"Docs4PatientCare.org is a politically neutral grassroots coalition of physicians. Use of any politically partisan terms does not reflect the position of Docs4PatientCare.org. We do encourage our speakers to express how they feel and we post articles based on their informative content only. Any politically partisan language used does not reflect the group as a whole. Specific party or political allegiances and opposition are not our intent. The goal of D4PC is only to advocate for effective and responsible health care reform."
Before the advent of Medicare and Medicaid and the HMO Act of 1973, the private sector funded over three quarters of the country's health care expenditures, individuals paid nearly one-half of total costs out-of-pocket and health care inflation was in-line with the consumer price index (CPI). When a third party pays the cost of routine health care services, consumers become insensitive to prices, quality, and choice of care setting. Individuals respond to lower cost-sharing (more comprehensive coverage) by utilizing more care, as well as more expensive care because they do not face the full price of their decisions at the point of utilization.
Read More
A new report from the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University reaches several conclusions about the 2006 Massachusetts health care law (commonly referred to as "RomneyCare" after former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney). President Obama has stated on several occasions that RomneyCare served as the model for his own health care initiative, PPACA (or "ObamaCare"). In this regard, the costs and consequences of RomneyCare serve as an earlier warning signal of what doctors, patients, employers and taxpayers can expect nationwide as a result of ObamaCare.
Read More
Obamacare Failures
Over the past week, multiple reports have showed how Obamacare has not lived up to its promises, delivering higher premiums, more spending, and new mandates on job creators:
May 13—More Waivers Granted: “As of the end of April 2011, a total of 1,372 one-year waivers have been granted.” – Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
May 15—Penalties on Job Creators: “For a midsize nursing home, that penalty [under Obamacare’s employer mandate] could easily exceed $200,000 a year.”– New York Times
May 18—Nearly Half of Employers Could Drop Coverage: “84% of companies indicated they would make other changes to their plans [e.g., raising premiums and co-payments] to offset costs associated with [Obamacare].” – Price Waterhouse Coopers employer survey
May 19—Skyrocketing Premiums: “Employers can expect to see an acceleration in health care cost increases in 2012, with expenses rising 8.5 percent next year.” – Marketwatch
May 20—Medicare Actuary Exposes Obamacare’s Unrealistic Assumptions: “The current law Medicare expenditure projections are based on payment updates that have a strong likelihood of not being feasible.” – Medicare Office of the Actuary
Health Insurance Reform: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
"Explanation of How the 3.8 Percent Medicare "unearned " Income Tax Works"
This new tax is created to help pay for the massive entitlement program known as the PPACA (Affordable Care Act, Obamacare) since the law diverts taxpayer money out of financially strapped Medicare. It is obvious from the following explanation how this tax will affect more Americans over time as currently written.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Medicare's Actuary Paints A Darker Picture Than Trustees", National Review
Under current law, Medicare would spend $220 billion on physicians in 2012. But that assumes the 29 percent cut goes into effect--something that is considered unlikely. So under the alternative scenario, Medicare would spend $248 billion in 2012 on physicians, or about 12.6 percent more. At the same time, Medicare physician payment rates would decline to 57 percent of what private insurers pay in 2012, and eventually to 27 percent by 2085. With the debate over Medicare heating up, this report illustrates that the PPACA does nothing to save Medicare. In fact, it drives the nation over the national debt cliff by continuing the failed policies of this government program.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"GOP Senators Demand Withdrawal of ACO Rule", Politico Pro
Seven Republican senators are demanding that the Obama administration withdraw the embattled ACO proposed rule, saying the criticism from providers shows that the rule is unworkable. The letter, sent Tuesday to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and CMS Administrator Don Berwick, was signed by Tom Coburn (Okla.), Jon Kyl (Ariz.), Mike Crapo (Idaho), Mike Enzi (Wyo.), John Cornyn (Texas), Pat Roberts (Kan.), and Richard Burr (N.C.).
“The concerns over the ACO regulation from some of our nation’s most knowledgeable and innovative health care providers are clear,” they wrote, pointing to an imbalance between incentives and accountability and the expense of investing in quality measures. “Unfortunately, based on the feedback we have from providers around the country, we conclude that the proposed ACO regulation will fail to accomplish its purpose.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Albany Out to Boost Malpractice Lawyers", New York Post
A package of bills moving through Albany could mean big paydays for medical-malpractice attorneys -- proving the case for greater ethics disclosure among the state's elected officials, good-government advocates say.
The legislation, backed by lawmakers who moonlight as attorneys, would include increasing lawyers' fees on malpractice cases and extending the cutoff date for filing suit.
Not surprising, there is a conspicuous lack of effort on medical liability reform in the president's healthcare law.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Government Entitlements and Economic Growth
A key argument in favor of the PPACA is that our economy is less competitive because of soaring health care costs. If this is true, increasing government entitlements will not help. The paper below demonstrates that government entitlements have a negative impact on economic growth--which is the only means we have of enlarging the economic pie for everyone.
Policy Research working Paper by Jean-Pierre Chauffour, Lead Economist International Trade Dept. world Bank. "On the Relevance of Freedom and entitlement in Development: New Empirical Evidence" (1975-2007) May 2011
Summary:
Reviewing the economic performance -- good and bad -- of more than 100 countries over the past 30 years, this paper finds new empirical evidence supporting the idea that economic freedom and civil and political liberties are the root causes of why some countries achieve and sustain better economic outcomes. For instance, a one unit change in the initial level of economic freedom between two countries (on a scale of 1 to 10) is associated with an almost 1 percentage point differential in their average long-run economic growth rates. In the case of civil and political liberties, the long-term effect is also positive and significant with a differential of 0.3 percentage point. In addition to the initial conditions, the expansion of freedom conditions over time (economic, civil, and political) also positively influences long-run economic growth. In contrast, no evidence was found that the initial level of entitlement rights or their change over time had any significant effects on long-term per capita income, except for a negative effect in some specifications of the model. These results tend to support earlier findings that beyond core functions of government responsibility -- including the protection of liberty itself -- the expansion of the state to provide for various entitlements, including so-called economic, social, and cultural rights, may not make people richer in the long run and may even make them poorer.
Read More
1