Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE Menu

Results found: 133

Permalink:

Business Model For Medical Care 2020. The Ideal Future State

October 28, 2012
inEMR, Health Savings Accounts vs Medical Savings Accounts, Healthcare Insurance Industry, Information Technology in Healthcare, Innovations in Healthcare, Medicine: Healthcare System, Summary Blogs
• Leave a comment

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

 

Please click on all the links to study
the references to each spoke. It will help you visualize the power of the business
model.

The ideal future state business
model for the healthcare system must include the execution of ideas in the specific spokes outlined below.. These spokes
will serve to align all of the stakeholders’ interests.

Slide16
The business model must
contain appropriate rules for a consumer driven healthcare system, an ideal
electronic medial record, and an ideal medical savings account.

The ideal medical saving
accounts can work optimally when there is significant tort reform and patients
take full responsibility for their health and healthcare dollars.

Consumer education is critical to the business
model of the future. Educational modules can be available to consumers 24/7 via
the Internet. These educational modules must be an extension of consumers
physicians’ care in order to be effective. The education can become available
using a series of social networks.

Chronic disease self-management education can
be achieved by the use of interactive online teaching programs. Patients can be
linked to share their disease experience through private social networks.

Most believe that the healthcare system must
have greater integration of care. This integration of care can be done
virtually through a series of private integrated networks.

Effective integration can be achieved without
disruption of the entire healthcare system. Obamacare has been disruptive to
the entire healthcare system.

Obamacare is forced integration by the
government will be slow, costly and unsuccessful.

Physicians must be compensated for the presently
uncompensated time necessary to execute each one of the spokes of the wheel.

Each spoke is necessary to convert the
healthcare system into a system that once more makes the physician patient
relationship paramount.

The future business plan removes control of the
healthcare system from the government. It permits the patient to have the freedom
to choose his own healthcare course.   

Tort reform is vital to the 2020 business model.
It will decrease costly over-testing to avoid frivolous malpractice suits.
There are many ways to set up a tort reform system that truly protects patients
from real harm while eliminating over-testing. It limits the malpractice
litigation system. Punitive damages must be lowered. Losers in lawsuits must
pay all fees. These two provisions will decrease lawyers’ incentive to sue.

 
Slide24

Consumer driven healthcare will create a system
that promotes personal responsibility by the consumers’ for their health and
health care dollars.

 
Slide19

The major spoke necessary to successfully
accomplish a consumer driven healthcare system is my ideal medical saving
accounts.

 
Slide18

 

The ideal medical savings accounts would
provide the financial incentive for consumers to drive the healthcare system.
It would dis-intermediate the healthcare insurance industry’s grasp on first
dollar coverage and profits. The insurance industry would realize that its
profit margin would increase under this system.

In order for consumers to be in a position to
lower the cost of healthcare they must be taught to understand how to self
manage their disease and be responsible for the decisions they make in their
choices for medical care.

Slide20

In order to decrease patients’ dependency on
the government and increase  being
responsible for themselves, a system of education using information technology
as an extension of their physicians’ care has to be developed and put into
place.

Social networking is in its infancy at present.
It must be developed and used as an educational tool between physicians, patients
and physicians, and patients and patients.

All the social networking must be an extension of
the physicians’ medical care to their patients. Social networking must be
developed to enhance and promote the physician/patient relationship because
this relationship is critical, at its core, to successful medical treatment.

Social networking and information technology
can extend physician educational resources for patient care.

Slide21

Systems of care for the self-management of chronic
disease as an extension of their physicians care have already been developed.
The unsuccessful chronic disease self-management systems are the programs that
are not an extension of physicians’ care. The reason these third party systems
are unsuccessful is because they undermine the patient physician relationship.

President Obama has done pilot studies using
those third party self-management companies to prove that chronic disease
self-management systems work. They have all failed to reduce the cost of care.

Therefore the administration has reached the
conclusions that self-management of chronic disease does not work. Nothing
could be further from the truth. The government simply does not understand the
magic of the physician-patient relationship.

Slide22

In order to decrease the cost of medical care,
medical care must be integrated. At present, primary care physicians recommend
specialists. The primary care physicians know whether the specialists are doing
a good job by the specialists’ treatment results with their patients.

Most of the time physicians do not know their
specialists’ fees. These fees must be totally transparent to primary care
physicians and their patients. The primary care physicians can then be in a
position to help their patients choose appropriate specialists.

It will also reduce the specialists’ prices
because they will be forced to become competitive by the patients in a consumer
driven system.

Hospital fees must also be transparent. One of
the reasons I am opposed to hospital systems hiring physicians and paying them
a salary is the hospital systems would then be able to develop a monopoly in a
town or area of town. This would permit the hospital system to raise prices
without informing patients or physicians.

Hospital systems could erase physicians’ choices
and hindered patients from having the freedom to choose a hospital or
specialist of their choice with their primary care physicians. It devalues the
patient physician relationship.  

 
Slide23

The way President Obama is going about
developing a universally functioning electronic medical record is foolish and
costly. Most physicians cannot afford a fully functional electronic medical
record. This fact is being used to drive physicians into being employees of
hospital systems. The problem is hospital systems are paying hundreds of
millions of dollars for electronic medical records that are not fully
functional.

