Barack Obama

Mr. Obama wants to limit profits of private industry…

In the NY Times article on May 30, 2007, “Mr. Obama calls for wider and less costly health care coverage”. Mr. Obama wants to limit profits of private industry because he believes it is the right thing to do. Using money from previous tax cuts made by the Bush Administration and regulating Insurance Company profits will not do anything to resolve escalating health care costs. It is an encroachment on private industry that sounds like too much Government to me. However, it may free up some money to pay for things in the current system that are unavailable to low income families. Let innovation and creativity be the motivating factor. Mr. Obama is correct about the fact that private industry and the US Government have to work together to resolve the cost issue.

More affordable coverage comes at the price of less desirable plan designs…

Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has not expressed any innovative ideas for improving our costly health care system. It is the same old rhetoric. The US Government and private industry can make significant changes that will make health care more accessible. What Mr. Obama is suggesting is a mix of employer based and government funded programs, which is what we have now in the US Health Care System to improve access to health care. He is not suggesting a Universal Plan or requiring all Americans to carry health insurance. So, just what is he proposing…very little. He has no real position because Mr. Obama, like most of the other candidates, does not comprehend the undertaking ahead of them. It is not the powerful lobbies that keep Americans from accessing affordable health coverage. More affordable coverage comes at the price of less desirable plan designs that will continue to encourage cost shifting to consumers who utilize health care services.

Providing health coverage to the masses does nothing to curtail health care inflation

That cost shifting becomes unaffordable for working Americans who have employer sponsored coverage, as well. Every candidate has expressed an interest in covering all children. That is the right thing to do. All it takes is money. Providing health coverage to the masses does nothing to curtail health care inflation. Whether the US Government, or actually tax paying citizens of the United States, are asked to pay more to fund these programs still does not address the issues of cost. More money for the uninsured will get more Americans covered with health insurance. Ultimately, US health care costs will probably decline when Insurance Companies are forced through Government mandates to cover more preventive care and provide incentives for other healthy changes in behavior. Subsidizing health care still does not resolve the cost issue either.

Over time, broader preventive care coverage and incentives that lead to healthy lifestyle changes could bring down the current health care inflation rate.

Surgery With A Warranty

A flat fee will be charged up front for this “guarantee”

In the NY Times article, “In Bid For Better Care, Surgery With A Warranty”,Geisinger Health Systems has implemented a new program available for more reimbursement dollars up front. The article infers that if there are any complications regarding a surgery, they will not charge any additional money if the patient is re-admitted due to medical error or other re-admission reasons that relate to that surgery and hospitalization. A flat fee will be charged up front for this “guarantee”.

Why guarantee something that is should be done right the first time?

All hospitals should be forced to publish this information…

Medical information should be made available to the public in a compiled user friendly format. It would be useful to have the re-admission rates and other standards to evaluate your Hospital System and Practitioners, prior to having the surgery. What good is it after the fact? All hospitals should be forced to publish this information and patients will use it with Transparency data to evaluate the best choice for them. Patients want to make decisions regarding any care they might receive, armed with this new information that is taking its sweet time reaching us. I am more concerned with the end user, the patient, than I am about reimbursement on this matter. After all, we expect to get well when we pay the best educated, highest paid profession to keep us well when we do need their services.

You, the patient, will not get any better after your surgery because you received a guarantee...

Americans need to get interested in their health care when having a procedure in order to guarantee better outcomes for themselves. There are so many ways to get more for our medical reimbursements than is being done today. But, a guarantee is simply better than nothing at all. Expectations and generous reimbursements for reputed high quality care are not enough. This “warranty” is simply a new way of contracting for the Hospital System with Health Plans for reimbursement. You, the patient, will not get any better after your surgery because you received a guarantee, unless the system performs like they should be doing, in the first place.

