As the week comes to an end and policy makers head out of Washington for their 5 week recess, a few interesting items to note.
It appears that the Rep. Waxman and the House committee he chairs have garnered the political support for their bill and will pass it out of committee. This opens the way for a unified bill to be voted on by congress in September. Also gives members of the house plenty to discuss at home. One key issue is to make premium concessions to families with incomes at or below $88,000--this has been agreed to and is a new benchmark to note in the impact of reform to the average American.
Meanwhile, it appears the bi-partisan efforts from the Senate Finance committee are still being hashed out. It is widely believed that this bill will be the "one to watch". With the Senate vote next week on the Supreme Court nominee, the chances that this bill gets released are diminishing--though reports say a draft may be put forth.
Finally, more pointed attacks are being made against insurance companies. Watch for ads against the insurance industry in the next month. Though we are often frustrated with insurance companies ourselves, we often hear claims made about insurance companies which are sometimes not 100% accurate. As a rule, we feel the companies that we conduct business with provide a high level of benefit and adhere to the guidelines within their policies. We have added a link to the right of our blog that BCBS of NC has put together stating their thoughts on good health reform. As other perspectives are developed we will put those forth as well.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
What's Canadian Health Care Really Like?
In case you missed it, National Public Radio (NPR) had an interesting program yesterday (Monday, July 27th) entitled, "What's Canadian Healthcare Really Like?" You can listen to the podcast by logging onto:
http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=111063897&m=111063892
The program outlined some of the pros and cons of the Canadian system. While many Canadians called in to praise their healthcare system, two notable interviews addressed some of the deficiencies in their system. One of the interviews was with Dr. Brian Day, former President of the Canadian Medical Association. The other was with Mr. DeSange, the former Minister of Health for Canada.
These doctors noted the following:
1. Prescription drug coverage isn't available universally in Canada. Richer provinces offer coverage and poorer provinces often do not;
2. 1 in 7 Canadians doesn't have a primary care physician due to physician shortages;
3. There appears to be variation in the administration of care among the provinces;
4. 2/3'rd's of Canadian purchase medical supplements to cover items not covered by their plans (ie: ambulance services; RX drugs; mental health, chiropractic);
It was also noted that the Canadian Government sometimes exports patients to the United States for care when it is not readily available in Canada. This might lead one to suspect that the Canadian system might not be able to meet the needs of all of its citizens without the U.S. medical system to back it up.
While both gentlemen said that there were obviously some good things about their universal system of care, Dr. Day commented that neither the Canadian system, nor the United States healthcare system, were the ideal model for healthcare. He noted that other countries like Germany, Switzerland, etc. were able to provide better quality, more efficient healthcare at a lower, more predictable cost.
All in all, it was an interesting program that helped clear up some of the myths I had heard about the Canadian healthcare system.
http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=111063897&m=111063892
The program outlined some of the pros and cons of the Canadian system. While many Canadians called in to praise their healthcare system, two notable interviews addressed some of the deficiencies in their system. One of the interviews was with Dr. Brian Day, former President of the Canadian Medical Association. The other was with Mr. DeSange, the former Minister of Health for Canada.
These doctors noted the following:
1. Prescription drug coverage isn't available universally in Canada. Richer provinces offer coverage and poorer provinces often do not;
2. 1 in 7 Canadians doesn't have a primary care physician due to physician shortages;
3. There appears to be variation in the administration of care among the provinces;
4. 2/3'rd's of Canadian purchase medical supplements to cover items not covered by their plans (ie: ambulance services; RX drugs; mental health, chiropractic);
It was also noted that the Canadian Government sometimes exports patients to the United States for care when it is not readily available in Canada. This might lead one to suspect that the Canadian system might not be able to meet the needs of all of its citizens without the U.S. medical system to back it up.
While both gentlemen said that there were obviously some good things about their universal system of care, Dr. Day commented that neither the Canadian system, nor the United States healthcare system, were the ideal model for healthcare. He noted that other countries like Germany, Switzerland, etc. were able to provide better quality, more efficient healthcare at a lower, more predictable cost.
All in all, it was an interesting program that helped clear up some of the myths I had heard about the Canadian healthcare system.
Monday, July 27, 2009
What happens now?
Health care reform 2009 has run into some notable road blocks in Washington. By design, our intent is to not be too political here--but more of an overview of what we see going on.
In short, the Republicans and conservative Democrats are concerned about the expansive role of reform--both in cost and structure. Interestingly, what no one seems to deny is that our system is quite damaged and may be beyond repair. However, as they try to sort out payments to physicians, tax on the wealthy and creation of a public plan for those who have no other choices--politics begans to take hold.
What is the expected outcome today? We are expecting a watered-down healthcare bill. Long -noted agreement on 80 percent of health reform could be the end result by years' end. In the interim expect lots of advertising on television, radio, etc on both sides of the debate.
For you as an employer, all of this still means more administrative effort, more complexity in assisting your employees. An employer mandate, minimum benefit standards and limited underwriting can certainly be enacted. Interestingly, it is far easier to tweak the existing insurance structure and still not really solve the underlying problem--which is not the cost of insurance, but the cost of health care. Unfortunately, reform (whatever form) probably means still higher insurance cost.
In short, the Republicans and conservative Democrats are concerned about the expansive role of reform--both in cost and structure. Interestingly, what no one seems to deny is that our system is quite damaged and may be beyond repair. However, as they try to sort out payments to physicians, tax on the wealthy and creation of a public plan for those who have no other choices--politics begans to take hold.
What is the expected outcome today? We are expecting a watered-down healthcare bill. Long -noted agreement on 80 percent of health reform could be the end result by years' end. In the interim expect lots of advertising on television, radio, etc on both sides of the debate.
For you as an employer, all of this still means more administrative effort, more complexity in assisting your employees. An employer mandate, minimum benefit standards and limited underwriting can certainly be enacted. Interestingly, it is far easier to tweak the existing insurance structure and still not really solve the underlying problem--which is not the cost of insurance, but the cost of health care. Unfortunately, reform (whatever form) probably means still higher insurance cost.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Must-read article on healthcare by Dr. Atul Gawande
If you haven't read the article that appeared in the June 1st issue of The New Yorker, you definitely need to read it. It will give you a new perspective as you formulate your own personal opinions about what ails the healthcare system in the United States.
www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande.
Dr. Atul Gawande is a surgeon and writer who examines the community of McAllen, Texas, one of the nation's most expensive healthcare markets. He compares the quality of care and patient outcomes in McAllen, versus other cities which provide similar quality care with better outcomes for much less money.
Dr. Gawande's assertion is that our current "fee-for-service" based healthcare system is one of the reasons that medical costs have spiraled out of control. I found this article to be extremely interesting and a confirmation that in healthcare, more isn't always "better."
www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande.
Dr. Atul Gawande is a surgeon and writer who examines the community of McAllen, Texas, one of the nation's most expensive healthcare markets. He compares the quality of care and patient outcomes in McAllen, versus other cities which provide similar quality care with better outcomes for much less money.
Dr. Gawande's assertion is that our current "fee-for-service" based healthcare system is one of the reasons that medical costs have spiraled out of control. I found this article to be extremely interesting and a confirmation that in healthcare, more isn't always "better."
Monday, July 20, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Health Care Reform
This should be an exciting week. We will began making post on our observations, our opinions and general consensus on what the impact may be for employers and for us as brokers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