Many of these records are hard to use and
provide inflexible data. The inflexible data leads to healthcare policy
decisions that are wrong. The data is also used to commoditize medical care.

Commoditized medical care is not the best quality
of medical care.  

If the government is so smart it should develop
a fully functional electronic medical record and provide it to all hospital
systems and practices for free.

The EMR should be put in the cloud. Providers
should be charged by the click. The government can service and upgrade the EMR
in one place and improve the quality of data collected. The data should be used
for educational purposes only and be owned by the patients and physicians. It
should not be used for punitive purposes. The inaccurate data is now used for
punitive purposes. The result has been a lack of physician cooperation.

 
Slide17

The healthcare journey to an ideal future state
must begin in an orderly way. The principle goal is to be consumer centric. It
must be consumer driven and force the secondary stakeholders to be transparent
and competitive.

This journey will wring the excess costs out of the healthcare
system. It will create a democratic system affordable to all.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

 

 

 

 

 

Permalink:

My Ideal Medical Savings Account Is Democratic!

May 9, 2012
inHealth Savings Accounts vs Medical Savings Accounts, Innovations in Healthcare, Medicine: Healthcare System
• Leave a comment

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

A reader sent this comment; “My Ideal Medical Savings Account (MSA) “was not democratic and leads to restriction of medical care for the less fortunate.'

This comment is totally incorrect. I suspect the comment came from a person who has “an entitlements are good mentality.”

I believe that incentives are good. They lead to innovation. Innovation leads to better ideas.

Healthcare entitlement leads to ever increasing costs, stagnation, restrictions on freedom of choice and a decrease in access to care.

I have written extensively about the virtues of My Ideal Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs). They are different than Health Savings Accounts (HSAs).

HSAs put money not spent in a trust for future healthcare expenses. MSAs take the money out of play for healthcare expenses. MSAs provide a trust fund for the consumer’s retirement.

MSAs provide added incentives over HSAs to obtain and maintain good health.  Obesity is a major factor in the onset of chronic diseases. Consumers must be motivated to avoid obesity to maintain good health. MSAs can provide that incentive.

The MSA’s can replace every form of health insurance at a reduced cost. It limits the risk to the healthcare insurance industry while providing consumers with choice.

This would result in competition among healthcare providers. Competition would bring down the cost of healthcare.

Some people might not like MSA’s because they are liberating. They provide consumers of healthcare with freedom of choice. They also give consumers the opportunity to be responsible for their healthcare dollars while providing them with incentives to take care of their health.

MSAs could be used for private insurance purchasers, group insurance plans, employer self insurance plans, State Funded self-insurance plans and Medicare and Medicaid.

In each case the funding source is different. The cost of the high deductible insurance is low because the risk is low. 

If it were a $6,000 deductible MSA, the first $6,000 would be placed in a trust for the consumer. Whatever they did not spend would go into a retirement trust.  If they spent over $6,000 they would have first dollar healthcare insurance coverage. Their trust would obviously receive no money that year.

The incentive would be for consumers to take care of their health so they do not get sick and end up in an expensive emergency room.

If a person had a chronic illness such as asthma, Diabetes, or health disease with a tendency to congestive heart failure and ended up in the emergency room they would use up their $6,000.

If they took care of themselves by spending $3,000 of their $6,000 trust their funding source could afford to give their trust a $1500 reward. The benefit to the funding source is it saved money by the consumer not being admitted to the hospital. The patient stayed healthy and was more productive.

President Obama does not want to try this out. He wants consumers and businesses to be dependent of the central government for everything.

MSAs would lead to consumer independence from central government control of our healthcare. MSAs would put all consumers at whatever socioeconomic level in charge of their own destiny.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

 

Permalink:

The Second Spoke Of The Wheel: The Ideal Medical Savings Account

February 8, 2012
inConsumer Driven Health Care, Health Savings Accounts vs Medical Savings Accounts, Healthcare Insurance Industry, Information Technology in Healthcare, Medicine: Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

Stanley Feld

"Dear Dr. Feld

If your ideal Medical Savings Account is such a good idea why has it not become more popular?"

The reason is simple. The Ideal Medical Savings Account does not exist as a healthcare insurance option. The healthcare insurance industry has obfuscated the purpose of creating financial incentives for consumers with the offer of Health Savings Accounts.

The Health Savings Accounts keep premium dollars in the healthcare insurance industry’s control at the end of the year. Consumers are able to use unspent money on healthcare deductible in the future.

The Ideal Medical Saving Account puts the money not spent in a separate tax-free trust for consumers’ retirement. The logic is to reward consumers for good health financially and to encourage consumers to be responsible for their health and healthcare choices.

The goal is not to reward the healthcare insurance company it is to reward consumers. The healthcare insurance industry is controlling the consumer’s money for its own profit.

Despite its faults HSA’s are becoming very popular. It is the fastest growing healthcare insurance product in America.

President Obama wants to eliminate HSAs. His goal is to increase government control over consumers’ healthcare choices. He does not want consumers to control their healthcare dollars. He wants to control consumers.

The healthcare insurance industry’s goal is to maximize its profit. It is not concerned about the consumer’s health. The more consumers in the healthcare system the more premium dollars the healthcare insurance industry controls. 

 Using the power of lobbying and the influence of lobbyists it has been able to rig the game against the consumer.

