Let's Start Debating the Healthcare Issues That Need Fixing
If a broke country can be salvaged and resurrected, we can do the same with the US healthcare system instead of creating another massive government boondoggle.
8.14.2009
By Russ Magarity
Editor’s Note: It is apparent from what we are witnessing in the news and media that Americans DO NOT want the Obamacare plan as currently being promoted and pushed by the democrats. However, we are at the tipping point where the yelling and screaming needs to be replaced with solution thinking and discussion; not ramming this Act home as the administration hopes to do when Congress returns from vacation. Hopefully, the town hall meeting across America will have swayed returning Congressmen and women to what America wants; not what Obama and his cronies and Czars want.
We all agree the American healthcare system desperately needs fixing and probably the best thing to come out of all of this has been to energize Americans to rising up and demanding to debate the issues and seek solutions THAT WORK. This will not be done if the government is allowed to throw a net over the entire system and do it their way. Their way inevitably doesn’t work as they say, ends up costing a whole lot more and inevitably requires additional funding, taxes and bailouts. If this Act is bullied through, America will have socialized healthcare and in the decades ahead we will experience a 21st century healthcare disaster.
Let’s hope when Congress convenes the real debates will commence; debates that will ultimately lead to Americans deciding together how to fix the system.
Chris Janelli
Howdy Folks,
The readers are restless and in the interest of healthy debate, I feel that perhaps I have inaccurately portrayed the balance I seek, or at least the need to answer the almighty question:
Shouldn't we be in favor of national health care reform given that the system is broken?
The fact has been pointed out to me that 52% of Americans voted for change, and one of the platforms, if not the darling of the debate, was health care. Okay fair enough, I have never disputed that there is not a problem with the country being broke, or that there are some members of our society, which need a safety net. Nor those insurance companies have not screwed people too. My problem, and apparently one that is shared by more than the 52% that want to fix health care, is that I have not seen anything that fixes the problem.
As most of you know, I spent a great deal of my professional career fixing broke companies, and participating in fixing broke countries as well. In order to be successful at this, one has to tackle the specific reasons creating the problems and stop the bleeding, and on the 7th day rest and truthfully address whether given the market for your product, costs and competition, you are going to survive.
Throwing into a serious program like health care that represents 15% of America’s GDP, every liberals’ idea of a wet dream, and not addressing costs (but rather requiring more money), privacy issues, quality of care and life, nationalization of an industry by czars and more inexperienced bureaucrats, and then lying about it all is the root of the problem. Calling people stupid, employing thugs and trying to crush dissent is a whole other discussion. The point is that the current plan is incomprehensible. No one understands it. No one can articulate it. And frankly few have read it. For sure, it doesn't fix the problem.
Therefore, I wrote my senator today, Mike Enzi, Republican from Wyoming. I am furious with him as a member of the Senate Committee responsible for the Senate version. I am furious with him because he is trying to fix the current bill by way of compromise rather than tackling the problem as it needs to be tackled, torn apart, analyzed, digested and fixed piece by piece.
If one is truly interested in fixing our health care system, then it seems to me you have to work from a few assumptions:
• that something like 84% of the people are happy with what they have;
• that 49% and climbing think the current proposed plan (s) sucks, while only 32% like it;
• that it is quoted that there are 47 million folks that are uninsured, but only about 15 million are citizens who either want coverage or should be eligible for coverage; and
• that the administration wants socialized medicine modeled after the single payer UK or Canada programs, but this has never worked anywhere. EVER. Today's system is one that is generally thought of to be employer based.
The folks want choices and the freedom to choose without any of the social engineering attached. They want to maintain currently the best health care system in the world, but control costs. They appear to be open to revenue neutral proposals to deal with the uninsured, but seem to recognize the need to fix Social Security and Medicare, which are broke. The majority of Americans want a private sector solution with little or no government centralization of anything; Obama and his gang want Big Brother dominated and controlled single payer healthcare. That’s socialized healthcare.
This calls for a do over.
Therefore, to address some real issues:
In my humble opinion, there is a role for government in the final outcome; it cannot be avoided. However, it is one of guidance and regulation; NOT MANAGEMENT.
For instance, if you want to lower the costs you create competition, and or more product. YOU CANNOT SPEND YOUR WAY INTO SUCCESS BY THROWING MORE MONEY AT AN ALREADY FLAWED SYSTEM. Witness Social Security and Medicare, or management of the post office, Amtrak stimulus plans et cetera.
My suggestion is to WORK ON ELIMINATING CROSS BORDER INSURANCE REGULATIONS.
I know the states control this today, but it is stifling competition. There are different reimbursement rates and administrative procedures, et cetera. Eliminate them so the consumer can shop around for prices that meets the standardization of criteria to offer health insurance. Use the existing states insurance regulators to monitor the enforcement without creating greater bureaucracies. Use the InterState Commerce Act as the Feds have so effectively done in the past.
Government should post list of the average cost nationwide for any number of procedures and which doctors and hospitals meet the national average. I do not mean price fixing or telling anyone what to charge. This is for informational bully pulpit purposes. Consumers can go anywhere they want for health care and policies would allow for this. Now insurance companies may have their own "contracted" amounts nationwide, but hey it is a free market and consumer choice should rule.
