“Medical malpractice: Medical malpractice is not a major driver of spending trends. Premiums for liability coverage and defensive medicine contribute to health spending at any moment in time but are not considered a recent significant factor in the overall growth of health care spending.15 Put another way, tort reform would lower health insurance premiums but medical malpractice is not currently driving the rate of increase. or medical liability,” (page 9).

I think tort reform should be balanced with adequate consumer protection.

I examined a chart rather recently comparing the health care systems of a number of countries, and the item that I found most notable was that the American health care system has by far the most specialists per capita (I would like to find that chart again).

By the way, the Wellpoint report is quite informative, for those of you who may not have had the chance to read it.

For more up-to-date information, YahooFinance will give data for the latest quarter, based on quarterly earnings statements: this is available at http://biz.yahoo.com/p/sum_qpmd.html

It is interesting to note that the highest profit margin for this quarter was beer brewers – at well over 6 times the profit margin … wonder what that’s doing to our health???

As for those who cannot afford health insurance, perhaps the government should provide more free clinics. I hate to be accused of class distinction, but the reality is that those who have the money drive better cars. Perhaps health care should not be “better” for those with money, but perhaps more convenient.

On the up side of that, it gets the high wage earners back to their jobs sooner. On the down side, that means those who can least afford to miss work – miss more work to wait at free clinics… That does not sound to good either.

I believe that the right to life and health should be protected by the Constitution and the government, I am not not sure if equal access is a requirement.

Please don’t beat me, but part of capitalism is having more, and getting better service – what do you think?

Regarding health care at the ER. Alternatives are available. 1. Urgent Care clinics have opened across the Denver area.
I used one for the 1st time last winter when I had strep. This clinic is open 24/7-365. A number of years ago, I would have gone to an ER for off-hour or holiday sprained ankles, strep, flew, etc. Conditions not rising to a true emergency. This was a good consumer experience for me. I was in and out in less than 1 hour. I carry a higher deductible on my coverage, so I paid cash.

My experience was much better than a friends experience in Canada. He saw a 12 hr wait for a sprained ankle. Waits there for basic care, diagnostics, surgery are very long.

We will always have people who truly cannot afford coverage. (As opposed to some who are uninsured who chose not to carry coverage.) It is a very appropriate public policy to offer coverage to those who truly cannot afford coverage.

2. I just saw a walk-in at King Soopers called the “Little Clinic”. I understand these are staffed by RNs perhaps PAs. Good alternative for walk up care.

Both are examples of entrepreneurs addressing a market need.

Health Insurers Profits: I have no doubt that the profit for health companies are less than 5%. Much lower than people generally imagine. When the comment is made that $1 billion of profit is still $1 billion. If that translates to 2% to 5% profit.. That is not much. Don’t care about the profit? Well, does your IRA, 401(k), mutual fund or pension fund hold shares in health stocks? It seems that profit is bad except when it apples to your business, salary raises, retirement plans.

If health insurance was very profitable, there would be more companies entering the market. More insures have left the health insurance market.

Some feel that a government plan will be more efficient since the profit motive will be removed. Which government programs are deemed to be models of efficiency? Which country is the poster child for a universal system?

Will members of congress and the administration who favor a government option be the first to register their families and themselves? I doubt it.

My suggestions not necessarily in order:
1. Tort reform.
2. Divorce health insurance from employment. Everyone picks their own private company.
3. Government should not be in the insurance business. Government should enable people to make their own decisions not make people dependents. Act like a good NFL official and perhaps a cheer leader. Official: Enforce rules, impartial judge, Cheer leader, encouraging people. I don’t want to see government as a competitor.
4. Health policies are not underwritten for pre-existing. We have a general “risk pool” for the US. Actuaries would be able to calculate the general risk factor. That factor is built in the premium cost.
5. Those that cannot pay for their own health coverage must have public support. This is call public charity. But make no mistake, if I cannot support the cost of my insurance, I am asking someone else to help pay for me. This needs to be either public or private charity.
6. We, all of us, need to be smart consumers. Ask about pricing at a Drs. Office. Price shop care when possible. Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) can help with this.

There is no easy answer. However, the more control government has over our lives, the fewer choices we have.

To the extent any health care changes promotes consumer choice it will succeed. To the extent it, over time, removers choice it will fail.

We have Medicare for the elderly in this country. It has $30 trillion of unfunded liability.

So in short, we already have the government in healthcare and they are BROKE with what they have on their plate now and you want to add the rest of the country to that plate?

We can’t afford it. Even if they ran healthcare much better than the DMV, FEMA, Post Office, Passport Office, we can’t afford it.

I agree the solution is to have tort reform and open up the health insurance market to the whole country versus being segmented as it is now.

Imagine if Apple had to have a different iPhone for each state because of each state having their own requirements. How much would it cost then?

This isn’t rocket science.

Government employees, including Congress, have an array of plans to choose from – all private.

1) the system needs fixing. Its not a crisis, its a chronic problem that deserves deliberation to come up with an optimal plan.

2) America’s wealth is NOT unlimited (look at our debt). The public option will lead to rationing when demand exceeds resources.

3) failure to implement tort reform is a glaring example that government is not actung purely in the public’s interest. Lack of tort reform leads to 1) unnecessary CYA lab tests, and 2) malpractice insurance policies; both huge contributors to costs.

4) the government own policies are a significant contributor to costs. (e.g., non portable policies across state lines)

5) Consumers spending their own money are the best cost containment method. (Compare the cost of elective Lasik: (declining year to year) vs. covered procedure (escalating year to year)

6) When the survival rates of patients with equivalent cancers is compared between government run health care (UK, Germany, Canada) and private healthcare (US), Patients with private coverage live longer.

My conclusion; have consumers pay for day-to-day health care. Cover catostrophic incidents with a needs-tested co-pay.
Healthcare resources should be spent on provably legal citizens, everyone else pays cash.