    "Wendell Potter, former senior executive[1] at Cigna turned whistle-blower, has written that the insurance industry has worked to kill "any reform that might interfere with insurers' ability to increase profits" by engaging in extensive and well funded, anti-reform campaigns."

"This is nothing new. However, as consumers (patients in all three categories) the Internet and social networking can empower us to have more influence over the politicians than lobbyists."

"After all, we are the people who give them their jobs. Some might say this is a naïve view. However, recent events have shown the effect of People Power and its ability to disrupt the establishment and its lobbyists.

The industry, however, "goes to great lengths to keep its involvement in these campaigns hidden from public view," including the use of "front groups." Indeed, in a 1998 effort to successfully kill the Patient Bill of Rights at that time, “the insurers formed a front group called the Health Benefits Coalition to kill efforts to pass a Patients Bill of Rights.

While it was billed as a broad-based business coalition that was led by the National Federation of Independent Business and included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Health Benefits Coalition in reality got the lion’s share of its funding and guidance from the big insurance companies and their trade associations."

The question is why would the National Federation of Independent Business or the U.S. Chamber of Commerce do this? They either don’t understand the healthcare insurance industry’s motives or they received grant money from the healthcare insurance industry. Both groups are working against the benefit of it own people.

"Like most front groups, the Health Benefits Coalition was set up and run out of one of Washington’s biggest P.R. firms. The P.R. firm provided all the staff work for the Coalition. The tactics worked. Industry allies in Congress made sure the Patients’ Bill of Rights would not become law."[2]" 

Obamacare and the Democratic congress have also yielded to the demands of the healthcare insurance industry. President Obama’s goal is to control all medical decisions for patients to keep healthcare costs down. Most advocates of Obamacare overlook this fact.

President Obama’s individual mandated purchase of healthcare insurance would increase the number healthcare industry’s customers. Its profits would increase. 

Medicare and Medicaid are totally dependent on the healthcare insurance industry for administrative services. This results in keeping the healthcare insurance industry in control of healthcare spending. The 2.5% overhead for Medicare and Medicaid continuosly repeated by government officials is completely bogus.

The healthcare insurance industry receives at least 30% of every Medicare and Medicaid dollar spent.

The administrative services costs are supposed to be no more than 15%. However, large sums of administrative costs are applied to direct patient care. Each administrative cost has a profit center attached to it.

These profits center increases the healthcare industry’s profits. In turn the salaries of the executives increase.

The Ideal Medical Savings Account eliminates all these layers of bureaucracy, profits and abuses.

It is a perfect opportunity for “People Power” to demand through social networks that the Ideal Medical Saving Account be added to healthcare insurance choices.

The Ideal Medical Savings Account puts the power back in consumers’ hands.

Neither traditional insurance plans or Medicare or Medicaid provide financial incentives for patient to be responsible for their disease nor their healthcare needs.

 

Spoke CDHC

 

Financial incentive for all categories of patients (consumers) can serve to increase adherence to physician’s treatment instructions.

Financial incentives can stimulate consumers to be educated consumers of both healthcare and medical care.

Financial incentives can serve to incentivize patients to become professors of their chronic disease. Self-management can avoid many emergency room visits and hospitalizations.

Instant adjudication of claims can decrease many of the excessive administrative costs.

The Ideal Medical Savings Account is simple and transparent to consumers.

IMSAs revives the patient physician relationship. It drives the government and the healthcare insurance industry to the edge of the medical care transaction. It disrupts the hairball and will instantly disrupt the food chain that is failing under the weight of healthcare costs.

The Ideal Medical Savings Account is a perfect healthcare insurance product if deployed properly. Social networks must be formed to demand its availability in order to permit consumers’ (patients) to drive the healthcare system.

Social networks on other levels can force physicians to be more competitive.

The result would be a reduction in the healthcare system’s cost while eliminating administrative abuse, waste and fraud.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” is, mine and mine alone

Please send the blog to a friend

 

 

 

Permalink:

The House And Senate Bills Are Terrible Bills For Medical Care And The Economy. Part 8 : The Bill’s New Taxes

December 2, 2009
inPoliticians,Healthcare and Vested Interests, Stakeholder Abuse of the Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

 

The Senate healthcare reform bill contains a host of new taxes for both the wealthy and the middle class. The tax increases are designed to raise $370 billion dollars. Another $202 billion dollars will be raised from other provisions such as fees and penalties.

The fees and penalties are really tax increases. Many of these tax increases will start in 2010 before benefits begin.

“The most shocking tax increase is a payroll tax increase that will permanently sever the link between the Medicare Payroll tax and its contributions to Medicare.

An additional Medicare payroll tax will go into the general revenue fund rather than the Medicare Trust Fund. The funds collected can be used for other programs.

“The shift emerges from the liberals. They have long been tried to turn social insurance programs into welfare programs that redistribute wealth. The Reid payroll tax is a huge step down the road of using social insurance payroll taxes as regular taxes to transfer income.”

This payroll tax increase will be 5% on earnings above $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for couples.

President Obama promised anyone earning less than $ 200,000 will not experience a tax increase. He failed to mention the other taxes and fees that will be imposed on the middle class.

There will be an excise tax on healthcare insurance companies. This excise tax is projected to raise $150 billion dollars. Everyone knows this tax will be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher premiums either for private insurance or government insurance.

