CQ TODAY MIDDAY UPDATE
Nov. 17, 2008 – 1:02 p.m.
Senate Democrats Get Serious About Health Care System Overhaul
Rather than waiting for President-elect Barack Obama to take office next year or for the 111th Congress to convene, Senate Democratic leaders this week are escalating discussions about an ambitious overhaul of the health care system.
Max Baucus , D-Mont., chairman of the Finance Committee, and Edward M. Kennedy , D-Mass., who chairs the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, plan to meet Tuesday to discuss how to craft an overhaul that would fall under the jurisdiction of both committees. Baucus’ committee plans a hearing Wednesday on the issue.
“Now is the time,” Baucus said at a Brookings Institution seminar on health care Monday. “We’re going to get it done.”
Baucus said a comprehensive health care overhaul will be his top priority next year. He has outlined a plan that includes expanding both public and private insurance plans so that every American has coverage, while simultaneously reducing health care costs and improving the quality of care by changing the way health care is delivered and paid for. “The time for incremental improvements has passed,” he said.
Kennedy said in a statement, “We’ve been making real progress in our discussions about a consensus approach, and I’m optimistic we’ll succeed.”
About 46 million Americans lack health insurance of any kind, according to the U.S. Census. About 25 million more are under-insured, Baucus said, or in his words, “have some insurance, but it’s lousy insurance.” Health care costs, he said, have meanwhile risen 5.5 times faster than wages from 2000 to 2007.
For a full version of this story and the latest coverage, please visit CQ Politics.
Comments
Health care reform sounds well and good, as long as it gives one a true choice of health care practitioner. So far, the lion's share of money simply goes to AMA approved MD's, while holistic and natural practitioners are mostly left out. We could potentially have a healthier public and save $billions by allowing this option. To find out more about this and other pertinent info: http://www.HealingNews.com
I'm sure magnets and incense will cure our obesity epidemic and 47 million uninsured, just as I am sure the AMA "approves" MDs, and that the lion's share of health care dollars actually goes to physicians.
I urge the Senators to consider the simplicity, cost effectiveness and humanity of a single payer universal health care plan, which could be implemented comparatively easily as was traditional Medicare. Any plan that keeps the profit-making insurance companies in the mix will add layers of bureaucracy, will not be able to control costs, and will fail in the noble effort to bring good care to all. In the current economic situation, a single payer system is an even greater imperative. We ask that Senators Kennedy and Baucus introduce, in the Senate, legislation modeled on HR 676, Cong. John Conyers' bill currently pending in the House, which has already gained the support of 94 Representatives, countless labor unions, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the Houses of Representatives in Kentucky, New Hampshire and New York, and hundreds more cities, counties, faith groups and organizations that express the great hope and dire need of our people.
What good is national health care when there aren't going to be enough primnary care Doctors to provide care, and when many, many doctors do not accept Medicare patients who also have health care supplements now? What will become of Medicare with the establishment of a national health care plan? Will we continue to pay into the Medicare system when medicare no longer exists? Where are the doctors going to come from when we no longer have enough of American doctors, a shortage now and a major crisis within the next three years? Who will receive medical and hospital care and who will be rationed, who will live and who will die?
i am a health care provider. national health care sounds like a great idea as long as there is incentive for providers to stay in practice. it is first and foremost a job. i love what i do but it is a very demanding job and people in medicine should be paid appropriately. i'm all for it as long as it does not affect my salary. i have a mountain of student loans that need to be paid. will the government provide a bailout for me on those? i doubt it. the concern i have is that if the pay is not appropriate people will not go into medicine or leave it quickly. most of the physicians i know are in their mid to late 50's. most of them have enough money stashed away to retire now. most, if not all, would retire immediately if their compensation went down. that would create a huge void and lead to rationing of care. i could also see large health care worker strikes. doctors can't be trained quickly like they did with the air traffic controllers. again, i am all for it if my pay stays the same. cut it and i'm going back to school, law school. the lawyers, for the most part, make the laws and if you can't fight them, join them.
The variations on what would be needed to fix the health care system are as numerous as the chances to win the lotto. But the two basic models are regulation and market. Combinations of the two are in a variety of colors and hues to put the rainbow to shame. There appears to be a preference for market answers but a reluctance to create the conditions for an efficient and economical market. We need to educate and certify more doctors, more nurses, more technicians, more researchers, more health care planners to assist people in understanding the alternatives available to them. This is the long term market solution which will drive costs down and makes care available to more people. It requires money and a willingness to compress training and certification, to require electronic communication and records, to risk institutional treatment and mechanization. The regulation model requires training of not only more health care professionals but health care managers who can appreciate the many unknowns in the process of providing care to a mass audience.
The cost savings in reducing or controlling all the health management costs would be enormous by getting the health care system out of the profit business. For some reason we keep thinking that the private sector is the answer - let the market solve the problem. In general I agree. But our health care system disaster has been caused by the market and I see no indication they have any vested interest in solving the problem. Why would they want to reduce their profits? We're not talking about reducing doctors salaries - just significantly reducing the administrative cost burdens the at the industry imposes and which we all end up paying for... And all this says nothing about the quality of the health care decisions which are determined by their impact on the profit. And is Medicare really that bad - it seems the system works, people get care - they have choice of physicians - and the costs of reduced... It's a single payer system which works...
Come see photos of what is deemed acceptable standards of health care in East Tennessee, although "horrifying" it's quite acceptable. www.wisecountyissues.com
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: