At a White House speech on Mar 25, Barack Obama said: “I’ve got my pen ready to sign a good, bipartisan bill—which would be really exciting. I love when Congress passes bipartisan bills that I can sign.” http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/Medicare/50665
From the President’s enthusiasm, one can assume that the bill would do nothing to interfere with his agenda to cement government control and force “fundamental change” from a free-market system. Competition is not favored, as is clear from the website of the Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network, for which the presidential speech was the kick-off. “Making operational changes will be viable and attractive only if new alternative payment models and payment reforms are broadly adopted by a critical mass of payers. When providers encounter new payment strategies for one payer but not others, the incentives to change are weak. When payers align their efforts, the incentives to change are stronger and the obstacles to change are reduced.” http://innovation.cms.gov/initiatives/Health-Care-Payment-Learning-and-Action-Network/
Senate conservatives are balking because the “doc fix” (repeal of the sustainable growth rate or SGR) is not immediately “paid for.” But it will be more than paid for eventually, writes Douglas Holtz-Eakins: “A rough projection is that the combination of the Medigap policies and the reduced premium subsidies will cut Medicare outlays by $230 billion over the second 10 years, 2026-2035.” http://americanactionforum.org/research/merits-of-the-proposed-sgr-repeal
Note that he is speaking of reducing premium subsidies and first-dollar payment—not substituting “payment for value” for payment for service.
The cause of excessive spending is third-party payment, not fee for service, writes AAPS president Richard Amerling, M.D. http://www.wsj.com/articles/should-the-u-s-move-away-from-fee-for-service-medicine-1427079653
The problem with Medicare payment is price controls. http://www.spreecast.com/events/debate-on-u-s-fee-for-service-medicine
Instead of a “repeal and replace [with something even worse]” fix to SGR, Congress should repeal the ban on balance billing, and let fees be set on the basis of value—to the patients, not the system.
Social Media
UnitedHealthcare lobbying for special op – "health insurance gerrymandering" in "doc fix" bill. @kksheld @jorient http://t.co/F5CVJpDWzD
— Twila Brase (@twilabrase) March 24, 2015
Hospital ands Revenue Cycling? Heck Optum 360 (combo of Dignity/Optum) wants hospital contracts to profit from it http://t.co/dJ3tednt7v
— MedicalQuack (@MedicalQuack) March 26, 2015
A little-noted masterpiece of constitutional scholarship by Justice Thomas
http://t.co/HwGYTOLX1C #PJNET #TCOT #ccot @dramerling @BettinaVLA
— shirley jean dobler (@shirleyjean1776) March 26, 2015
