The following is a reader take by Maggie Mahar.
Most of us are now familiar with the estimates that as much as one-third of our health care dollars are squandered on ineffective, often unnecessary, unproven and overpriced products and services. But which third?
The fat in our health-care system is not hanging out conveniently on the edges of the steak, waiting to be trimmed. It will take a scalpel, a keen eye, and a steady hand to remove at least some of that fat.
This is why we probably don’t want to leave the job to Congress. Senator Jay Rockefeller has introduced legislation that would turn the job over to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), an independent panel formed in 1997 and charged with advising Congress on Medicare spending and quality of care. Members of the panel are selected by the Comptroller General, and currently include a number of physicians, a nurse, the head of the American Association of Retired Persons, a hospital CEO, an expert who specializes in aging, a healthcare consultant who specializes in Medicare and Medicaid issues, the executive director overseeing pensions and benefits at a healthcare workers’ union, and a professor of healthcare policy.
In Washington, MedPAC is generally viewed as apolitical, though industry lobbyists tend to be distressed by any recommendations that could cut into their revenues. One man’s avoidable hospitalization is another man’s income stream.
Rockefeller would give MedPAC authority to implement its recommendations. MedPAC would decide how much Medicare should reimburse doctors and hospitals for various services, and the panel’s annual recommendation would go to Congress for a simple, fast, up-or-down vote. Legislators would not have the power to make changes. Last week, President Obama indicated his support for Rockefeller’s plan.
Setting fees for doctors and hospitals . . . Isn’t this something our elected representatives should be doing?
Consider what Congress has done in the past. In 1997, when it set out to contain Medicare spending, it decided that if Medicare’s reimbursements to physicians grow by more than a certain amount in a given year Medicare should slash all physicians’ salaries, across the board. This was a crude solution, so crude that the legislators themselves have repeatedly postponed making the proposed cuts.
Meanwhile, healthcare costs continue to spiral. Both private insurers and Medicare are paying billions for ineffective care. We are not just talking about throwing healthcare dollars to the wind: this is hazardous waste. Every time a patient is subjected to an unnecessary or ineffective treatment he or she is, by definition, exposed to risk without benefit.
But as Senator Rockefeller recently told the Washington Post, Congress just doesn’t have the skills needed to excise the waste without harming the quality of U.S. care: “We must take Congress out of its current role. It is inefficient and ineffective. We are not health-care experts, and being a deliberative body means that we cannot keep pace with the rapidly transforming health-care marketplace.”
In a recent Senate Finance Committee meeting Rockefeller was even more candid: “ . . . the best way to take politics out of all of this is to take Congress out of setting [Medicare reimbursements]. There is a group of 17 . . . completely dispassionate people,” who could do this, Rockefeller added, referring to MedPAC.
MedPAC knows where to look for spending that doesn’t benefit patients. It understands the importance of medical evidence. It knows that Medicare Advantage insurers don’t deserve the windfall bonuses they are receiving. They simply are not delivering better quality care to seniors. And it recognizes that Medicare needs to hike its payments to primary care physicians, while trimming fees for certain specialists’ services that are done too often, in large part because they are so lucrative.
Maggie Mahar is the author of Money-Driven Medicine: The Real Reason Health Care Costs So Much. A film adaptation of her book by Academy Award-winning documentary producer Alex Gibney (best known for Taxi to the Dark Side and Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room) will premiere in New York City on Thursday, June 11th. Admission is free.
The film, which stars Drs. Don Berwick and Jim Weinstein, along with many other doctors and patients, focuses on healthcare waste.
Related posts:
- Chronic Disease: The Financial Crux Of The Healthcare Crisis
- "A much greater driver of costs today are patient-demanded healthcare and CYA healthcare"
- Healthcare Diseasecare
- Why removing the tax breaks for non-profit hospitals could be dangerous
- How eliminating waste and taking fewer steps can improve patient care
- Rising health care costs
- Medicare and cutting health care costs
 
Follow on Twitter  
Subscribe






{ 7 comments }
Yes, the government doesn’t know how to cut the waste. No one does. The government shouldn’t BE IN the business of health care. The same altruist premise that allows it to become involved in the first place, prevents it (and the people, and congress) from coming to grips with cost. After all, if health care is a right, then by what right can anyone shut of the money faucet?
