PNHP can threaten health reform

PNHP is a fringe physician group that advocates for a single-payer health system.

The Massachusetts branch came out recently and railed against the state’s health reform plan, which incidentally, is similar to what President Obama is likely to propose.

According to its leadership, “nothing less than single-payer national health reform will work.”

I’ve always thought they should compromise their stance on a single-payer system, which has next to zero chance of being passed. In fact, as I noted previously, influential Democrat Max Baucus “wasn’t going to waste his time” on the idea.

Suffice it to say, PNHP didn’t take my advice, and today circled their ideological wagons. David Himmelstein, associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and co-founder of PNHP, said that “if the reform plan looked like the Massachusetts reform he probably would prefer the status quo.”

In essence, he’s saying that if the United States fails to adopt a single-payer system, he’d prefer doing nothing to change a system that doesn’t cover 50 million Americans and counting.

It’s becoming increasing obvious that the biggest threat to health reform isn’t coming from Republicans and the right, but from these radical, far-left, groups causing liberals to fight amongst themselves.

Maggie Mahar comments on the damage PNHP is doing to the progressive cause, noting that “the single-payer advocates are simply dividing progressive health care reformers at a time when [they] need to be united against the conservative opposition.”

In order to pass meaningful health reform, the President will need all the support he can muster. It’s ironic that his biggest enemies will likely be those on his own side.

email

  • Anonymous

    PNHP is a fringe physician group that advocates for a single-payer health system…….

    THANK YOU for characterizing PNHP for what it is…..a fringe group.

  • Anonymous

    Health care reform is not going to be stopped by anyone. It is always reforming. The question is whether it is reformed in an evolutionary fashion by millions of patients and their doctors making independent decisions according to their own values or by a handful of planner who imagine that they know what is best. Those who you label as opposed to reform are not opposed, they just prefer the former process, more consistent with liberty, individualality, pluralism and limited government.

  • Neel

    David Himmelstein’s problem with Massachusetts health reform is that it affects his own bottom line. It has shifted money away from “safety net” hospitals such as the Cambridge Health Alliance — the hospital he works in. Although this is a legitimate and concerning criticism of the reforms efforts, he does not disclose his very obvious bias/stake in the matter.

  • Anonymous

    Kevin,

    Those far-left kooks are taken about as seriously as Erza Klein and Michael Moore. Really.

