*

*
Today at the Forum
Opinions from members of the Enquirer Editorial Board


David Wells,
Editorial Page Editor


Ray Cooklis,
Assistant Editorial Editor


Krista Ramsey,
Editorial Writer


Dennis Hetzel, General Manager,
Kentucky Enquirer/NKY.Com


Jim Borgman,
Editorial Cartoonist



Powered by Blogger

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Health costs poised to consume U.S. economy?

A report issued Tuesday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office warns that Medicare and Medicaid are on track to explode the federal budget, growing from 4 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) today to 12 percent of GDP in 2025. “Without changes in federal law, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid is on a path that cannot be sustained,” the study says. That’s bad enough, but the CBO study’s look at the nation’s overall health-care costs is enough to give us all heartburn. It suggests that if those costs continue to rise unabated, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren may not be able to afford to do much at all except go to the doctor. Total spending on health care, it projects, will rise from an already hefty 16 percent of GDP to a full 50 percent of the nation's economy within 75 years – unless changes are made in federal law.

How can we slow that rise? The study suggests “generating more information about the relative effectiveness of medical treatments and changing the incentives for providers and consumers in the supply and demand of health care.” Simply stated, we still do not know nearly as much as we should about what works and what doesn’t. The current system encourages use of the most expensive treatments, even if they’re not particularly effective, the CBO says. “Comparative effectiveness” research should develop ways to target the most cost-effective options and change the behavior of doctors and patients through financial and other inducements.

But here’s the report’s kicker: The best chance for slowing the growth of health care costs, the CBO admits, comes not from the federal government, which seems unlikely to adopt real reforms, but from the private sector and state governments, which “would almost certainly have more flexibility to respond to (economic) pressure …” Changes there would then “exert some downward pressure” on federal programs. In other words, don’t look to Washington for a solution. It’s going to have to come from the free market, and from the states, those “laboratories of democracy.” That’s why initiatives such as Ohio’s new, bipartisan health-care reform task force, which is studying innovative ways to cover the uninsured and solve other aspects of this growing crisis, are so important.


14 Comments:

at 7:17 AM, November 15, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

You need a "but" in the 3rd PP, 1st sentence.

 
at 8:26 AM, November 15, 2007 Blogger Ray Cooklis said...

Whoops! 'But' added. Thanks. Funny how there always seems to be a 'but' involved when it comes to the federal government ...

 
at 1:37 PM, November 15, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the standpoint of someone who has worked nearly 25 years in the local healthcare system, I can tell you that we know more about "what works" than we let on.

It all starts with physicians. Taking away over-the-counter remedies, 100% of healthcare expenditures require a physician's order---be a it a prescription for medication or admission to a hospital and every action that occurs therein.

Much greater scrutiny needs to paid to the realtionships between physicans and the vendors of medical products and services. It is these cozy relationships that drive the vast majority of wasted healthcare expenditure. The influences the companies have over the physicians either consciously or sub-consciously creates most of the "confusion" that physicans experience when they deviate away from "what works."

Work to put tighter restrictions and more transparency in those relationships and you will see the downstream impact in cost savings.

 
at 10:41 PM, November 15, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

To quote Shakespeare, "First, we kill all the lawyers," thus eliminating wasteful "defensive" medicine. Then we pass laws requiring HMOs and other health insurers to reward those of us who practice healthy habits and punish the fatties and smokers. There's the long-term savings. Next, you stop whining about the remaining costs. What else do you want to spend it on?--Stupid wars in the Middle East?

 
at 7:40 AM, November 16, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

theres a pretty direct relationship between healthcare costs and healthcare revenue. all the free market does for us is let health care costs rise out of control while insurance companies and drug companies stuff money in their pockets.

its time to regulate the daylights out of the healthcare industry.

 
at 2:11 PM, November 17, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

You should talk about the auto industries' crippling healthcare obligations, past and present, before you start beating the private sector drum. We need very basic, universal healthcare structured by the federal government, and supplemented by a tiered structure of additional coverage to satisfy a variety of tastes and needs.

I agree with the poster who said don't whine about the cost. It's about time we start taking care of our infrastructure: social, transportation, etc. There are days when I'd like to see one lump sum taken in taxes from cradle to grave and just leave me alone so I can read, cook, not be constantly worried about what my neighbor might have that I don't, etc. It would get right to the heart of America's dirty little secret: we're NOT a classless society.

And as to the CBO: it's technically non-partisan, but it is definitely subject to pressures from the administration and/or congress. They have been very reliable water carriers during this particular admin.

Mr. Cooklis, I think your readership is shifting. It's not easy to be conservative when it's happening to YOU. And here in the midwest, the coverage changes like the weather. Anthem can't be consistent from one day to the next.

 
at 10:32 AM, November 18, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Try reading a history book. There never has been a classless society recorded in human history. What's the secret?

 
at 4:44 PM, November 18, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

GO ON A DIET
GO ON A DIET
GO ON A DIET
GO ON A DIET
GO ON A DIET

AMERICA IS TOO FAT
AMERICA EATS TOO MUCH GARBAGE
AMERICA IS TRILLIONS OF POUNDS OVERWEIGHT

AMERICA IS FAT AND UGLY AND LAZY
AMERICA'S NEW DRUG IS FOOD

GIVE SOME FOOD TO THE POOR STARVING IN OTHER COUNTRIES

GIVE FOOD AWAY
STOP EATING SO MUCH
GO ON A DIET
LEAVE SOME FOOD FOR THE REST OF THE PLANET

GET HONEST AND TELL THE WORLD HOW FAT YOU ARE; HOW MANY POUNDS OVERWEIGHT ARE YOU?

