More on how The House and Senate Bills are “Ambitious”: “Not Perfect—but Ambitious”

Over at the New America Foundation, blogger Joanne Kenen elaborates on how the House and Senate Finance bills can lead to providing better end-of-life care.  As As Kenen points out, these proposals are all about giving people choices—including the parents of children who are seriously ill. Finally, these proposals would reduce health care costs by making sure that people who don’t want to die in an ICU don’t wind up there by default.

“After all the sound and fury of last August, we're pleasantly surprised that the right hasn't risen again with all sorts of horror stories about the resurrection, so to speak, of the "death panels." Maybe because all that fear-mongering was finally discredited. Maybe we are finally getting just a little bit smarter.
The inevitable focus on the politics of health reform, and the disproportionate amount of attention paid to the public plan, sometimes obscures the many ways that the House and the Senate health plans are ambitious. Not perfect. Ambitious. I've heard experts, people I like and respect, say the legislation does "nothing" to advance the cause of quality of end of life care in America. They are wrong. The House and Senate bill each contain measures that would advance that cause — not fix it completely, far from it, but they will take us important steps in the right direction. It's too soon to know which of these measures – if any — will survive a final melding of House and Senate legislation. But let's look at them here because, except for the end of life consults which got way too much of the wrong kind of attention, they haven't gotten adequate attention. In an accompanying guest post. Dr. Ira Byock, director of palliative medicine at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in New Hampshire, talks about what these changes can mean for his patients and their families.

Continue reading

Breaking News from AP: Reform Moves Forward as AARP Endorses House Bill

Many reformers have been uncertain as
to whether they could rely on the Association of Retired Persons (AARP)
to support progressive health care reform.
  After all, AARP has close ties to the insurance industry.

But
this evening, the Associated Press (AP) reported that “In a coup for
House Democrats, AARP will endorse sweeping health care overhaul
legislation headed for a history-making floor vote

“An
announcement from the 40-million member group is expected Thursday
[tomorrow], said officials with knowledge of the group's decision. They
spoke on condition of anonymity because the endorsement is not official
yet.

Continue reading

Heath Care Reform– Looking at the Glass Half-Full

What Has Been Accomplished; What Still Must Be Done

These days, many progressives are expressing deep disappointment with the health reform legislation now moving through Congress. Some suggest that some legislators made deals with lobbyists and let them write the bills. Others complain that both the subsidies and the penalties are too low. Still others don’t like the fact that states can “opt out” of the public insurance option, and decide not to offer Medicare E. Finally, many ask: “Why can’t everyone sign on for the public plan in 2013? Why do we have to wait until 2013? Why can’t they roll out universal coverage next year?”

Normally, I would be among the first to critique the bills. By temperament and training, I’m both a skeptic and a critic.

Continue reading

For-Profit Hospitals Poised to Take Market Share From Non-Profits

Non-profit hospitals have been spending, hand-over-fist, on new construction and new wings, adding rooms that most communities don’t need, while investing in the same multi-million dollar medical equipment that five hospitals in a three-mile radius already have. On HealthBeat, I’ve been writing about the investments in hotel-like amenities for more than two years.

Hospitals were borrowing in order to build – interest rates were low; money was available—why not?  Inevitably, the recession would bring an end to all of that. I have predicted that many hospitals would find themselves running out of money in the middle of projects. Other are now saddled with debt, and struggling to hold onto market share.  

Continue reading

Lieberman Defects While Public Support for Medicare E Grows

Joe Lieberman is no Olympia Snowe (R-ME). Many progressives admired Olympia Snowe’s stance (even if they disagreed with her). By contrast Lieberman’s  announcement that he may join the Republicans in a filibuster that aims to block letting the health care reform bill come to the Senate floor is merely vintage Lieberman. He’s an opportunist. I knew him many years ago, back in Connecticut, when a reform candidate was challenging the Democratic machine. Lieberman wavered on the sidelines, waiting to see who was going to win. He didn’t want to risk picking a losing team.

Today, as Lincoln Mitchell points out on Huffington Post: “By wavering between the two parties while never fully abandoning the Democratic Party, Lieberman has made himself far more important than he should be. If he were to formally switch parties, he would suddenly be of little interest to the Republicans as he would be just another member of the minority who would probably be suspect because his right wing credentials would not be strong enough for the Limbaugh-Palin wing of the party.”

Continue reading

Who Would Be Eligible For A Public Option? Far more than “10%” of the Population

Very likely you have heard that only a “tiny group” of Americans will be eligible for the public plan. But if you read the House bill approved by three House committees (HR 3200) carefully, (this is the proposal that provides the most detail on the public option) it appears that 20 percent to 25 percent of all Americans would be eligible to sign up for the public plan in 2013. In the years that follow, the Exchange will be open to all Americans.
 
The notion that only “10 percent of the population” will be eligible to enter the Insurance Exchange and choose between private sector insurance and Medicare for Everyone is fast becoming an urban myth. Some commentators are using the number to minimize the importance of the public plan.

Continue reading

Patient-Centered Malpractice Reform

Below, an excellent Op-ed by Kevin M.D. in “U.S.A Today.” It looks at malpractice from the patient’s perspective. Read the whole piece—the final section explores what we might learn from other countries. Before commenting, be sure to take a look at the NEJM article (see link below).

Any malpractice reforms should put patients first

By Kevin Pho

Whenever the issue of medical malpractice comes up, my fellow physicians and I agree that changes are necessary. Where we disagree is on how to fix the problem. So we all took note when President Obama acknowledged that  medical malpractice reform must be considered. In fact, he proposed pilot projects to study how to improve patient safety and change the way we compensate injured patients.

Continue reading

The Public Option: It’s Not About Politics; It’s About the Economics of Reform

Last week, I argued that the insurance industry had declared war on President Obama’s plans for healthcare reform because industry leaders sensed—or knew– that support for a federal public insurance option was building. A week earlier,  I told an audience at a San Francisco screening of Money-Driven Medicine that I thought the odds were at least 60/40 in favor of a national public plan. They were surprised that I was so optimistic, and this was a very liberal audience in San Francisco.

At the time, most progressive pundits had declared the public plan moribund. Reading the political tea leaves, listening to “informed Congressional aides,” parsing the administration’s statements, they were convinced that the public plan was, as the Buffalo News put it “the rotting corpse of health care reform.” Why was I still hopeful? Because I continued to believe that, without Medicare E (for everyone) health care reform won’t be affordable.

Continue reading

“I’m sorry but we cannot print the data.”

Have  you ever received this message when you tried to post a comment on HealthBeat?

It  happens to me too.

I finally realized that this happens when too much time elapses between the time I started writing the comment and when I try to post it. (Since I often respond to many of your comment in one long comment, I may spend a half hour writing it.)

The solution is simple. Just "copy" your comment, then close HealthBeat.

Open  a new HealthBeat, scroll down to the comments section, paste in, your comment, and send it.  It will be accepted.

I'm sorry for any inconvenience, but this is  just how typepad works .

A Letter from Canada

Below, a letter from a Canadian disputing some of the propaganda that we hear about health care in Canada. (Thanks to HealthBeat reader Lisa Lindell for putting me in touch with Vera Goodman) This is the first in what I hope will be a regular series featuring letters from patients, doctors, nurses and others describing how health care works in their countries.

Since I believe that the best reporting combines stories and statistics, I’ll add some stats, as I have here, in brackets.

The next letter will be from a doctor in Norway who has practiced medicine—and been a patient—both here in the U.S. and in his home country.

Continue reading