Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dr. Jeremy B. Stern: Single-payer reduces waste dramatically

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 01:10 PM
Original message
Dr. Jeremy B. Stern: Single-payer reduces waste dramatically
I am an orthopedic surgeon who has been practicing in this community over the past 16 years and may be familiar to many of your readers. As our Congress debates the future of our health-care system, I am writing to urge my fellow citizens to get involved in the process. The debate in Congress is being framed largely by the insurance companies. This is problematic because of the large sums of money donated by the insurance lobby to the same senators who are crafting the reform.

What is not being considered fairly is H.R. 676, a single-payer health-care system.

In the U.S. today we spend approximately two times as much as other industrialized nations, over $7,000 per person per year, yet have nearly 50 million uninsured residents. What causes this waste of health-care dollars? We are the only industrialized nation that does not have a single-payer system. Instead our system is based on privately owned for-profit insurance companies.

In the average private health insurance company, one-third of the money paid in premiums is used for “administrative costs.” That means that one-third of all the money you and I now pay for our insurance is used to pay for things like salaries, marketing, overhead and, of course, profits and bonuses. Not to provide health care.

In addition, hospitals, nursing homes and physicians need to employ large staffs just to negotiate the maze of rules and regulations from multiple insurance companies. By eliminating these multiple insurance companies, the cost savings to the system would be more than a staggering $350 billion each year.

Many people are scared to have a single-payer system run by the federal government for two main reasons. First, there is a general impression that the government is inefficient and will be unable to manage the system well, and second, people fear that the government would limit their choice of providers. Most people don’t realize that the government plan we all know best, Medicare, runs at about 3 percent overhead while most HMOs run 15 to 20 percent overhead, and the Canadian system has 1 percent overhead. The government, then, is more efficient than the private sector.

As to the second fear, lack of choice, in the single-payer plan being talked about for the United States, the majority of the health-care system would run just as it does today. That means that most people would have greater choice of providers because they would no longer have an HMO telling them who they could see. Unlike the VA or Army system where the doctors and hospitals are run directly by the government, in a single-payer system here in the United States there would be no change in the providers; only the payers would change.

What would happen is that we and our employers would all pay taxes instead of premiums. These taxes would amount to a fraction of what we used to pay in insurance premiums. For those taxes we would have insurance that would pay for literally all of our health needs, from glasses to dental care to medical and surgical care.

The large cost savings of a single-payer system would come in various ways. By buying in bulk and demanding volume discounts, the single-payer plan would greatly decrease the cost of medication. The VA system in the United States gets a 40 percent reduction in medicine costs over what we all pay. A single-payer system would also greatly increase the country’s access to preventative care. This in turn would reduce the inappropriate overuse of highly costly emergency rooms. Having diseases diagnosed earlier and treated appropriately vastly decreases the overall cost of treatment of that disease. For example, by treating high cholesterol early with medicine, you may well eliminate the need for a very costly coronary artery bypass later in life.

While doctors and hospitals would be paid somewhat less, their costs of doing business would be drastically reduced since there would be a very low cost to billing and administration, and providers would get paid more quickly and reliably.

Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, there would be improvements to our actual patient care with a single-payer system. Having only one payer would allow us to use a unified computer system. With this single computer system, whenever you went for health care of any kind, the health-care provider would have all the information needed to treat you safely, such as the medications you take and the allergies you have. There would be fewer medical errors and a greater awareness of interrelated medical problems.

I strongly encourage you all to call, write, text or otherwise contact your congressmen and senators, and encourage them to strongly consider H.R. 676, the single-payer system that will fundamentally eliminate a huge waste of health-care dollars and restore our health-care system.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/july/singlepayer_reduces.php

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kicked and recommended for common sense and logic.
Thanks for the thread, RedEarth.:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Alas, Big Insurance trumps common sense and logic
The only reason -- and I do mean the only reason -- why this country isn't well on the road to adopting single-payer Medicare for All is because Big Insurance and Big Pharma don't want it. We need to face this fact head on and wonder what kind of democracy we have when a powerful industry can control whether we live or die, stay prosperous or go bankrupt.

No system is perfect. And we can learn a lot about how to implement our version of single-payer by studying the systems in the world's civilized nations. But we aren't even having that national discussion because the insurance companies with their propaganda of doom and gloom won't even let us get that far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. While I would agree with you from a historical perspective,
Edited on Thu Jul-09-09 04:16 PM by Uncle Joe
I believe the times are changing.

The American Peoples' First Amendment Rights; have been strengthened more than any time since the Constitution was adopted from the growing power and influence of the Internet.

It wasn't just Big Insurance and or Big Pharma building roadblocks to health care reform with their vast financial resources, it was their propaganda machine via the corporate media which truly hoodwinked the American People for so long.

I believe the psychological/emotional barriers; erected by the so called free press against common sense and logical reforms were far greater a hurdle to overcome because they masked and or distorted the truth from the American People.

Whereas today the people can communicate among-st themselves en-mass for the world to see, unfettered by the corporate media editor filter, thus curtailing the speaking of truth to power has become increasingly difficult for the Corporate Media created Matrix to contain in the new age. I believe this dynamic is the cracking of the dam; resisting accountable governmentf from actually representing the bests interests of the American People.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I wish I could be as sunny about this particular issue as you are
The problem is that even when we communicate online, "unfettered by the corporate media filter," the parameters of the debate have largely been set. Many of the things discussed are not fresh ideas per se but rather responses to or reactions against things that have been put forth by the corporate media.

Refuting the propaganda, which mounts like waxy buildup on a dirty kitchen floor, uses up valuable time and energy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I see the parameters as shifting, at one point
Edited on Thu Jul-09-09 04:33 PM by Uncle Joe
the public option seemed to be "off the table," the Democratic controlled Senate was seeking "Republican compromise" just for that sake, "taxing health benefits" as a means of funding was considered sound or fair policy, now taxing the wealthy is on the table and I believe if this reform isn't satisfactory to the American People, the political leaders will find out long before the elections of 2010.

I also believe challenges to established power structures; long dependent on corporate media favoritism over that of the American People is evolving as well. The new political leaders will need to adapt to this changing environment or go the way of the DoDo.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Alas, the "public option" proves my point somewhat
It runs the risk of complicating an already complicated system and triggering a race to the bottom between the government and private insurers to see who can spend less.

The fact that Medicare for All has been marginalized is proof of my original assertion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Cheer up, Rufus, my keyword was shifting,
paraphrasing John Paul Jones, we've only just begun to fight.

I believe single payer universal coverage to be the most moral, efficient and cost effective means of health care coverage possible for the American People and I also believe momentum; is for the foreseeable future on our side.

"The Americans will always do the right thing," Winston Churchill once remarked, "after they've exhausted all the alternatives."

Winston Churchill was speaking of the American Political leaders; of his day, a similar animal in many respects to today's politicians with one large exception, instant national feed back via the Internet, holding them to public accountability. In short I believe the result of this dynamic will eliminate or at the very least shorten consideration of all those other "alternatives."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnWxy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. REcommended. Everybody should email their Congressman/woman and attach this article.
www.congress.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. Between Medicare, Medicaid, and flat out uninsured, we already have a bunch
of people on "public health care". Why not just give everyone "public health care"?, thereby getting rid of the "Health Insurance" parasites and relieving our economy from the burden of supporting the "Health Insurance" parasites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
10. knr thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-09-09 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
11. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC