The case against a government health plan
Granted, Charlie Baker runs a private (albeit non-profit) health insurer. Still, he makes the argument that before government begins competing with providers like his, it first needs to deal with the fact that America is getting older and figure out how to be less ridiculously complicated. He cites as just one example a recently enacted subsidy for unemployed workers on COBRA:
... [I]t's really not administered as an individual benefit. Instead, the employer and the health plan are required to figure out who's eligible and for how much over that period of time, to pay out the benefit/subsidy to the eligible individual, and to then claim credit for that payment on subsequent employer payments into Social Security. That's right - the employer and the health plan figure out who's eligible, for how long, and for how much. We then deduct the value of the subsidy from what would be someone's full COBRA payment, we then get reimbursed by the feds through a reduction in our FICA contribution. If this sounds complicated to you, it should - because it is. We spent a lot of money (like hundreds of thousands of dollars) just putting in the technology to keep track of all the moving parts.
And by the way, the form the feds developed for beneficiaries to fill out to claim eligibility is, ah, about 11 pages long and has so many "if /thens," "and/ors," and "must/must nots" associated with it, I wondered when I first read it about how many people would be able to determine if they were eligible or not. I didn't have to wait long to get the answer to that one. To date, we've sent out almost 4,000 letters, answered tons of questions and only enrolled a little over 100 people. Sheesshh. ...
Comments
That's it?
Really, Charlie? That's your argument? "It's hard, so we shouldn't do it"?. Maybe you're too young to remember RFK's take on that excuse.
Next up, toll road operators make the argument against the federal interstate system. Blackwater CEO writes about how national defense is too hard and complex to leave to the government. James Sokolove chimes in to tell us that the Constitution of the United States is unnecessary - just call him when there is a dispute.
I wish there was a Firefox extension that let me reach through the internet and bitchslap the author. General Motors is your whipping boy, Baker? GM is in the tank for lots of reasons, one of the main ones being that of massive health care costs that Toyota, for instance, is less burdened by. The differential is debatable, but its existence is not.
We spend 1.9 trillion a year on health care. More than the whole Chinese economy, says Google. And for that we get the system we have? How much of that goes into Charlie's pocket? Yeah, I'd be defending the status quo too, if I were he.
"I’m sorry. I just don’t get it" Me neither, pal. I don't get how we tolerate your kind.
Reminds me of the old saying about the original: Harvard Community Health Plan. They had nothing to do with Harvard, there was no sense of community, your health was the least of their concerns, and they had no plan.
I don't think the statement
I don't think the statement is that it's too hard and therefore not worth doing. I think it is that it's very hard, so let's make sure it is worth doing before taking that leap. The COBRA example he cites is a pretty good one. If the FedGov wants to subsidize health insurance for the unemployed, why not simply make direct payments to claimants who document they are using COBRA. Why involve the former employer at all?
Hey, If Obama Really Can
Hey, If Obama Really Can "Save" So Much in Medicare with His Reforms, Why Doesn't He Just Do That Before He Nationalizes Health Care?
Might as well test the "reforms" before possibly catastrophically destroying our existing system. But that would make too much sense, wouldn't it?
Healthcare
Hey Charlie:
The fact is that private healthcare has had 40 years to do this and failed miserably. Medicare actually works better and costs less. The time has come for you and your ilk to be phased out
Medicare actually works
Can I get some of your kool-aid?
WHEN HAS THE GOVERNMENT EVER MADE ANYTHING CHEAPER AND MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE PRIVATE SECTOR?
Think what has happened to public schools in the last 50 years thanks to the gubmint', do you REALLY WANT YOUR HEALTHCARE TO FOLLOW THE SAME TREND?
He's right about the red
He's right about the red tape, but honestly I fail to see how that's any different from the paperwork of a private insurer. I deal with this stuff regularly as part of my job, and I find the entire idea of health insurance being provided as a private enterprise to be, frankly, laughable.
Agree
The high cost of healthcare is making it harder for businesses to succeed...can't hire as many people, spend money on R&D, and yes be more profitable.
It's time for single-payer healthcare. The existing providers can act as supplemental insurers for people who want extra services. Yeah they will be smaller, but we dont need 'em.
Apples and oranges
Wondering if he's part of the same bunch of smoke screeners serving up their warmed over guano in opposition to providing affordable health care for all.
"Form reform" as some have called it is absolutely necessary, no doubt about it.
But good health care for everyone as a matter of morality and policy is quite a different question.
How about both???