There will be taxes imposed on drug companies and medical device companies which in turn will pass on these added costs to consumers. The increase in the costs of drug and medical devices will result in increased healthcare insurance premiums. Consumers will pay these extra costs with post tax dollars. Isn’t this a hidden tax for all consumers?

Consumers will have less discretionary income to support America’s economy which depends on consumer spending.

The Joint Tax Committee published an complete list of the new taxes and its projected revenue generation for the federal government.

A 40% Excise tax on High Value healthcare insurance plans such as $8,500 for Individual and $23,000 for a couple. This tax is projected to generate $149.1 billion in new revenue over the next ten years. The government will not collect this excise tax because companies will not buy these healthcare plans.

The 5% increase in the Medicare Payroll Tax for single earners over $200,000 and joint earners over $250,000 will generate $53.8 billion in new taxes over the next ten years.

President Obama’s unintended consequences will eliminate innovative healthcare insurance products that would make real gains toward repairing the healthcare system.

A proposed change would tax and restrict Health Savings Accounts, Archer Medical Spending Accounts and Health Flexible Spending Accounts and Health Reimbursement Arrangements in order to generate $5 billion in new federal revenues. This is another mistake. These innovative healthcare plan products are a step in the right direction. They make consumers more responsible for their healthcare. Their elimination makes consumers be more dependent on the government.

A tax on branded drugs will cost the pharmaceutical industry $22.2 billion over ten years. This tax will be passed on to all consumers as another hidden tax increase.

The annual tax on the health insurance companies is projected to generate $60.4 billion over ten years resulting in an increase of $60.4 dollars in premium increases plus a handling fee.

Medical device companies will experience a $19.3 billion dollar increase in taxes over ten years. Again, this increase will be passed on to consumers. It will also stifle medical device innovation.

The federal government is going to impose a 5% federal sales tax on cosmetic surgery and procedures over ten years. I am not a big fan of cosmetic surgery but this move is a tax on consumers’ freedom of choice

A more complicated and less transparent tax increase is the change of the Medical Expenses Deduction from 7.5% of Adjusted Gross Income to 10%. The floor for seniors will be maintained at 7.5%. It is a tax on having an expensive illness. Consumers will not be able to deduct medical expenses to the degree they could in the past.

The federal revenue projection is it will generate an additional $15.2 billion dollars. President Obama is penalizing someone who becomes sick. The tax increase consumer out of pocket expenses. It is also decreasing discretionary income for consumer spending.

Harry Reid’s bill will eliminate the income tax deduction of Medicare Part D (prescription drug plan) and generates $5.4 billion dollars in new taxes over the next ten years.

The federal government plans to cap salaries for all employees of health insurance companies at $500,000. Any salary above $500,000 will not be a deductible expense to the company. The government claims making salaries of over $500,000 a year a non deductible expense will save over $6 billion over ten years.

All these taxes, fees and penalties will be taxes not only on the wealthy but on the middle class as well. They will have a negative effect on innovation. They will eliminate incentives.

President Obama’s healthcare reform bill is not really about healthcare reform. It transfers the power of healthcare regulations from the states to the federal government and is a tax increase to all consumers.

Healthcare insurance mandates for employers and employees are going to increase taxes to consumers even further. There has been much confusion about these mandates. I will cover the specifics of this draconian provision in detail in my next blog.

President Obama’s bill is not about improving healthcare. It is about concentrating the power of the Federal government and increasing its control over American citizens. It is about reducing their freedom to choose and making their own decisions.

The Democrats have tried in the past to accomplish this. It failed.

If Americans wake up the Democrats will fail again.

Write to the President and congress.

The email address can be found at;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

.

Permalink:

Confusion About The Ideal Medical Saving Account: Part 2

October 18, 2009
inMedicine: Healthcare System, Politicians,Healthcare and Vested Interests, Stakeholder Abuse of the Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Why will President Obama’s Healthcare Reform Plan fail? Medicare and Medicaid have unrelenting increases in its yearly deficits. Both programs as well as the available private health insurance do not provide incentives to consumers or physicians to improve the healthcare system.

Consumers, who have healthcare insurance have been passive until now. “If I get sick my insurance will take care of me.”

As more people get sick they realize they are uninsured.

Therein lies the problem with President Obama’s Healthcare Reform Plan. It forces the consumer to be dependent on the government rather than to be responsible for health and healthcare.

Sometimes patients cannot help it if they get sick. Some illnesses are genetic. Some illnesses are environmental. Many illnesses are preventable.

Healthcare reform should put an emphasis on disease prevention. It should provide incentives for consumers to prevent disease and incentives for physicians to teach patients to avoid complications once they have a chronic disease.

Prevention of the onset of chronic disease and the complications of chronic disease require motivated consumers. It also requires the elimination of environmental hazard that precipitate chronic disease. There are many examples of environmental hazards (air pollution, toxic wastes, cigarette smoking, and obesity to name a few).

Let us take obesity as an example.

Is there any language provided in any of the bills before congress addressing the obesity epidemic?  No, yet obesity predisposes consumers to Type 2 Diabetes and coronary artery disease. Medical care of these two problems cost the nation $400 billion dollars a year.

