Story from the Wall Street Journal, by the Dean of Harvard Medical School Jeffrey S. Flier.
Excerpt:
As the dean of Harvard Medical School I am frequently asked to comment on the health-reform debate. I’d give it a failing grade.
[…]Speeches and news reports can lead you to believe that proposed congressional legislation would tackle the problems of cost, access and quality. But that’s not true. The various bills do deal with access by expanding Medicaid and mandating subsidized insurance at substantial cost—and thus addresses an important social goal. However, there are no provisions to substantively control the growth of costs or raise the quality of care. So the overall effort will fail to qualify as reform.
In discussions with dozens of health-care leaders and economists, I find near unanimity of opinion that, whatever its shape, the final legislation that will emerge from Congress will markedly accelerate national health-care spending rather than restrain it. Likewise, nearly all agree that the legislation would do little or nothing to improve quality or change health-care’s dysfunctional delivery system. The system we have now promotes fragmented care and makes it more difficult than it should be to assess outcomes and patient satisfaction. The true costs of health care are disguised, competition based on price and quality are almost impossible, and patients lose their ability to be the ultimate judges of value.
Worse, currently proposed federal legislation would undermine any potential for real innovation in insurance and the provision of care. It would do so by overregulating the health-care system in the service of special interests such as insurance companies, hospitals, professional organizations and pharmaceutical companies, rather than the patients who should be our primary concern.
In effect, while the legislation would enhance access to insurance, the trade-off would be an accelerated crisis of health-care costs and perpetuation of the current dysfunctional system—now with many more participants. This will make an eventual solution even more difficult. Ultimately, our capacity to innovate and develop new therapies would suffer most of all.
In order to have an economy recover, you need people running government who actually understand health care and economics. My lunch-time book is Regina Hertzlinger’s “Who Killed Health Care?”. Regina teaches at Harvard University, as well. She talks about how we need to lower costs and improve quality by introduce elements of choice and competition. Her plan is similar to the Republican’s Patient’s Choice Act. Consumer-Driven health care is the right solution to the problem of rising health care costs. Obama’s plan just adds fuel to the fire.
The right way to reform health care without sacrificing liberty
Consumer-driven health care:
Health Care: Fostering Focus Factories
with Dr. Regina Hertzlinger
(8:46)
Choice, Competition Should Drive Health Care Reform
with Dr. Michael D. Tanner
(5:21)
The Republican Plan (“Patient Choice Act”) is consumer-driven:
Obama’s False Health Care Choice
with Rep. Paul Ryan
(10:39)
Ideas for Free-Market Health Care Reform
with Rep. Paul Ryan
(8:30)
What’s wrong with Obamacare, Medicare, RomneyCare and CanadaCare:
Competing with the Government
with Dr. Michael F. Cannon
(7:34)
Medicare: A Model for Reform?
with Dr. Michael D. Tanner
(4:34)
Lessons from Massachusetts Health Care Reform
with Dr. Michael D. Tanner
(4:18)
The Canadian Health Care Experience
with Sally C. Pipes
(7:45)
Puncturing the Myths of American Health Care
with Sally C. Pipes
(about 8 minutes)
WINTERY KNIGHT 