  • Quiact

    The following are facts that are believed to exist regarding the present U.S. Health Care System. This may be why about 80 percent of U.S. citizens understandably want our health care system overhauled desperately due to the inadequate health care they receive and access:
    The U.S. is ranked number 42 related to life expectancy and infant mortality, which is rather low.
    However, the U.S. is ranked number one in the world for spending the most for health care- as well as being number one for those with chronic diseases. About 125 million people have such diseases. This is about 70 percent of the Medicare budget that is spent treating these terrible illnesses.
    Health Care costs are now well over 2 trillion dollars of our gross domestic product. This is three times the amount nearly 20 years ago- and 8 times the amount it was about 30 years ago. Most is spent with medical institutions, as far as health expenditures are concerned.
    One third of that amount is nothing more than administrative toxic waste that does not involve the restoration of the health of others. This illustrates how absurd the U.S. Health Care System is presently. Nearly 7000 dollars is spent on every citizen for health care every year, and that, too, is more than anyone else in the world.
    We have around 50 million citizens without any health insurance, which may cause about 20 thousand deaths per year. This includes millions of children without health care, which is added to the planned or implemented cuts in the government SCHIP program for children, which alone covers about 7 million kids.
    Our children.
    Nearly half of the states in the U.S. are planning on or have made cuts to Medicaid, which covers about 60 million people, and those on Medicaid are in need of this coverage is largely due to unemployment. With these Medicaid cuts, over a million people will lose their health care coverage and benefits to a damaging degree.
    About 70 percent of citizens have some form of health insurance, and the premiums for their insurance have increased nearly 90 percent in the past 8 years. About 45 percent of health care is provided by our government- which is predicted to experience a severe financial crisis in the near future with some government health care programs, it has been reported.
    Most doctors want a single payer health care system, which would save about 400 billion dollars a year- about 20 percent less than what we are paying now. The American College of Physicians, second in size only to the American Medical Association, supports a single payer health care system. The AMA, historically opposed to a single payer health care system, has close to half of its members in favor of this system. Less than a third of all physicians are members of the AMA, according to others.
    Our health care we offer citizens is the present system is sort of a hybrid of a national and private health care system that has obviously mutated to a degree that is incapable of being fully functional due to perhaps copious amounts and levels of individual and legal entities.
    Health Care must be the priority immediately by the new administration and congress. Challenges include the 700 billion dollars that have been pledged with the financial bailout that will occur, since the proposed health care plan of the next administration is projected to cost over a trillion dollars within the first year or so of the proposed plan to recalibrate health care for all of us in the U.S.
    Yet considering the hundreds of billions of dollars that are speculated to be saved with a reform of the country’s health care system, health policy analysts should not be greatly concerned on the steakholders who may be affected by this reform of our health care system that is desperately needed. Tom Daschle leads this Transition’s Health Policy Team. And we also have Ed Kennedy, the committee chair and a prolific legislator. So if the right people have been selected for this reforming team, the urgency and priority regarding our nation’s health care needs should be rather overt to the country’s citizens.
    Half of all patients do not receive proper treatment to restore their health, it has been stated. Medical errors desperately need to be reduced as well, it has been reported, which should be addressed as well.
    It is estimated that the U.S. needs presently tens of thousands more primary care physicians to fully satisfy the necessities of those members of the public health. This specialty makes nearly 100 thousand less in income compared with other physician specialties, yet they are and have been the backbone of the U.S. health care system.
    PCPs manage the chronically ill patients, who would benefit the most from the much needed coordination and continuity of care that PCPs historically have strived to provide for them. Nearly have of the population has at least one chronic illness- with many of those having more than one of these types of illnesses. A good portion of these very ill patients have numerous illnesses that are chronic, and this is responsible for well over 50 percent of the entire Medicare budget.
    The shortage of primary care physicians is due to numerous variables, such as administrative hassles that are quite vexing for these doctors, along with ever increasing patient loads complicated by the progressively increasing cost to provide care for their patients.
    Many PCPs are retiring early, and most medical school graduates do not strive to become this specialty for obvious reasons. In fact, the number entering family practice residencies has decreased by half over the past decade or so. PCPs also have extensive student loans from their training to complicate their rather excessive workloads as caregivers.
    Yet if primary care physicians were increased in number with the populations they serve and are dedicated to their welfare. Studies have shown that mortality rates would decrease due to increased patient outcomes if this increase were to occur. This specialty would also optimize preventative care more for their patients. Studies have also shown that, if enough PCPs are practicing in a given geographical area, hospital admissions are decreased, as well as visits to emergency rooms. This is due to the ideal continuity in health care these PCPs provide if they are numbered correctly to treat and restore others. Also, the quality improves, as well as the outcomes for their patients. Most importantly, the quality of life for their patients is much improved if there are enough PCPs to handle the overwhelming load of responsibility they presently have due to this shortage of their specialty that is suppose to increase in the years to come.
    The American College of Physicians believes that a patient centered national health care workforce policy is needed to address these issues that would ideally restructure the payment policies that exist presently with primary care physicians.
    Further vexing is that it is quite apparent that we have some greedy health care corporations that take advantage of our health care system. Over a billion dollars was recovered for Medicare and Medicaid fraud last year through settlements paid to the department of Justice because some organizations who deliberately ripped off taxpayers.
    These are the taxpayers in the U.S. who have a fragmented health care system with substantial components and different levels of government- composed of several legal entities and individuals, which has resulted in medical anarchy, so it seems.
    Thanks to various corporations infecting our Health Care System in the United States, the following variables sum up this system as it exists today. Perhaps the United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676) is the best solution to meet our health care needs as citizens, it appears.
    We would finally have, as with most other countries, a Universal Health Care system that will allow free choice of doctors and hospitals, potentially, and health care for all completely. It should and likely will be funded by a combination of payroll taxes and general tax revenue which is realistically possible. Because the following needs to be corrected regarding the U.S. Health Care System:
    Access- citizens do not have the right or ability to make use of this system as we should.
    Efficiency- this system strives on creating much waste and expense as it possibly can.
    Quality- the standard of excellence we deserve as citizens with our health care is missing in action.
    Sustainability- We as citizens cannot continue to keep our health care system in as it is designed at this time- as it exists today.
    http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/US_healthcare/index.asp
    Dan Abshear

  • Anonymous

    Not facts.

    Opinions.