 

In a March 26, 2008 article in the New York Times, New York City was declared Fat City? Ten (10) million pounds were gained in 2 years according to the April issue of Preventing Chronic Disease, a medical journal published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“About 173,500 adult New Yorkers became obese and more than 73,000 received new diagnoses of diabetes from 2002 to 2004, according to a new study by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Put another way, “the citywide weight gain totaled more than 10 million pounds in just two years,” the city noted in a news release summarizing the study.”

President Obama should be concentrating his efforts on how to motive people to lose weight in order to avoid the onset of Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Disease. He and his healthcare reform team should study my “War on Obesity.”

None of the necessary steps are being taken by the administration to solve Obesity in America. Without a solution to the obesity epidemic, the Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus epidemic will continue and the cost of President Obama’s new entitlement plan will escalate.

How should President Obama motivate people to be responsible for their own care? He should provide incentives. He should propose and enforce regulations that provide consumers with a healthier food environment.

A first step would be to deal with farm subsides that encourage obesity. It can be done. He must also provide effective education to the public to combat obesity. He must provide economic incentives to consumers to exercise and lose weight. This can be accomplished by the ideal medical savings account.

President Obama should become serious about dealing with malpractice reform. The cost of defensive medicine is $750 billion /year. Consumers must be educated to demand tort reform. Defensive medicine would affect the remaining balance in their medical savings accounts. Consumers should be taught to demand an explanation for the tests from their physicians. Consumers could be taught to waive physicians’ liability if there is no good reason for a test. Physicians have not been sued for tests they have done. They have been sued for tested they have not done.

President Obama should be spending money on a system that encourages innovation (the ideal medical savings account) rather than spending and wasting money on a new entitlement for a healthcare system that is broken.

I will repeat my answer to your question. Your employer or the government pays for your ideal medical savings account.  The entire policy (the $6,000 deductible and the $6,000 high deductible policy) remains tax deductible to your employer.

You have the responsibility to use the first $6,000 wisely and remain healthy. If you do not spend it you keep it in a trust account tax free for retirement and not for future healthcare needs. If you use it before you retire you pay ordinary income tax plus a penalty. If you spend more than $6,000 you receive first dollar healthcare coverage.

If you are self employed and qualify for government aid or a subsidy the government pays for healthcare premium. If you are on Medicaid the government remains the payor.

All citizens would have the same healthcare coverage. Everyone would be responsible for their choice of lifestyle. President Obama would instantly have 300 million consumers repairing the healthcare system. It would take major control of the healthcare system out of the healthcare insurance industry’s hands.

Stimulating innovation would decrease the cost of healthcare while insuring everyone. It would improve wellness and quality care.

Expanding an entitlement is not the answer to Repairing the Healthcare System.

 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Permalink:

Public Option vs. Ideal Medical Savings Account: Part 4

September 8, 2009
inMedicine: Healthcare System, Politicians,Healthcare and Vested Interests, Stakeholder Abuse of the Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Politicians and healthcare policy makers have not included consumer driven healthcare in the healthcare reform debate. They have not included tort reform in the debate either.

The debate is about a public option. President Obama is going to redefine his meaning of the public option in his message to congress. He will make it sound benign. It will not sound like a government takeover of healthcare. He will omit the details and consequences of the bill.

President Obama must know the government cannot afford a public option. He knows he must control costs somehow. His policy makers believe the only way to control cost is by total government control over the healthcare system. Ultimately the goal is a single party payer system.

This way of thinking about the problem is wrong. Government control does not reduce costs in most projects. It usually increases costs. The President is focused on reducing physicians’ and hospitals’ reimbursement. He believes they are the reason for increasing costs. Medicare has continually decreased reimbursement to physicians and hospitals. Yet costs have increased.

To some extent decreased reimbursement leads to increased utilization but it is not the principle reason for the increase in utilization. A principle reason is an increase in the need to practice defensive medicine. Plaintiff attorneys deny it. The Massachusetts study confirms that defensive medicine leads to a large increase in utilization and costs.

Physicians are an easy target because they are not well organized. The Democrat controlled government is timid about attacking the plaintiff attorneys and tackling tort reform. Defensive medicine results in about a $700 billion dollar a year cost to the healthcare system. 

Howard Dean said it a few weeks ago. “Congress will not face the issue of tort reform because it does not want to take on plaintiff attorneys.” Consumers can solve this for congress by signing a valid limited liability waiver. Patients can put their own cap on damages. It would not require any courage on the part of congress or the President to face this difficult political issue. All congress and the President have to do is declare the waiver valid.

Texas and California have had the courage to place caps on damages. It has been very successful. If there were caps on damages and they were effective the need for defensive medicine practices would decrease.

The public does not trust congress or the President with control over its healthcare coverage. The public experience with unintended consequences of government control is obvious to all.

Recent examples are the unintended consequences of the bank bailouts, Goldman Sachs bailout, the economic stimulus package promise, the auto bailout, and the war in Afghanistan. All these bailouts are increasing the deficit at the expense of the taxpayers and future generations.

The public mistrusts the healthcare insurance industry as much as it mistrusts the government to control healthcare. The healthcare insurance industry has restricted access to care and rationed care. It has not reimbursed physicians and hospitals in a timely fashion. It has found it is cheaper to pay the negotiated settlement rather the medical bills for its insured.

