This is one of the reasons we can’t deal with health care in America
This politician is playing politics and misleading Americans. Neither health insurance nor the insurance company CEOs are the problem.
What is out of control and of great concern are politicians like Greene. She can’t even tell truth from fiction.
Health insurance premiums are going up because the cost and use of healthcare are going up.
Medicare trustees project its costs will increase over 8% a year in the future- no insurance company involved.
I dare say Rep Greene opposes Medicare for All, possibly as socialized medicine. Oh look…
She has warned against it as part of a “socialist” or “socialized medicine” push.
- Greene has said that the Left has pushed for socialized medicine for years. She sees Medicare for All as part of that, citing Bernie Sanders explicitly. EconoTimes+1
- In interviews and speeches, she has expressed concern that politicians or commentators might use certain events or personalities to popularize Medicare for All or universal health coverage agendas. EconoTimes
The fact is people like Greene offer no viable alternatives, but have no problem lying about “socialized medicine” or are simply ignorant.
Is Medicare socialized medicine? Nope‼️
My wife and I have used Medicare for fifteen years and we haven’t seen any hint of socialized medicine – because there is none.
Multiple private and public programs distort prices, and shift costs about. Multiple programs create administrative nightmares. Our non-system inhibits the coordination of care often leading to unnecessary duplication of care and risk for patients.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
I have offered my solution here in prior notes many times. it is simple.
A national stop loss/reinsurance system with a $25,000 per capita attachment point, where providers are limited to either the Medicaid allowable or Medicare allowable for expenses in excess of the attachment point – funded by general revenues including a per capita premium. That is all American citizens, including those covered by Medicare or Medicaid or the VA today. Should be something like $500 a year per person, something like $200,000,000,000 (that’s two hundred billion). Employers and not-for-profits could pay the premium on others behalf.
Individuals are responsible for expenses up to $25,000 a year. There would be no point of purchase cost sharing (deductibles, copayments, coinsurance) on preventive care and primary care. Individuals could contribute to a Health Savings Account on a tax preferred basis. The coverage could be provided by an employer sponsored plans, individual coverage, public exchange, Medicare, Medicaid or self-insurance via posting a bond. Those who don’t show/can’t show coverage are defaulted into the public exchange and the premium is assessed as a tax. The cost of $25,000 in coverage per year is likely to be less than $1,800 per person, or $150 a month, on average – ranging from about $500 a year for a child under age 18, to $5,000 a year for Americans age 65+. I would require age based rates.
So, affordable, universal coverage, where the coverage prior to the attachment point is “equitable” relative to the anticipated cost.
.
.
.
The problem is your suggestion that the best solution is something that:
“… assures 100% universal coverage, a uniform fee and payment system, fair cost sharing by citizens and employers and simplified administration. …”
100% universal coverage is possible via an individual mandate, where those who cannot show coverage are defaulted into coverage – where they are then charged the premium for the default coverage, in the form of a nominal, per person, excise tax. No one wants that, however, because many Americans want “the best coverage YOUR money will buy.”
A uniform fee and payment system is also possible – let’s allow everyone to use the fee rates provided by Medicaid, where the Medicaid allowable averages 72% or so of the Medicare allowable, which averages about 150% – 250% – 350% of typical reimbursements by employer sponsored plans for the exact same service, in the exact same city, by the exact same physicians in the exact same hospital on the exact same date. The challenge, of course, is that most providers would simply walk away from their practices and most hospitals would close if everyone had coverage with Medicaid allowables. Our health system would rapidly deteriorate to something closer to Venezuela.
https://www.expatriatehealthcare.com/countries-with-the-worst-healthcare/
A “fair” cost sharing is not possible. Introducing “fair” into your equation makes the above goal an oxymoron – like jumbo shrimp. The optimal cost sharing structure is not something that is “fair”. “Fair” means treating me the way I think I should be treated.
You might try for “equitable”, however, nowhere else in America is there anything where prices are set based on equity – where the price is the same for similarly situated people (horizontal equity), and different for differently situated people (vertical equity).
