Join The Debate!

Conservatives' Koolaid is not the answer

Obviously, Mr. Stossel has not spent much time comparing health plans. Some of the nuances in HC; what: procedures are covered, the co-pay is/if there is one, is covered/not, the maximum/year, facilities/doctors/specialists are covered; millions of possibilities. Can you imagine covering this in a phone call? It's like reading "terms of use" for computer software, a credit card agreement, etc. Comparing this to an automobile is silly-I just signed paperwork on a car that didn't make sense; it was a leap of faith-so are many things in our lives. Next, the common claim that private business knows what it's doing and government does not-excuse me: who ran GM, Chrysler, and the banks into the ground??? Who's bailing out who??? Lastly, there were also superior products that failed due to marketing...the Betamax and the 8 mm camera are two that come to mind. What the health care system needs is some general standardization: a standard group of benefits to start with, and blocks of additional benefits that each company would offer that each employer or person could purchase. If folks are going to be able to have a legitimate chance at comparing, this should be made as easy as possible. However, I still can't imagine having a gall bladder attack, for instance, and calling around to find out who has the best rate! This is absurd! I suggest Mr. Stossel re-think his prescription and read this month's Money magazine: "Too Much Money for Too Much Medicine" by Dartmouth researcher Elliot Fisher. Fisher noted wide disparities in health care spending around the country without there being no correlation to better care, i.e. lower cost areas actually had slightly better mortalities and care. Further, he noted that "Under the system we have today, health-care providers are rewarded only for doing more stuff, not for providing better outcomes." Among his suggestions: rewarding doctors for providing good care at low cost instead!