The underlying error, that health care should be treated as right (and that others’ lives can be taxed away in order to provide it) must be challenged. If this is not challenged, then you are just fiddling around on the surface of the problem
The concern is that of accountability. If one hands over control of medicare to a bureaucracy, one is skeptical of any reform. I have read of how MedPAC proposes smart reforms to the system. I have yet to meet anyone who has read these “smart” reforms, let alone anyone with enough experience to be able to independently assess them.
With Congress running the show, you know where to go, and if all else fails, you can try to throw them out. A bureaucracy is where change goes to die. Smart reform from any government agency seems a bad bet, in my opinion.
I see this move as intended to create opacity between process and actors in an attempt to provide politicians cover. Why they want cover is an open question, but it makes me nervous.
Tom–
I have read all fo the Medpac reports from the last four years.
So now you have met someone who has read them..
You are right, most people haven’t–typically the reports are 180 pages long. They are detailed and very well foot-noted–no assertions without proof. . .
These reprosts are very, very good. I also know a few people on the 18-member commission.
They are extremely knowledgable and they believe in medical care based on medical resaerch–safe, high-quality care for everyone.
The panel is not made up fo governmetn “bureaucrats”
A fair number of the people on the 18-member panel commission are doctors,, plus a nurse, the head of the American Association for Retired Persons. the head of health care benefits and penstions for a healthcare workers’ union, etc., etc.–
These are people who have a very real-world understanidng of how Meicare affects people’s lives—and how both Medicare and taxpayers are gouged by people in our for-profit health care system.
For a number of years, MedPac has insisted that we need to raise reimbursements for primary care physicians. . .
They’re right.
Maggie: you didn’t address Tom’s issue.
This panel, if given the authority to make changes, has the potential to turn into the health care equivalent of the FCC or any number of politicized quasi-government authorities. That would be even worse than Congress making the decisions because the voters won’t get a chance to get rid of these members.
And to be blunt, I don’t want my healthcare decisions made by bureaucrats of any form. And the panel members will be bureaucrats. Do we REALLY need another arm of the government making decisions for us “for our own good”? Haven’t we seen enough of what the government does for our own good?
Tom and David hit the issue right on the head: we don’t need more government in our healthcare. We need less. A LOT less.
Tell us how we’re getting less government in our healthcare with this panel of supposed “wise men”? And when can I meet them so I can educate them on MY health care needs, since you want to let them make those decisions for me?
Indeed, excessive medical care is drowning the health care system financially. Related postings on http://www.MDWhistleblower.blosgspot.com
As a practicing MD, I see unnecessary medical care every day and I’m sure that I contribute to it. While everyone agrees that the system is bloated, it will be impossible to achieve consensus on what defines excessive care. I may think, for example, that a cardiac stent is not justified, but the cardiologist and the stent manufacturer will likely have a different view.
GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM
So .. the VA system is perfect. Odd — why do studies show their outcomes are v’ble? Despite being single-payer?
And if the system is “money-driven” — name one that isn’t — wouldn’t it be logical that efficiencies would lead to the layoffs of unionized hospital workers?
How many layoffs? Who’s got a calculator? Do Democrats know how to use a calculator?
Really getting tired of “experts” with obviously no ability to put pencil to paper and authoritatively calculate gains and losses.
Example: if gummint directly controls nearly 50% of health care, and health care is SNAFU — what does that say about gummint?
After Fannie/Freddie debacle — could anyone rational trust gummint? I don’t think so — I still have a brain, and trust myself more than Bwarney Fwrank.
Dr. Obama got his White House, and now is after the white coat jobs. Oh yeah, and wants homeowners to have white roofs put on! What’s up with this?
Comments on this entry are closed.