Name one?! Name any consumer good, insurance, service, etc. where what you or I pay varies based on our differences in incomes, wealth, marital status, dependent status, geographic location, etc.
Again, many Americans have long believed that they should have “the best coverage YOUR money will buy.” By definition, that won’t be “fair” to those who are called upon to pay more to fund a subsidy to others.
Wake up. Wake up! So long as Beltway Bandits are allowed to buy votes by providing coverage and subsidies, where they are not required to adopt specific taxes TODAY (where they send the bill to those too young to vote and generations yet unborn) and run $1 – $2 Trillion a year in annual deficits, we won’t have universal coverage, we won’t have a uniform fee and payment system, we won’t have “fair” or even “equitable” cost sharing, and we won’t have simplified administration.
LikeLike
I don’t see that as realistic.
As expert as you are Jack, i think you miss the human behavior aspect of all this. You simply cannot view healthcare as a commodity to be purchased as such.
I asked several people one on one in nearly every European country how they like their health system. I never heard and significant complaints.
Medicare needs several changes, but it works for 65 million people and there is no reason a version would not work for everyone.
Everybody in the pool. Everyone participates, everyone pays, not program to program cost shifting.
Yes, paying taxes and income based limited OOP costs is what people prefer whether they know it or not.
LikeLike
You state: “Yes, paying taxes and income based limited OOP costs is what people prefer whether they know it or not.”
No, Dick. People want YOU (and me, someone else) to pay more taxes for their coverage.
And, that’s not limited to Americans. That is also true for people around the world – they want you and me to continue paying more, much more, for medical treatments, products, services.
The only reason why individuals in other countries accept the system they have is because they don’t know what they are paying (it is buried in their taxes) AND, more importantly, they are not paying for all of the medical and Rx innovations developed here in America.
I’m waiting for the idiot ass Trump to place a Tariff on medical innovations, new Rx and other EXPORTS so as to recover domestic spending/investments in creating medical innovations.
Yes, in other words, every other country should be shouldering some of the cost to develop medical equipment, treatments, Rx – and – I expect Trump to penalize those countries (China, etc.) who pirate our technology.
LikeLike
I have lived abroad for several years of my retirement and discussed health care with expats of many countries. There is no perfect system, but many citizens of countries with single payer, universal coverage seem mostly satisfied. The USA spends more per patient with less favorable results than many countries with a universal plan. Both political parties in the USA have deamonized the other side about health care. Political theater is easy, but actually solving problems requires real leadership and hard work. Most Americans want politicians to solve problems, not create more division.
LikeLike
Al Lindquist:
maybe the politicians cause the problems–did you ever hear of “free lunch”? they buy votes by
promising that all the time–you probably believe what they are selling is real.
my solution is a health care plan that allows me to keep my doctor and pay, say, no more than $2,500 hundred per year for a premium–I’m willing to build in a COLA for the premium.
these are the same folks who lied about student loans–great idea back in ’65 or so when LBJ signed legislation creating the process and all would be fine–until it wasn’t–then we had some old fool tell us he would wave a magic wand and “poof”– a good deal of the debt would disappear–the debt would increase because someone had to pay the interest (Joe taxpayer) but who cares we can blame it on Trump.
how about ACA and those subsidies to help folks during the pandemic–did they disappear when the pandemic did? why you silly goose a government program that disappears–not even PBS should disappear–Quinn and Connie like it so we all, after 60 years, need to continue paying for it because there are no alternatives and it is another left leaning outfit. It took Big Bird decades to fly the nest and it went, for the right price, to HBO.
sure Medicare for All will be unlike any other federal program–it will save us money (see ACA)–provide health care for all–and the uninsured will disappear. What a deal I’ve got for you!!
Oh–maybe Quinn should find an alternative to his big medicine scheme–in his world the solution is big government over and over again. The debt just expands but his credit card keeps on coming out.
One has to laugh–one day critical of our massive debt and then scheming to increase it.
LikeLike