When voters think about affordable health care, usually it means how it pertains to them. How much will it cost out of their own pocket?
The ACP’s Bob Doherty – his blog is rapidly becoming a must-read by the way – points out that the public is less concerned about health care spending as a whole, finding that only 6 percent of voters wanted the Presidential candidates to discuss “reducing the total amount the country spends on health care.”
This is entirely unsurprising. Reducing global health care spending means sacrifices that patients aren’t willing to accept, “such as restrictions on access to tests or procedures of uncertain value.”
Doherty also blames politicians who pander for votes by refusing to take serious stands supporting reduced health care spending.
The only true way to lower individual health costs is to lower the country’s spending as a whole. In many cases, this means rationing care and saying “no.”
topics: rationing, costs
Related posts:
- Why controlling health care costs is so difficult
- Does cutting health care costs mean spending less on the elderly?
- Rationing care is inevitable to control health care costs
- Curbing health care costs
- Affordable, comprehensive health care
- Reforming health care in the current economic climate
- Did Obama provide any health care clues in his inaugural address?
{ 1 comment }
Another approach that many people support it so ensure that more resources are dedicated to primary and preventive care. The Dartmouth Atlas studies are very clear that you get care more care but not better outcomes based on how many specilists live in the area.
One simple approach being used in Seattle Washington to cut out the 30% overhead in the system is that people are opting out of insurance for their primary care and seeing internists and primary care doctors who charge a flat monthly fee.
One example is Qliance in Seattle. Unlike the boutique practices this is only about $30 to $60 a month for unlimited care and they treat cab drivers, people who are without insurance as well as those with high deductible plans. (I have no relationship with them)
At first I was opposed to the model as I thought that cutting a practice down to 500 patients (and grossing over $300,000 a year) would be similar to private schools taking the cream of the crop but it seems to actually work to keep docs in family practice at the same time it meets the needs of consumers who can’t afford insurance and cuts costs while providing high quality care.
Comments on this entry are closed.