Nancy Pelosi is right about one thing and only one thing. The real villain is the healthcare insurance industry. However, she does not understand with a public option she is not controlling the healthcare insurance industry fees for administrative services. The government outsources administrative services to the healthcare industry and will still be subject to grotesque administrative services fees.

The healthcare insurance industry has lobbied to change the law to increase co pays to 35-40% of bills so it can lower premiums to affordable levels. Increasing deductibles and lowering premiums would satisfy President Obama’s goal of affordable premiums. At the same time, it will increase the out of pocket cost of medical care for consumers who might need to use their “affordable healthcare insurance.”

The healthcare insurance industry will be forced to offer insurance to consumers with preexisting illness at an affordable cost. Some states have a high risk pool. The premiums in the high risk pools are at least 11/2 times higher than normal premiums and have higher deductibles. High risk patients must be put into the general insurance pool.

There has not been a word in the healthcare reform discussion about patient responsibility for their health. We are in the middle of the worst Obesity epidemic in American history. President Obama should declare a War on Obesity. He should promote legislation that could help eradicate obesity. He should provide patients with financial incentives to eliminate obesity and adhere to prescribed therapy. Obesity is a leading driver of increasing healthcare costs. The costs will only become grater as the obesity epidemic continues.

It is time consumers took control of their own health care dollars and their own health and well being. The defensive medicine/tort reform issue can be solved by consumers. Obesity can be solved with the government rewriting farm subsidies and a substantial public service health campaign to change our eating habits.

A consumer driven healthcare system along with the ideal medical savings accounts could solve many of the healthcare system’s problems without total government control. The government’s job should be to help with educating the public, negotiating prices that are transparent and fair and enforcing regulations to create a level playing field for consumers among the other stakeholders.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Permalink:

Public Option vs. Ideal Medical Savings Account: Part 3

September 4, 2009
inMedicine: Healthcare System, Politicians,Healthcare and Vested Interests, Stakeholder Abuse of the Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Dear President Obama;

Please listen. The American public doesn’t want the public option. They know America cannot afford another entitlement program. Americans do not want increased taxes. They are afraid China is lending us too much money. If and when they pull out it will be doomsday.

The healthcare insurance industry would love you to get your healthcare reform bill passed. It would increase their profits at taxpayers’ expense. The healthcare insurance industry did it to Massachusetts. The federal government had to bail out Massachusetts. Why not the entire country?

Americans want healthcare reform. They would love to provide universal care, have affordable insurance coverage, and increased quality of care. Your strategy is wrong.

There is another way to accomplish these things. It requires you to have faith in the intelligence of the American public. The strategy would decrease the cost to the healthcare system instantly. It would decrease the obscene costs for administrative services to the healthcare insurance industry. It would diminish the need to develop a massive government bureaucracy.

It eliminates the influence of lobbyists for vested interests. It would create competition among physicians, hospital systems and healthcare insurance companies. The healthcare insurance industry is drooling over your healthcare reform plan.

Americans know government bureaucracy can be cruel and inefficient. There are too many generalities that are wide open to abuse.

I received this note from a reader summing up America’s mistrust of government control. This person is neither a Republican nor Democrat. He is an American.

Stanley,

To sum up the recent post you can simply remind readers of the laughable old line, "I am from the government and I am here to help".

It was gaggy enough to see all the pigs at the trough getting 100’s of billions.  It will make everyone wretch just watching the same participants helping themselves to trillions of dollars worth of slop.

Heaven help us.  Neither the press nor the Obama fans can see through this smokescreen.  God, haven’t people figured out that when the government doles out money poor people don’t get helped, rich people do.  Does foreign aid help poor people in other countries.  If it did poverty in Africa would have ended decades ago.

Go back to the days of Lyndon Johnson.  We fought the war on poverty and lost that.  We lost the Drug War.  We lost the Vietnam War, we are losing the Afghan and Iraq Wars and we are well on our way to losing the war on the high cost of healthcare.  All of these efforts were lost not because they weren’t laudable goals, but because they were not properly considered.  As you know, some we should not have fought, others we should have fought differently.

Interestingly, the only real win we have had in the last forty years was the war on welfare and it came about because something was taken away, not added. 

Is there a lesson here?

L

How do you accomplish your goals and have the American public trust you once more? You can accomplish your goals of universal care, affordable insurance and increase in quality of care by putting individuals in control of their health and healthcare dollars.

This must sound radical to a liberal. If you permit consumers to drive the healthcare system they will drive the prices down.

How would a consumer driven healthcare system work using an ideal medical savings account?

Employers, states, and the federal government are currently paying healthcare premiums at very high administrative service fees to the healthcare insurance industry. Many self employed are paying the entire healthcare insurance premium with after tax dollars making their cost at least 35% higher than employer based coverage. Most cannot qualify for insurance because of preexisting illness.

The healthcare insurance industry controls the premium dollars. Patients have no financial incentive to be responsible for their health or healthcare dollars. The goal of a consumer driven healthcare system is to create a system that would provide incentives for consumers to be a watchdog for their healthcare dollars.

If these payers gave half of the $12,000 per family per year to consumers and permitted them to keep monies unspent in a retirement account, then patients would be motivated to use their healthcare dollar wisely

If consumers with chronic diseases perform well (weight loss, diabetes control, asthma prevention, COPD and heart disease prevention) and stay out of the ER or hospital because of proper maintenance they should receive a bonus for their retirement fund.