GIVE SOME FOOD FOR THE STARVING COUNTRIES

GET PAT R. TO DO HIS JOB AND BEG FOR MONEY FOR THE POOR, STARVING PEOPLE

ARE THERE ANY CHRISTIANS OUT THERE WHO WILL GO ON A DIET FOR GOD?

 
at 9:25 PM, November 18, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Medicare-Medicaid, along with every Health and Human service bureaucracy, needs a complete overhaul. While there is a great amount of money paid out to assist individuals, there is a greater amount used for the system to operate. While there are federal regulations designed to control the various programs, the receiving states are without uniform implementation of them. Politicians, and their base, have secured power, and profit according to these entitlement programs. Those truly in need of assistance have suffered at the hands of these people, and America suffers.

 
at 8:28 AM, November 20, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

To: 10:32 AM Nov. 18th

Of course we've never been classless, but it's how we view ourselves, and what gets trotted out every time somebody says "melting pot", "democracy", "with truth and justice for all" (pledge of allegiance? Superman? the Constitution? - I don't remember, I have too MUCH history floating around in my head).

And in trying to reform things, this myth allows politicians and others to hide behind it by declaring that we all have equal opportunity. We don't. It's a survival of the fittest society with a slight blip on the radar when FDR had to literally save the poorest amongst us during the Great Depression. Caps NOT mine.

Just tell it like it is so we can make adjustments. Especially now when we have an oligarchical class forming on Wall Street that's after our Social Security safety net. I'd be happier if they were a declared class that always wore purple and gold, or a specific type of hat. That way you'd know who and what you were dealing with rather than having to wait for the press to report some back room deal. That's my point.

 
at 8:36 AM, November 20, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Expound Truth

Technically, you're right about overhaul. Let's hope it's done with some transparency and vision.

Does anyone know how the welfare reform Clinton pushed through in '96 ('97 ?), has affected the people who had grown reliant on it? Or us, their fellow citizens who need to absorb and help them? It's funny how it was there one day and gone the next with very little consistent reporting follow up by the media who have the attention spans of gnats. (No personal disrespect to our blog hosts). Always after the latest story for ratings. Tell me how that trickled down, and then maybe I'll get right in there and help shuffle the fed. gov. again.

 
at 10:00 AM, November 20, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Or, we could just get rid of the source of a good portion of illnesses to begin with: pollutants, poisons and additives in our air, food, water and soil. That would at least prevent some high-cost treatments for cancers, asthma, allergies, etc., etc. It's much more cost-effective to prevent disease than to cure it.

 
at 3:12 PM, November 23, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

If we REALLY want to change things, let's start with this: make the healthy food in the store the least expesive to buy. Lean meat, fresh vegetables, whole grains, low fats and sugars...lower those prices, and make the potato chips and soda pop cost more. There's the main reason the poor are overweight...they can't afford decent food.

(I'd rather see someone on Food Stamps buy healthy food at the higher price, because I know they're improving their health and lowering my future Medicare/Medicaid payments.)

As for Social Security, we had our chance to fix it. We had the money ($3 trillion, if memory serves) to do it in 2000, and instead we got stuck with Bush and this war (read the 9/11 Commission Report and you'll discover Bush had regime change in Iraq as his #1 foreign policy item BEFORE the WTC came down). We blew it as a nation, and it's too late now; we will not have another chance.

Next, look at hospitals, with an obscene markup of 200%-700% on drugs. I should NOT cost you $10 for an aspirin...it shouldn't even cost you $1. Fix that monster, and it frees up millions for other expenses. The pharmaceticals won't like it one bit, though.

Fourth, perhaps we need to accept our human frailty, stop trying to live forever, and instead live the lives we have with a decent quality of life. There's no need to pump gazillions of dollars into research trying to make us live to be 150 years old.

And here's a radical shift...eliminate insurance altogether. That's right, destroy the industry, shut every one of the health insurance companies down. Instead, charge one rate for services nationally, and that's what we pay, period. Alabama to Wyoming, no matter where you live, you know it's $25 for a tooth cleaning, $30 for a doctor's visit, $15 for a prescription. You know the nursing home will cost you $750 per month. That's not the same as national health care...that's regulating the industry and eliminating the waste in the industry, next to the pharmaceuticals. More and more doctors are no longer taking insurance these days anyway, because it saves them $2000 or more a month in paperwork alone, and they're passing that along to their patients.

 
at 11:47 AM, November 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree with the Anon 3:12 11/23 poster absolutely. Thanks for comprehensive thinking.
BTW, and without veering too far off topic, SS doesn't need fixing but funding. The late, great, Alan Greenspan, funded it in 1983 by increasing payroll contributions, which were supposed to take us through 2048 (?) if I'm not mistaken on the last figure. I think our best weapon against the scare tactics by which we are governed these days is and will be a good memory and holding politicians' feet to the fire.

 
Post a Comment*

* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.

By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site. << Home


Blogs
Jim Borgman
Today at the Forum
Paul Daugherty
Politics Extra
N. Ky. Politics
Pop culture review
Cincytainment
Who's News
Television
Roller Derby Diva
Art
CinStages Buzz....
The Foodie Report
cincyMOMS
Classical music
John Fay's Reds Insider
Bengals
High school sports
NCAA
UC Sports
CiN Weekly staff
Soundcheck