    Data-sets arranged to make a polticial statement.

    We’re not fooled.

  • Anonymous

    Why do you all want to leave insurance companies in the mix? What have they done that has improved the health of one individual? Imagine one set of rules, one place to send bills, one formulary, every person with insurance, no multimillion dollar CEO salaries sucking up money, no for-profit insurance companies who are beholden to stockholders and not to patients. When I was in Canada there were no dead bodies on the side of the road; so what if you have to wait 3 months to get a knee replacement. Single payer makes perfect sense and will work!

  • Major Domo

    It’s becoming increasing obvious that the biggest threat to health reform are people who are too ignorant to see the health system in the US is strictly for profit; not curing sickness or the injured. I am lucky to be an american living in a foreign country with access to medical services that is far better than I ever received in the US regardless of the language barrier. Also, my american insurance premiums are approximately one-third of what it would cost if I were in the US, yet the service I receive is much better with waiting times no greater than what I experienced in the US. Any of you yahoos care to comment on that? The only real financial loss I suffer is the transaction between dollars to euros, but that’s because from 2000 to 2006 the US was run by a bunch of amateur boy scouts in dire need of adult supervision.

    I will submit a compromise that would be beneficial to all sides concerned. The US can support both a universal health care package as well as private insurance – it’s done in Europe. The additional insurance would be additional coverage for those wishing to have private rooms during their hospitals stays for example. Also for those who engage in sporting activities where injures can be severe or rescue efforts, such as avalanche rescue, search teams, and emergency transport are being charged to individuals in many stateside locales such insurance would be ideal. Think about it. The coverage could include skiing, swimming, boating, bicycling, hiking, mountain climbing, medical coverage when traveling outside the US and so on. Any sporting activity requiring special functions to ensure public safety would fall under such an insurance. The insurance industry can be tailored to meet specific coverages for a diverse set of injury possibilities that still maximizes their profits while providing coverage in those areas not mandated by the universal health care umbrella. They just have to face the fact that as insurers of the public’s health, they are absolute failures.

  • Reform Now

    So you must be satisfied with the amount of payment you get from the insurance companies that insure your patients. You must be okay with insurance companies denying coverage and procedures of patients. You must think its good medicine for insurance companies to make decisions for you. Why else would you want them to continue to be involved in our system? They are taking money from both sides of the equation. In doing so they are responsible for the deaths of the very human beings they are meant to help. Why would any thinking human being allow this to happen? The Physicians for a National Health Care Program have done their homework. They have a good plan for a health care reform that would actually benefit us. We see state plans failing. Would you rather we try a national system based on failing state systems?

  • Insurance Optional

    The big probelm is everyone thinks they are entitled to Insurance. But they hate the money-grubbing-scum insurance companies. A easy solution is everyone should drop their coverage and pay the doctors directly. That will get rid of the those evil bastards and save tons of administrative fees.

    Oh, by the way, it’s the insurance companies that keep negotiating lower prices with the doctors. Try asking a doctor how much a procedure will cost before you have it done, love to hear that answer!

    Oh by the way, insurance companies are tightly regulated and have to have their rates approved by… THE GOVERNMENT! Ironic isn’t it, the government sets the prices of the evil empires!

    By the way, insurance companies have to keep money in reserve to insure that they can afford to pay your bill. Will the government?

    Insurance companies could quickly lower costs if it didn’t have to jump through hoops to fulfill all the diferent regulations in every state. Why do you think not all companies are in all states? Because based on state regulations they can’t always afford to be in all states.

    Has your doctor ever said he’s doing a certain procedure but reporting it differently to to the insurance company so you will pay less? Or is it so they will be paid more? That gaming of the system is responsible for higher costs!

    Do all doctors accept Medicare/Medicaid? Why not? Is it because it pays below market and they have to take a loss? Is that the single payer system we need? Because that loss is usually made up on the people that have insurance… hmmmm interesting.

    How come anesthesiologist average over $400,000 a year and never are “In Network”? Good luck requesting one to get your network negotiated price!

    We should think carefully before we decide which industry the government should put out of business next.

  • giveTheIocaneToLimbaugh

    Polls show almost 60% of American doctors think we ought to have Single Payer. So characterizing PNHP as “far left” means most doctors are far left.

    But just wait till after this attempt at health care “centrism” fails — another five or ten years of “American Free Market” “Care” and that number will be 75% favoring Single Payer.

Trending