April 5th, 2010 by Toni Brayer, M.D. in Announcements, Better Health Network, Health Policy, News, Opinion
No Comments »
President Obama likes to shake things up. He has named Dr. Donald Berwick to head the Medicare and Medicaid Agency known as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This is a huge government agency with a budget of over $800 BILLION a year. That is more than most countries in the world have. Dr. Berwick would be a major force in implementing the new health laws and changing Medicare to be more efficient and cost effective.
The average person probably doesn’t know who Dr. Don Berwick is, but he is a big name in the healthcare industry. A pediatrician by training, he is the president of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) and is a national leader on quality and patient safety. By telling stories that people can relate to, he is a transformational leader for reducing hospital errors and reducing variability in care. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth*
October 12th, 2009 by DrWes in Better Health Network, Health Policy, Opinion
No Comments »
From “War on Specialists” in the Wall Street Journal:
Take a provision in the Baucus bill that would punish any physician whose “resource use” is considered too high. Beginning in 2015, Medicare would rank doctors against their peers based on how much they cost the program—and then automatically cut all payments by 5% to anyone who falls into the 90th percentile or above. In practice, this rule will only apply to specialists. , Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr. Wes*
August 25th, 2009 by KevinMD in Health Policy
No Comments »
One of the storylines in the health reform debate is how the Medicare population is fighting the current reform efforts.
It’s ironic, in a way, since if the status quo continues, fiscally sustaining current Medicare benefits will be a near-impossibility.
In his regular column, The New York Times’ Ross Douthat provides some insight as to the mindset of the Medicare recipient. He says, rightly, that, “At present, Medicare gives its recipients all the benefits of socialized medicine, with few of the drawbacks. Once you hit 65, the system pays and pays, without regard for efficiency or cost-effectiveness.”
When reformers talk about savings, it “sound[s] a lot like ‘cuts’” to the elderly, and hence, their apprehension. Arguments that many of the tests and treatments can be reduced without sacrificing quality of care will not resonate. With the prevailing mentality equating better care with more care, any attempt to introduce serious cost-saving measures will meet a determined resistance from the American public.
*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com*
June 30th, 2009 by Happy Hospitalist in Better Health Network, Opinion
No Comments »
The drug makers have agreed to cover part of the costs of brand name drugs in the donut hole, that no man’s land of Medicare Part D where patients must pay for their own drugs.
As reported:
Obama said that drug companies have pledged to spend $80 billion over the next decade to help reduce the cost of drugs for seniors and pay for a portion of Obama’s health care legislation. The agreement with the pharmaceutical industry would help close a gap in prescription drug coverage under Medicare.
I see one problem with the assertion that drug companies will be “spending” $80 billion dollars to reduce the cost of drugs for seniors. Drug companies and by default, their board of directors have allegiance to their shareholders, not the the US government or the seniors of this country. I can assure you, this deal may look good on paper (for seniors) and it may benefit seniors a great deal (FREE=MORE) but it is also one step further to the promised land of the senior vote. And it will worsen access to drugs for everyone else. There is no free lunch in this world.
It may save seniors money, but it will not be revenue neutral. It will not save $80 billion dollars over 10 years or reduce overall costs of care. Somehow, someway, the costs will be shifted. It may mean higher drug costs for those privately insured or the uninsured. It may mean decreased access to compassion programs. It may mean higher costs to hospitals. Whatever the agreement means, it will not mean $80 billion dollars saved in the next decade.
Drug companies are not in the business of sacrificing their shareholders or bond holders for patriotic means. They are in the business of making money. And that means they have selfish interests to maximize their ROI for any agreement they make with the government.
The question isn’t really how wonderful this is for seniors. The question is how will buying off seniors affect the rest of America. And I’m telling you here, right now, you will see higher costs for everyone not lucky enough to bathe in a sea of FREE=MORE known as the Medicare National Bank.
*This blog post was originally published at A Happy Hospitalist*
