WSJ Editor Attacks The Non-Existent ‘Public Option’ In Massachusetts

[ProSense]

WSJ Editor Attacks The Non-Existent ‘Public Option’ In Massachusetts

On Saturday, the conservative editors of the Wall Street Journal editorial page used their weekly Fox News show to attack every aspect of the health care reform that President Obama is trying to work through Congress. To criticize the idea of public insurance plan, assistant editorial page editor James Freeman claimed that health reform in Massachusetts shows what would happen with a public option:

<...>

There’s one problem with Freeman’s analysis: Massachusetts doesn’t have a public plan. As former MA governor Mitt Romney, who implemented the plan, told CNSNews last month, “Our plan did not include a government insurance plan.” “Instead, we relied entirely on private market-based insurance plans to help people get insurance,” said Romney.

Instead of a public plan, Massachusetts uses an employer mandate and subsidies for people under 300 percent of the federal poverty level unable to afford coverage. Massachusetts has successfully expanded coverage to all but 2.6 percent of its population, but unfortunately, the program deferred “until another day any serious effort to control the state’s runaway health costs.” Proponents argue that a public plan would be key to cost control.

[TomCADem]

1. The GOP Attacking Strawmen? Shocking!

Say it isn't true.

[ProSense]

2. It's not just the GOP, unfortunately. n/t

[flpoljunkie]

3. Massachusetts' Commission voted to change how doctors, hospitals paid to control costs

(More reason to include Obama's IMAC Commission to health care control costs.)

Pay for care a new way, state is urged
Hospitals and doctors may be put on budget

By Liz Kowalczyk
Globe Staff / July 17, 2009

A state commission recommended yesterday that Massachusetts dramatically change how doctors and hospitals are paid, essentially putting providers on a budget as a way to control exploding healthcare costs and improve the quality of care.

The 10-member commission, which includes key legislators and members of Governor Deval Patrick’s administration, voted unanimously to largely scrap the current system, in which insurers typically pay doctors and hospitals a negotiated fee for each individual procedure or visit. That arrangement is widely seen as leading to unneeded tests and procedures.

Instead, the group wants private insurers and the state and federal Medicaid program to pay providers a set payment for each patient that covers all that person’s care for an entire year and to make the radical shift within five years. Providers would have to work within a predetermined budget, forcing them to better coordinate patients’ care, which could improve quality and reduce costs.

Massachusetts would be the first state to adopt such a broad “global payment’’ system, and commission members are acutely aware that Congress and the Obama administration are watching how the state moves forward as the federal government overhauls healthcare nationally.

more..

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/07/17/pay_for_care_a_new_way_state_is_urged/

[damntexdem]

4. Don't you just love the excellent journalistic standards of the WSJ?

If they improve it just a little bit, it might be worthy of wrapping garbage in.

[Oregone]

5. If the public option is only going to cover 9 million in 10 years according to estimate...

Its a negligible part of the plan, leaving the rest of the reform very comparable to RomneyCare. Frankly, its not going to be accessible enough to provide some sort of stark contrast. And as an inaccessible option, it will have limited, if any, market influence.

[ProSense]

7. "leaving the rest of the reform very comparable to RomneyCare"

Nonsense.

[Oregone]

8. "Nonsense."

Disagree

[ProSense]

9. Bankruptcy

prevention: catastrophic care coverage.

Like I said, "RomneyCare" comparison is nonsense.

[Oregone]

10. We will see how that really plays out

And it may not at all

If you really want to prevent bankruptcies, you implement single-payer catastrophic coverage (which drastically reduces private premiums). That is not, as I am aware, the approach being taken.

[zbdent]

6. Wall Street Journal ... owned by Rupert Murdoch ...

'nuff said ...