

[Siggy]

I think most Tea-partiers have given up on this issue, and now our main fight is to slow the expansion of government and resist the administrative state wherever possible. We are fighting a rear-guard action as we slowly, but surely retreat to inevitable defeat.

Amazing that the fight only ended once a Republican was in office. Why stop now, I thought you guys were winning big league style by electing Trump? Congrats!

Oh, wait... I forgot.. it's not about parties, right? I mean...

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/DQQex3Fwg5x8fq4sL48805k6QgA=/0x91:2039x1620/1220x813/filters:focal(0x91:2039x1620):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/50048861/4526046180_410e12f1bb_o.0.jpg

 

[Siggy]

Gets even worse... Anthem is developing "high performance networks" with double-digit cuts to physician/hospital reimbursement to target large employers in major metropolitan areas. Basically this will limit in-network facilities to only one or two per major metro area. It's either take a 30% cut in reimbursement or fare your chances of survival without it.

It's all about the insurance companies' profits.

So... do you have an alternative?

 

[deleted941485]

So... do you have an alternative?

Govt run health insurance...lol.

 

[Siggy]

Govt run health insurance...lol.

You mean socialism... like EMTALA and the rules against pre-existing conditions? I've always found it funny how "conservatives" claim they don't want socialism, but love social security, medicare, medicaid, EMTALA, and the free stuff parts of the Affordable Care Act.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

You mean socialism... like EMTALA and the rules against pre-existing conditions? I've always found it funny how "conservatives" claim they don't want socialism, but love social security, medicare, medicaid, EMTALA, and the free stuff parts of the Affordable Care Act.

I feel pretty confident that the conservatives here don't like any of those things

 

[Cath Up]

Wrong. Conservatives and Liberals both don't care about the deficit. There is zero appetite in either party to control the growth of entitlements which is mostly to blame for the deficit. Both establishments are corrupt officials who've reached a bargain whereby they have slight policy differences around the edges, but agree to keep feeding the "blob" which is the massive lobbyist/administrative state that doles out billions of tax dollars to corrupt former Republican and Democrat office-holders.

The reason Democrats want Single Payer, is not because it will "help" people or that they are kind, generous politicians. They want this terrible policy because it is a way to massively expand their power, and use it to take $trillions from the private economy to fund their corrupt ecosystem.

Once you're dead and your bottom line was not affected, you would not rather the country try changing to another corrupt system that has some tiny possibility of accountability? Apparently the current system is destroying EM anyway via corruption/greed.

 

[southerndoc]

Anthem’s high-performing networks have been a round and are not new. I think that you may be referring to their planned expansion to all 150ish million subscribers by 2021. My understanding is that the reimbursement model is more complex than a pure 30% cut to non-network providers. Perhaps you have a website with more info as to how this will pertain to ED care?

No just inside knowledge from my health system (one of the first ACO's in the country). This is basically a Kaiser type system with strict in-network controls. Yes, it is an expansion into nearly all metropolitan areas. They have had it in other states for a while, but in 2021 this will be a national rollout in all metro areas.

The 30% cut is for in-network providers -- basically they have approached my health system with a 30% cut from already very competitive rates.

 

[namethatsmell]

The 30% cut is for in-network providers -- basically they have approached my health system with a 30% cut from already very competitive rates.

Great. My asymptomatic HTN just became symptomatic.

 

[southerndoc]

Great. My asymptomatic HTN just became symptomatic.

Make payments as low as possible, make premiums as high as possible, please your investors and reward your CEO with a great bonus. Typical insurance motto.

 

[namethatsmell]

Make payments as low as possible, make premiums as high as possible, please your investors and reward your CEO with a great bonus. Typical insurance motto.

Yup. I still cannot believe the health insurance industry is allowed to keep on keeping on.

 

[GeneralVeers]

The reason Democrats want Single Payer, is not because it will "help" people or that they are kind, generous politicians. They want this terrible policy because it is a way to massively expand their power, and use it to take $trillions from the private economy to fund their corrupt ec

You mean socialism... like EMTALA and the rules against pre-existing conditions? I've always found it funny how "conservatives" claim they don't want socialism, but love social security, medicare, medicaid, EMTALA, and the free stuff parts of the Affordable Care Act.

Conservatives hate all of things you mentioned. Unfortunately the politicians claiming to be "conservative" are too afraid to say what they are actually thinking and denounce Medicare, Medicaid and SS. I'm against all government involvement in healthcare. Personal interest and power unfortunately supersedes a consistent, realistic world-view.