The government can encourage pharmaceutical companies to sell in bulk to insurance providers; develop regulations so that the drugs available so much cheaper in Canada are available in this country. Push harder for generic development and alternative medicines; not regulation.
This country is already facing a huge doctor shortage in the coming decades, which Obamacare will only worsen. The government could provide grants to students to go to medical school. Let’s encourage more doctors and nurses and in exchange for loan forgiveness, they would be assigned to hospitals in towns and counties lacking in adequate healthcare for a specific period of time.
The government could use these same new increases in health care providers to staff VA and Military hospitals at closed military bases to serve the uninsured or uninsurable. This does not include illegal aliens that need to become documented workers or go home. They need to receive the same wage as would be paid anyone and pay into the system like everyone will have to. No more free emergency room access unless in the system, which requires them to have an ID card.
Tort reform: THERE WILL BE NO CONTROLLING COSTS WITHOUT GETTING RID OF AMBULANCE CHASERS. My suggestions include no trial by juries and losers pay court costs, but also include pain and suffering within limits.
NO GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM ITSELF, including centralization of records and certainly no competitive public option that will kill all competition. Free market competition, especially when open across the USA, will foster better pricing. It is my understanding that the administrative workload and government payments currently add a lot to the cost of medical care for an individual practitioner. Surely we can figure this out.
Also, if you want federally funded abortions the answer is, except in very rare occasions, NO. Buy the insurance.
There is also going to have to be a list of alternatives in choosing health care for the elderly. This does not include the government suggesting anything. Personally, I think that since the population is living longer and there are fewer folks to support social security and Medicare, more has to be done in terms of the amount paid in and choice coming in selection of plans. Taxes are going to have to be raised or benefits lowered, or both. There is no other alternative to maintain this program.
Furthermore, CONGRESS CAN KEEP THEIR STINKING HANDS OFF OUR MONEY. No more borrowing from the "trust funds,” which is a misnomer when it comes to Congress.
If we fail to participate or choose a lower rated plan, it does not take a genius to figure out that your standard of care becomes very basic.
I think I could also support rationing, but only if a patient is terminally ill, unless of course you have the insurance coverage or can afford to pay for it yourself.
MAKE ALL SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES AND ALL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES SUBJECT TO THE SAME HEALTH CARE PLAN AND RETIREMENT PLANS AS THE PEOPLE THAT PUT THEM THERE. This has to be a PREREQUSITE for America to work with Congress.
Make all plans portable, and many more choices.
On the subject of preconditions and employer based plans, I want to think on this a bit more. I am leaning to yes, preconditions must exist. But we should be able to do something that has them drop off after reaching certain milestones, or you pay an "excess risk" premium, particularly if related to known issues such as smoking or drinking excessively, drunk driving, heart disease or cancer, et cetera to cover the increased precondition “risk.”
The biggest problem I have is how to stimulate businesses to offer similar plans while securing competition. In fact, I think the plans should be individually based, not employer based. However, have employers provide incentives for good health since they likewise would benefit. I am still thinking on this.
In summary, I do not have all the answers and in fact may not even have good answers. I just want to stimulate the debate around useful solutions that people can understand.
Your humble editor, Russ
About Russ Magarity
Jackson, Wyoming Distressed Patriot Russell Magarity and Chris Janelli, Chief Distressed Patriot, have been business associates and close friends since working together at Chase Manhattan Asia in Hong Kong. Russ grew up in Cuba and Panama and graduated from High School in Peru. He received a BA in International Relations from the University of Oklahoma (Norman), an M.B.A. from the Universidad Autonoma de Guadalajara (Mexico), and a Masters in International Management (with Distinction) from the American Graduate School of International Management (Thunderbird).
Russ spent his career with Chase running countries and managing corporate finance businesses in Brazil, Mexico, Hong Kong and throughout SE Asia. Prior to joining Chase, he served in the US Navy for 9 years first as a Midshipman and Naval Aviator. As a carrier pilot, he served 3 tours in Vietnam and flew over 250 missions.
|
|
|
|
8/18/2009
Great perspective! Keep up the good work.
75.104.129.41
|
|
2.8.2010
When the Census Clowns Come Knocking, Remind Them the U.S. Constitution Enumerates Exactly What You Need to Answer; and Nothing More
I love my country, but I am appalled by my government
12.21.09
The Republicans Had 6+ Years to Legislate Changes to America's Health Care Problems
12.15.09
Nobel Peace Prize Recipient Honest Al Say's Planet Core Millions of Degrees Hot
For all the hoopla, earth's atmospheric temperature has risen one half of 1% in the last 100 years.
12.11.09
Meet Ted Cruz, the Republican Obama
Republican leadership must speak to the values of mainstream Americans; there are few doing that. The Republican Party must elect people who have firm principles; backbone and the ability to communicate.
12.10.09
American Prisoner Labor to Put More Americans on Unemployment
The title of their new playbook should be: American Gulag by Barry Soetoro and Van Jones
11.8.09
THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATEGATE, MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS, AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PARADIGM CHANGE
What Might They Have in Common?
|
