The Public Insurance Option

In a recent poll released by the Associated Press-GIK (data collected March 24-28) the public’s support for the Healthcare Reform Bill is at an all-time low.  This latest poll shows that 35% of Americans support the ACA, 45% oppose the expansion of the Federal government’s role in healthcare, ad 17% are neutral on the subject.

One of the concerns over the Healthcare Reform Bill is the increased cost to the taxpayer at a time when the Federal Government budget is already running huge deficits.  The American public seems to understand that the ACA will increase the amount of money needed by the government to implement the plan, even if many politicians don’t understand this fact.

Of particular interest in this poll are the responses by senior citizens, the acknowledged wisest among us.  59% of seniors oppose the new health care law, while only 29% support the changes.  62% of seniors disapprove of Obama’s handling of health care, while Republicans are more trusted than Democrats to handle the issue, by a 51 percent to 36 percent margin.

Several items of interest, related to Healthcare Reform were proposed this week, as part of the budget battle.  House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, (R-WI), proposed converting Medicare into a “premium support” program. Instead of traditional Medicare, people who are now 54 and younger would get a fixed payment, or voucher, from the government to buy private health insurance of their choice when they retire.   This program would be means tested, with lower income participants receiving a larger voucher.  He also proposed that Medicaid, which serves low-income people, would be funded by a block grant to the states who administer the program.  Both of these proposals would allow competition to increase which should reduce overall healthcare costs.

Dr. Donald Berwick, who oversees the Medicare and Medicaid programs, as well as the implementation of the new health care law, told Associated Press reporters Tuesday that the Republican approach would set back efforts to improve quality and squeeze waste.  In contrast, Berwick said, he wished “the tempo of the law were faster,” so that Americans could experience the benefits of increased coverage for most Americans and policy changes to reward doctors and hospitals for quality care, not just the volume of tests and procedures.  Perhaps Dr. Berwick doesn’t understand that the only way the Healthcare Reform Bill is remotely revenue neutral is for the tax increases to be implemented now, while the increase in costs to the government be postponed as long as possible, as the ACA is currently structured.

President Obama unveiled his own plan on reducing Medicare costs $340 billion dollars over the next ten years.  His plan relies on controlling prescription drug costs and changing how the federal government distributes Medicaid dollars to states. It also gives more cost-cutting power to an advisory board created by last year’s Healthcare Reform Bill. (Read -cut doctor and hospital payments). Unfortunately, President Obama’s plan is short on specifics though delivered in a great oratorical style.

On Tuesday, the Obama administration began implementing a new program which is aimed at improve safety in hospitals, which have serious problems with infections and medical mistakes.

The new ‘Partnership for Patients’ program will assist hospitals to adopt new protocols to reduce these problems significantly, with the goal of preventing nearly 2 million patient injuries and saving more than 60,000 lives over the next three years. The program’s goal is to also save Medicare $10 billion over that period.

Editor’s note:  Do we really need a new government program to tell doctors and hospitals how to save lives. And what is the cost, in new government employees to administer the program.  While the program may save billions of dollars in Medicare costs, how much in administrative and enforcement costs will the program incur?