Democratizing the U.S. Health System? No You Can't!

President Obama is facing a stiff fight against the medical establishment in his attempt to bring about systematic health care reform in the U.S. Just as Bill Clinton, with his wife at the time leading the initiative, Obama is finding that the special interests throughout the entire medical / pharmaceutical sector are deeply entrenched in opposition to democratizing the health system.

Addressing the AGM of the American Medical Association Obama confronted a less than enthusiastic reception when outlining his agenda for reform, as most doctors present at the AGM were more concerned about limiting malpractice awards.

The following article captures the mood of the meeting:

CHICAGO (AP) -- President Barack Obama bluntly told doctors Monday he is against their highest legislative priority -- limiting malpractice awards -- and earned a smattering of boos from an audience he was here to court for his health care overhaul plans.

Addressing the doctors in Chicago, the president said for the first time publicly that health care reform, including covering the almost 50 million Americans who have no insurance, would cost about $1 trillion over 10 years.

"That's real money, even in Washington," he said. "But remember: That's less than we are projected to have spent on the war in Iraq. And also remember: Failing to reform our health care system in a way that genuinely reduces cost growth will cost us trillions of dollars more in lost economic growth and lower wages."

To size up the stakes of the battle ahead Obama also made the point

"If we do not fix our health care system, America may go the way of GM -- paying more, getting less, and going broke."

One doesn't have to take a firm standpoint on the medical system overhaul debate either way, to be somewhat galvanized by a President saying that America could go broke.

Comments

[John Lounsbury:]

Unfortunately, this health care discussion will probably be resolved on an emotional battlefield, and not on a logical battlefield.

Jun 16 10:19 AM

[Mad Hedge F...:]

There still has to be a lot more public debate about this. George Schultz said that America’s health care headache started in WWII, when wages and costs were controlled, but not benefits. So companies competed for labor by offering increasingly generous, tax free benefits programs. And when something is free, you lose a lot of it, driving total costs through the roof. The end result is large misallocations of resources that you don’t see in other businesses. Private American companies have made possible tremendous medical advances for a profit, and this system should be allowed to continue. But we need to incentivize future advances with cost containment. We need a universal, subsidized plan that heads off intergenerational conflict by not allowing healthy young people to escape obligations, nor denying older people with preexisting conditions. Allowing consumers to buy private insurance across state lines, which is now impossible, would be a start. Today your average 65 year old lives for 20 years, compared to 13 years in 1965, and two years in 1900. An equitable system would enable those who wish to continue working after 65, without burdening employers with health care costs, adding $1 trillion to GDP that will help us pay for this all. If George represents the conservative response to Obama’s proposals, then I can see enough common ground for something major to get done this year.

Jun 16 02:52 PM

[YoYoMama:]

Mad Hedge Fund Trader - you make a lot of sense.

There are plenty of Republicans coming up with proposals, including non-profits and co-ops. Association health care - in which small business owners can band together in associations to obtain group rates - is an idea that has not quite gathered steam, but would provide tremendous benefits to those like myself that cannot access affordable group health.

It is tremendously regrettable that most are viewing this only as a Democrat (liberal) issue with a Democrat (liberal) solution. In reality there is a true crisis with many victims on both sides of the aisle. Myself included. I'm a free market white Republican small business owner who is deeply affected by the impossibility of personal health insurance. One illness, and my family faces certain bankruptcy.

I don't agree with all of Obama's proposals, but I am glad the issue is finally getting worked in Congress. What may come out of this is a hybrid solution that works for everyone. Let's hope so.

Jun 16 06:37 PM