I read the ABC news few paragraphs describing this suggestion. My summary would be that as the Federal Government is paralyzed and that now that the economy is improving there seems to be an upswing in health care expenses we "need" to do something. That something cannot be divert dollars from some other aspect of government toward healthcare nor can it be increase taxes to provide for those services. As DC can't perhaps each state would decide what to do to control costs. If the Federal Government saves money on whatever plan the state invents, they will share the savings with the state. There will be measurement of costs to include both public and private insurance. There will be a list of essential services which cannot be cut. Costs could not be shifted to patients.
On its face who could object to such a plan? How would a state decrease costs with things they control? The easiest ways are to make getting care less convenient but still available. You want an MRI? Those are expensive, definitely overused and sadly often contribute more to the income of the provider than to the management of the patient. So let's do 2 simple things. All MRI's must be approved by an agency. No new MRI's will be installed in the state without a certificate of need to limit the use of these machines. Does every orthopedic doctor need his own MRI and CT? Does she order those tests because it is really needed or because they own the machine? If only hospitals had MRI machines there would still be some in every county and I guarantee a whole lot fewer MRI's would be done. Multiply this kind of thinking which does not deny services, does not shift costs to patients, and likely does not lower the quality of care and the state saves millions every year. Now apply that process to lots of medical high cost procedures. Does this sound good to you?
|