AIDS drugs and the Clinton Foundation

In response to the NY Times article about the Clinton Foundation…

Why don’t Americans come first? In response to the NY Times article about the Clinton Foundation using it’s influence to help developing countries negotiate prices for much needed AIDS drugs and other crucial life prolonging medicines with US Pharmaceutical Manufacturers, I know their hearts are in the right place. Doing the right thing means making difficult choices. The US is still the World’s leader for producing innovative life saving drugs. Our pharmaceutical companies are extremely profit oriented and everything they do to sell their products to any buyer, are well calculated strategies that ultimately drive profits higher in their respective target markets. Every human being that is faced with a life threatening or debilitating disease wants access at an affordable price to care and the wonderful discoveries that lead to a potential cure. However, services and products do come at a price.

Our much maligned strategy to help every other country…

Innovative drug therapies are not free and were never meant to be. Our much maligned strategy to help every other country but ourselves leaves me perplexed. The Clinton Foundation should be working with the US Government to come up with a sound strategy where American consumers and our peaceful world counterparts come together to make access at an affordable price, a reality for these life saving drug therapies, first to Americans and then the rest of the world. If your Country is not a friend of the US, then our research should not find its way to your citizens. Medicine is an even more important resource than defense. We need to be healthy in order to defend our freedom and way of life. The Clinton Foundation’s partisan approach that follows all of the Clinton strategies will always be flawed. A divided Congress and Big Business need to come together with an open mind to listen to all opinions that may have value in resolving this growing crisis. By the way, the only reason there is any solution to AIDS is because of committed, unselfish scientists using their gift of extreme intelligence and well funded research to create potential solutions to a horrible diseases.

The conflict is when someone has to deal with the reality of paying for it

If your son or daughter was working at one of these large pharmaceutical manufacturers, making a modest living and discovered a cure for AIDS, don’t they deserve an overabundance of compensation along with recognition? Of course they do. The conflict is when someone has to deal with the reality of paying for it. Everybody wants something for nothing. Drug companies are greedy and market demand is extremely strong. The challenge is how to make access a reality to the needy at an affordable price. Killing the entrepreneurial zest for greatness that Capitalism and private enterprise have always encouraged is not the answer. What is the Clinton Foundation doing to bring the US Congress, the President and Pharmaceutical Manufacturers together to help Americans first? In the event that the Clinton Foundation actually accomplishes something real, then other world populations in need may benefit as well. If healthcare is the most important issue facing Americans, then why don’t Americans come first?

In response to President Bush

I am extremely disappointed

In response to President Bush’s health care initiatives and his position on Health Savings Accounts (HSA’s) and tax code changes, I am extremely disappointed. HSA’s are high deductible health plans that shift more of the financial burden of medical costs to the consumer in exchange for a slightly lower premium for the employer or individual. President Bush has no idea how to strengthen health care. Think about the statement “to strengthen health care”. Just look at what he has done so far. President Bush has accomplished nothing that addresses the most challenging issues of cost and quality. Instead of encouraging Plan Designs by Health Insurance Companies to be more innovative, they are simply being allowed to use an old and aging trick called cost shifting. Health Savings Account plan designs are not the answer. High deductible plans were always available. Health Insurance plan designs always should have discouraged the over-utilization of emergency rooms. Blame the Insurance Companies for that actuarial plan design flaw. The problems within our system that are getting all of the attention have to do with the uninsured and actual incurred medical costs for treatment. When we triple the current income limitations to help our less fortunate citizens qualify for Medicaid, we will have more children and their parents insured.

When Mr. Bush creates incentives for Americans…

When Mr. Bush creates incentives for Americans that give perceived value to changing unhealthy behaviors, we will be getting somewhere. Where are the tax incentives to push all providers to use the most advanced available technology for all medical records and communication? When America and its leadership embrace the effective use of available technology with tax incentives, the modernization of the US Health Care System can make real progress in lowering overall costs. Give Americans a tax incentive to buy healthy foods or join a gym. Give a tax break to Americans who get a physical every year. According to the most accepted medical research, these types of incentives would keep Americans healthier. How does giving an insignificant tax break for electing a Health Savings Account plan design for health insurance coverage address the lowering of medical costs in our Country?