The fees for services would have to be negotiated beforehand as we presently do. All fees should be totally transparent. You would have 300 million people watching and reporting their costs or care.

The remaining $6,000 would buy high deductible coverage that would provide first dollar coverage. The healthcare insurance industry would do very well. If they quit Fidelity or Vanguard could do the bookkeeping.

Think of all the administrative costs saved on the first $6,000. Think of all the middlemen expenses avoided.

Medicare cost per patient in only $6600 per year including the last 30 days of life. The average cost of younger persons is much lower. Cost of care would be decreased because physicians would be paid at point of service. If the cost for medical care was over $6000 for a patient’s care first dollar high deductible insurance would take over.

Medical care is the relationship between the patient and the physician. If you provide the tools and money to create a transparent relationship without middlemen the patients would make the cost decrease as we have seen in other industries. America would have an affordable system.

If the employer became an extender of the physicians care and a patient advocate the costs would drop.

Employers, patients and physicians have the same goals. All are at the mercy of the middlemen (healthcare insurance industry).

This is the American way. It can be done.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Permalink:

Public Option vs. Ideal Medical Savings Account: Part 2

August 22, 2009
inMedicine: Healthcare System, Politicians,Healthcare and Vested Interests, Stakeholder Abuse of the Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The Public Option is a misnomer. It will not be an option. It will become the only choice.

The intent of the Public Option is exactly as Barney Frank described in his off the cuff interview. It is a critical step to a single party payer system government. Representative Anthony Weiner has confirmed the intent of the Public Option. President Obama has been saying it in code all along.

The Public Option is a critical step on the way to a single party payer since the Democrats do not have the votes for a single party payer at this time. A single party payer system would work if it would not be paralyzed by a bureaucracy, did not run out of money, did not engage in rationing of care and permits patients to make their own medical decisions.

Medicare is running out of money and Social Security and Medicare has 107 trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities.  Medicare deductibles are constantly being increased. Physician reimbursement is constantly reduced. A 300 billion dollar reduction in physician reimbursements is scheduled for 2010.

Investor’s Business Daily revealed President Obama’s goal on Wednesday, July 15th one day after HR3200 was published.

“Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.”

The Investor’s Business Daily was not sure its interpretation was correct so they checked with the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:

“LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.— LIMITATION ON INDIVIDUAL HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE page 16

IN GENERAL.—Individual health insurance

coverage that is not grandfathered health insurance

coverage under subsection (a) may only be offered

on or after the first day of Y1 as an Exchange-participating health benefits plan.”

President Obama has promised we could keep our present healthcare insurance if we like it. It will be grandfathered in. Otherwise, we will have to buy insurance from Healthcare Exchange-participating health benefits plans.

"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.

“Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington’s coverage.”

If an individual changes healthcare insurance carrier he cannot buy private insurance from another company except through the certified healthcare insurance exchange.

Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private unregulated carriers.

“What wasn’t known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.”

On average, consumers change insurance carriers every eighteen months. The Healthcare Insurance Exchange will regulate the kind of healthcare insurance available.

The healthcare insurance industry has abused all the stakeholders. The consumer should be protected from abuse.

However, the healthcare insurance industry will continue to abuse the government and taxpayers. It charges the government a 15% administrative service fee to process claims.

Consumers will be forced into the government subsidized public plan. Employers will be happy to pay the 8% of their gross revenue. Employers are currently paying 18% of their gross revenue to the healthcare insurance industry. The healthcare insurance industry will not compete with the government. It will withdraw from selling healthcare insurance.

By default America will have a single party system, with an enormous bureaucracy and an enormous deficit.

Another downside is individuals will be paying public option healthcare premiums with after tax dollars. Premiums will be determined by means testing. Healthcare costs could become higher than today’s healthcare insurance premiums between tax rates increasing and the surtax for healthcare.

The cost will go down only by decreasing physicians’ and hospitals’ reimbursement. Six hundred billion dollars are scheduled to be removed from Medicare payments as the number of seniors covered increases. The result will inevitably be a further rationing of medical care for seniors.

HR 3200 is going to outlaw health savings accounts (HSAs) Health Savings Accounts are not as good as Medical Savings Accounts. HSAs do not provide enough incentives to patients to control their health and healthcare dollars. It keeps the healthcare insurance industry in control of the healthcare dollars.

Eliminating alternative forms of healthcare insurance has been a goal of Democrats for years. They want to crush any creative alternative.

“With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to the left’s expansion of the welfare state will be removed.”

Washington shouldn’t be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in Americans’ lives. It should be making rules to eliminate abuse of systems, and providing incentives for individuals to be innovative and efficient.

The public option won’t be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny.

Healthcare reform is not about better healthcare for Americans. It is about the government controlling our lives and decreasing our freedom to choose.

I would suggest the following note.

“We do not want the government to control our lives and increase our taxes. We want affordable, universal healthcare coverage that does not limit access to care. We want control over our healthcare dollars.

You can reach you Congressional Representative with the links below.

