Your email address is safe with us. View our Privacy policy.
Critics: Not enough health cost reductions
Legislation emerging from the Democratic-controlled Congress shy away from price controls and instead focus on President Barack Obama's preference for moving away from Medicare's fee-for-service payments, meant to break the cycle of rewarding providers for doing more procedures. Instead, proposals would establish a coordinated system that pays doctors and hospitals for gaining better results, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.
But the newspaper said critics say measures to control costs are tepid and likely ineffective, such as the Senate plan's refusal to eliminate tax exemptions for employer-sponsored coverage and a watered-down proposal to set up a new Medicare cost-cutting commission.
The Post reported that healthcare cost reduction advocates also contend that moves to "save" $110 billion by simply cutting reimbursements to the private Medicare Advantage program hardly represent a fundamental refashioning of the healthcare system.
"These bills do very little in terms of reining in long-term cost growth," Ralph Neas, head of the non-partisan National Coalition on Health Care, told the newspaper, adding, "There is not enough in the public sector and virtually none in the private sector."
Copyright 2009 by United Press International
This news arrived on: 11/04/2009
Printer Friendly Version | Send this page to a friend | Post Comment
Rate This Story:
Great - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Bad
Posted Comments:
11-04-2009 18:15
bj wrote:
Health Care
Make no mistake, this is going to cost us everything for the purpose of covering a great many illegal aliens and people who could pay for health insurance but chose really bigscreen tv's.
There is a small population of people who have made big mistakes, had a child without insurance or changed insurance with a sick child already covered under current policy. You are stuck with the job and the insurance they have once you have a sick child and that is a shame but that is the risk of parenthood. The same thing could happen if you get cancer and decide to change jobs. You can't do that. If you have coverage and plan on changing jobs, get a complete check up before you leave the company. You may wish you could keep that insurance and any new job will have to cover you (previous company pays) due to Hippa laws but not your family. And if you are truly sick, you still have to work because you can be let go when you run out of sick time and family leave and then you have no insurance except the ever expensive Cobra and that runs out in 18 months.
What I am trying to say is LOOK before you LEAP. Really. .. And if you live long enough you will develop a chronic illness.
There is a small population of people who have made big mistakes, had a child without insurance or changed insurance with a sick child already covered under current policy. You are stuck with the job and the insurance they have once you have a sick child and that is a shame but that is the risk of parenthood. The same thing could happen if you get cancer and decide to change jobs. You can't do that. If you have coverage and plan on changing jobs, get a complete check up before you leave the company. You may wish you could keep that insurance and any new job will have to cover you (previous company pays) due to Hippa laws but not your family. And if you are truly sick, you still have to work because you can be let go when you run out of sick time and family leave and then you have no insurance except the ever expensive Cobra and that runs out in 18 months.
What I am trying to say is LOOK before you LEAP. Really. .. And if you live long enough you will develop a chronic illness.
Comment archive | Comment FAQ's
 |
 |
View News & Features ezine stories by date or visit the complete archive |
The ArcaMax Politics channel is one of 70 content categories offered by ArcaMax Publishing on this ... |
VideoSquares.com
