Wow. No doubt expensive teams of lobbyists and providers and corporate leaders are seating down as equals, and holding unnecessary calls, as they monitor profit and revenue data, compare it to previous years and project forward even greater profit increases, reimbursements, labs, drugs, and ancillary services in order to combat the wave of cost reduction that Congress also bitterly wants to avoid.
A community system in Colorado has also reduced its costs and improved its care. As theses stories grow, greater effort will be used to supress these successful techniques of costs and care. Jim DeMint will tell us again, “we have the best health care system in the world.” Bachmann will call the teams “death panels,” deciding the level of care and who is served. (It’s the government’s money and I can spent it how I want to!). Fewer visits and admissions will be spun as a sign communities are being serverely underserved–the team will be cited to point to a primary care physician shortage.
Am I cynical? No. I remember the Palovian reflex, Skinner’s conditioning, and the corporate attachment, through its culture and training, to greed and greater profits. Lowering the costs rings the bell for the attacks.
Your first paragraph is brilliant satire, and captures exactly what is going on right now behind the scenes. [it parallels the structure and description of the Times editorial.]
It also expresses a thought that had been absent for much of the last 3 years’ debate, to wit: insurance carriers _do_ _not_ _want_ costs to come down. All they want is to shift the burden of costs to patients (in premiums, deductibles and co-pays) and the public (in taxation to cover those whose treatment they have delayed or denied).
I have yet to hear anyone ask, “Why _should_ an ER visit cost $1900?” and get a clear factual answer.
And, you do well to mention Congress, since, to the extent costs come down, they are deprived of an issue. Every vote for the repeal of ACA should be followed by the question, “OK, what do _you_ propose?”