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

 

Permalink:

Public Option vs. Ideal Medical Savings Account: Part 1

August 18, 2009
inMedicine: Healthcare System, Politicians,Healthcare and Vested Interests, Stakeholder Abuse of the Healthcare System, Stakeholder Mistrust
• Leave a comment

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

In response to my last post I received this note.

“Stan

This is interesting.  You may like this but it is very obvious that it is just another stall tactic.  If the current bill, with reconciliation, passes, we still have to address these points.  So where are this fellow’s solutions?”

I watched President Obama’s town hall meeting in Grand Junction on Saturday evening. He is a compelling and seductive speaker. If I thought his plan would work and at the same time be budget neutral I might be seduced.

It will not work for the consumer and it will not be budget neutral. He needs a better plan.

What is missing?

President Obama’s generalities are correct. The country needs a system that provides universal care at an affordable cost and an increase in quality. I believe his strategy is wrong. His strategy is reflected in his healthcare reform bill.

He is correct in pointing out that the healthcare insurance industry controls the healthcare dollar. His prescription to destroy the healthcare insurance industry is wrong because it will penalize patients. President Obama’s healthcare reform bill is not doing anything to limit the healthcare insurance industry 20% gross administrative fee whether we have a single party payer or a private insurance system.

He promises to get rid of the waste in the system. He claims eliminating the waste will pay for two thirds of the 1.1 trillion dollars his healthcare billion will cost in the next ten years. The remainder will be paid for by taxing people making over $250,000 a year. He needs to redo the math.

President Obama’s system sounds pretty simple. However, it seems the government hardly ever does anything efficiently. The costs are always underestimated. There are always uncontrolled abuses or unintended consequences.

President Obama is ready to create a massive new bureaucracy and employ approximately 110,000 new employees. Bureaucracy is always a prescription for inefficiency.

President Obama is ignoring the waste created by defensive medicine. The total cost of unnecessary testing is about $750 billion dollars a year. Nonetheless, tort reform is off the table. Defensive medicine is blamed on physicians wanting to generate more money for themselves. I think defensive medicine came first, and then physicians figured out how to generate more income in response to decreasing reimbursements for their services and an increase in malpractice lawsuits. Placing a cap on malpractice awards destroyed the malpractice business in Texas and California.

Where is the role of patients’ responsibility for their own health and healthcare. Patients with adequate healthcare insurance are satisfied. The healthcare inflation problem is the result of medical care costing little for the patient with insurance except for the deductibles.

Our healthcare system is a fix the sick system. The healthcare system is not geared to prevent an illness. The administration’s healthcare reform plan speaks of prevention but does not provide incentives to patients or physicians to prevent illness or even deal with the obesity epidemic..

“Consumers are receiving quality medical care at little direct cost to themselves. This creates runaway costs that have to be addressed. But ill-advised reforms can make things much worse.”

The public has no great love for the healthcare insurance industry. Their protests about the healthcare reform bill are not to protect the healthcare insurance industry. It is to protect their freedom of choice. The public does not trust the government to make choices for them.

Both political parties have extremely low approval ratings. President Obama’s approval rating is sinking because of the perception of his half truths and a mounting distrust by independent voters.

“An effective cure begins with an accurate diagnosis, which is sorely lacking in most policy circles. The proposals currently on offer fail to address the fundamental driver of health-care costs.”

President Obama’s public option and increase in bureaucratic decision making is not going to solve our healthcare systems problems. He is not focusing on repairing the perverse incentives that are presently in the dysfunctional healthcare system.

Consumers must solve the healthcare system problems just like they solved the auto industries problems. Government role should be to provide the appropriate regulations to level the playing field.

“The health-care wedge is an economic term that reflects the difference between what health-care costs the specific provider and what the patient actually pays. When health care is subsidized, no one should be surprised that people demand more of it and that the costs to produce it increase.”

The solution is not a public option or a single party payer system. Consumer driven healthcare is the solution through the use of the ideal medical savings account.

“To pay for the subsidy that the administration and Congress propose, revenues have to come from somewhere. The Obama team has come to the conclusion that we should tax small businesses, large employers and the rich.”

President Obama’s plan will not work because the health-care recipients will lose their jobs as businesses can no longer afford their employees. The economy will get worse and the wealthy will flee to tax havens.

General anxiety will increase, patients will get sicker and the healthcare system will be overused creating more debt and more taxes.

A few economic self evident truths are:

  1. A free marketplace with appropriate rules encourages innovation and productivity.
  2. In the United States profitability is a strong market driver. If inappropriate rules are set up entities will try to figure out how to benefit from the rules to the disadvantage of others.
  3. The higher the taxes the lower the productivity. The lower the taxes the higher the productivity.
  4. The greater the bureaucracy the lower the added value productivity.
  5. Consumers will try to maximize their purchasing power.

“According to research I performed for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a $1 trillion increase in federal government health subsidies will accelerate health-care inflation, lead to continued growth in health-care expenditures, and diminish our economic growth even further. Despite these costs, some 30 million people will remain uninsured.”

Rather than expanding the role of government in the health-care market, Congress should implement a consumer driven approach to health-care reform. A consumer driven approach focuses on the consumers being the policemen for their own healthcare dollar. If would focus on the doctor relationship and empower the patients and their physicians to make effective and economical choices.

The patients would be proactive rather
than passive. The result will be an increase in efficiency in the healthcare system rather than a further decrease.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.