Analysis of the Health Care Proposal
Here is the paragraph we are analyzing (found at the end of Page 7),
As a first step, policymakers must shed the notion that the government can run health care from Washington. No centralized health care “plan” can replace America’s health care sector, and, in fact, any such plan would stifle ingenuity. Health care is the product of many players, interacting in dynamic ways: doctors, nurses, technicians, pharmaceutical companies, medical equipment makers, State and local government, and insurers, among others. Effective and efficient health care must draw from this diverse field of participants. It should restore decision-making to the people most directly affected by the choices, putting patients, families, and doctors in charge, not the central government’s bureaucracies. It should encourage greater flexibility in the design and pricing of health insurance policies, so insurers can tailor benefits to a wide range of individuals and families with diverse needs – precisely the opposite of Washington’s insistence on prescribing what types of insurance people need. It should promote innovation by lifting regulatory burdens, and encouraging the exploration of untried technologies, rather than directing research from Washington.
The first sentence says that the Governement cannot run health care. This is a conclusion which is not supported by the following facts
- In ALL the other developed countries in the world the Government run regulated centralized Universal HC Systems enabling all of the components to work together efficiently. They support centers of excellence and share information. On average they all provide quality Universal coverage for about half of the cost in the US.
- They all reconize that competition in HC is not effective in reducing cost or increasing quality, as the consumer does not know what they need and has no cost or value data on providers to compare them.
- Healthcare bankruptcies are unheard of in these countries.
- HC is the leading cause of bankrupcy in the US.
- They all have national healthcare resouce plans to ensure that they efficiently meet the geographic and demographic needs of their population.
- No State in the US has a HC resources plan aimed at efficiently meeting their population’s needs.
- Only the US has employers as an integral part of the HC System. Employer US HC costs are a major competitive disadvantage for US companies in the global marketplace.
- 36 of these countries HC Systems are ranked better than the US in overall outcomes and cost effectiveness by the World Health Organization in 2000.
- The Commonwealth Fund wrote
- New York, NY, June 23, 2010—Despite having the most expensive health care system, the United States ranks last overall compared to six other industrialized countries—Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom—on measures of health system performance in five areas: quality, efficiency, access to care, equity and the ability to lead long, healthy, productive lives, according to a new Commonwealth Fund report. While there is room for improvement in every country, the U.S. stands out for not getting good value for its health care dollars, ranking last despite spending $7,290 per capita on health care in 2007 compared to the $3,837 spent per capita in the Netherlands, which ranked first overall.
- Because these countries only have one central plan their administration costs very much lower(up to 90%) than the US and people have a much easier time using the System. The Affordable Healthcare Act has dramatically increased administration costs through the number of “different” plans available.
- Many countries have the flexibility of “buying up” on some aspects of HC services. These are all very affordable compared to the US.
– US Medicare and Medicaid are centralised and goverment run with regulation on fees for service though the government “Fee Schedule”.
US Leads the World
– The US is one of the world’s leaders in a number of specialist(profitable) areas including Cardioligy and Cancer.
HC Education and Preventative medicine
-It is however one of the poorest in HC education and preventative medicine because of their low profit margins. Investment in these areas however actually has the biggest impact on overall community health and cost efficiency. Healthy life style means lower cost.
– For 2015 the US is 53rd in life expectancy in the world, Japan is 2nd, Australia 9th, Italy 10th, Canada 13th, France 14th, Spain 15th, UK 30th. (www. geoba.se/population).
– More HC innovation occurs in the US than any other country. This is because we are the only unregulated major market that allows for very generous pricing of new HC drugs, products and procedures. All foreign pharmaceutical companies make most of their profit in the US. This results in the American public effectively financing the most HC reseach for the rest of the world.