Should a public plan option be part of any health reform initiative?

One of the most contentious health reform issues going forward is the possible inclusion of a public plan as one of the health insurance options patients can choose.

Progressives see this as a vital part of any reform initiative, but those on the right see it as a “backdoor” to a government-run, single-payer system.

I won’t hash out all the details here, instead, I’ll leave it to the many policy wonk blogs that debate the issue. The NY Times piece, linked above, has a nice summary of the arguments for and against.

I’m wary of expanding the role of Medicare, or any other public plan, since it will give the government more clout in fixing the prices of health services. Progressives say that’s precisely the point, but it’s a crude way to control costs, and does little to differentiate what primary care does, versus, say, the work of proceduralists.

On the other hand, I can also appreciate that, without competition from the government, private insurers will have little incentive to control spending.

That said, what’s absolutely non-negotiable is maintaining the ability for doctors to opt-out of any type of public plan. Doctors must not be coerced into accepting a public plan, like, for instance, a condition of receiving Medicare payments.

Health policy blogger Maggie Mahar says that, as long as doctors can opt out of the public plan option, the government will be forced to keep their physician payment rates competitive with those of private insurers (sorry, I can’t find her exact post where I read that).

For instance, if physician payments in the public plan are too low, we’ll have a Medicaid scenario, where the poor are “covered,” but since so few doctors accept their plan, it’s effectively rendered useless.

So, in the end, I’m indifferent to the inclusion of a public plan. What’s most important is that doctors must retain the right to drop Medicare, or its public plan equivalent, at any time.

Losing that ability will render the medical profession powerless against the government, who will use their clout to drive payments further down, with little recourse from doctors.

email

  • Anonymous

    Forced price controls on a new plan with no option to withdraw from participation would be a disaster. It would create incentives to deny appointments where the costs of providing care exceeded the payments.

    That kind of government intrusion would once again force the question of unionization and the right to strike, something the federal government has nicely defeated before by claiming that doctors constitute multiple different businesses and unionization would therefore represent collusion and illegal price fixing–something the government does with impunity.

  • Anonymous

    The two year opt out requirement now for Medicare is for practical purposes a prohibition on non-participation as it puts the risk so high. In a free country, the choice would be made on a case by case basis.

    I don’t see why you say “without competition from the government, private insurers will have little incentive to control spending.” Insurers have a strong incentive to control spending now: profit. The less they pay out in claims, the more they keep. If we didn’t subsidize employer provided insurance and put it on a level field with self-purchases insurance, then the price competition for purchasing the policies would be even stiffer and their would be more low cost insurance options. State coverage mandates also drive up costs.

    For private insurance costs to be lower, less, not more government involvement in healthcare is required.

  • Bad Medicine, Good Solutions

    Dr. Rich over at his covert rationing blog has a fine piece on what would happen if the government banned the opt out. Medicine would then become like an illegal drug, and as we all know prohibition of something indemand doesn’t work. It isn’t working with the war on drugs, it didn’t work with alcohol, and to even fathom the notion it could work with medicine is just as ludicrous. People will want and seek out quality medicine that the government doesn’t provide one way or another.

  • Anonymous

    Whatever happened to allowing the common folk to join whatever plan the Congress gets?

  • Anonymous

    If they force Medicare or Obamacare participation, we’re not entirely powerless.

    The smarter premed students would pick other careers, older physicians would retire sooner (especially in lower paid primary care), younger capable physicians would transition to other fields, some would even try out Dr Rich’s suggestions.

    This would dramatically speed up the replacement of cognitive and even procedural specialists with lower paid, more compliant midlevels. That might be a good thing from the policy wonks’ point of view but scary if someday you’re going to be a patient needing comprehensive care of multiple chronic problems.

  • Anonymous

    Putting a 2000 lb gorilla in the place of the current 800 lb gorilla(Medicare) in no way will reduce the cost of health care. The Medicare model only shifts the costs to the private market. When Medicare tells a provider that they will only be paying approximately half of what is charged, the provider can do nothing about it. So, just like any other business professional trying to keep the lights on, they have to up what is charged to those who can’t dictate what is paid.

    Why don’t the politicians start pointing the finger at those who are actually using the health care dollars, the unhealthy American public? It costs a lot to care for fat, diabetic, smokers who can’t get enough Budweiser…oh yeah, sorry i forgot that doesn’t get people elected.

    If you want to use the gorilla to hold down the costs, being alongside the other options obviously doesn’t work on the root problem. Why don’t we place the ape on top of the problem? Say, have the government take over anyone who goes over (just an arbitrary number that would need to be studied by actuaries and underwriters) $500,000 in medical costs over his or her lifetime. Putting a ceiling on the risk would allow for some crisp competition for the majority of insurance policies. People could buy a “bucket” of $500K. When that’s gone, its into the government’s care you go. You could change plans from year to year to try to take advantage of the competition, but god forbid you get really sick. Then you become a line item.

    Yes, it’s harsh, but don’t you think that actually might make consumers and providers work harder for cures to diseases instead of cures to symptoms?

    Just my take on it, though.

  • Anonymous

    I like the gorilla guy. Now we are getting somewhere. Let the government do what it does best…big stuff! $60 hammer and stuff. Sell me a bucket of Ky fried health insurance. I want $250,000. If I use it all up, well, then the big guys in DC can take over and negotiate a price with someone qualified to take care of my problem. If healthcare is expensive now I can’t wait to see how much it costs after the government (efficiency of the post office and compassion of the IRS) get through setting it up. Letting the government be in charge of band aides and broken arms will set back health care in this country twenty years, research will stop, and eventually it will crippole our economy. Ever wonder why the provider side isn’t screaming for a bail out? Well, there you go. You go “bucket” guy sitting in the last row at the top of the stadium in the cheap seats. Becuase you sure won’t get a seat with all the politicians who swear they are experts on spending your health care dollar.

    Oh, by the way, two other small points. The government might say they are going to use the private sector to run their program but what they fail to point out is that if the government sets the rates and writes the rules…it ain’t private. Second regarding the government setting up a public plan to compete with the private sector is a friggin joke!! It is IMPOSSIBLE for the commercial market to compete because they negotiate rates…the government sets them. Explain that to an economist. Any form of national health care is simply just one big joke.

Trending