Posts Tagged Massachusetts Connector

So, the battle is joined – the passage of the Senate Finance Bill has forced every healthcare participant whose oxen might be gored into the open, and the fighting is fierce.

I don’t have a dog in the fight from an economic standpoint, unless Washington, D.C. decides to give everyone a full indemnity policy like the New Hampshire state union employees. As a result, I have had a freedom to think and speak in a way that few of my colleagues can.

It took me a while to realize that I would be so alone in this regard. I have been very fortunate to participate for the past five years in two different groups of nationally recognized healthcare executives with very diverse experiences. Several of them are very publicly prominent in the debate, and others are quietly influential. I have hoped that these groups might coalesce, create a blueprint for reform, and lead the way forward. While I am disappointed that has not happened, I am really surprised at how resolutely the group members have retreated to their economic realities or their philosophical ideals. In short, there has been no sustained dialogue with the goal of determining how hospitals, physicians, insurance companies, device manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies and others can create a reformed system. At the same time, I have observed all of us bemoan that “healthcare reform” is really “insurance coverage reform”, and not so impressive at that.

The result is that We, the People, have turned it over to Washington, D.C. In the coming weeks, 535 people who know a lot about politics, a little about the art of compromise, and almost nothing about how approximately 20% of the economy works will decide our future. The 20% of us employed in healthcare have failed to reform ourselves through real and shared sacrifice. The 80% is angry enough not to care that they don’t know the difference between a scalpel and a saw.

In the words of Dandy Don Meredith, some people in healthcare will need to “turn out the lights, the party’s over”. The tricky part is that we won’t know until the very end who that is.

On Wednesday, The Wall Street Journal ran an opinion piece called “Paying the Health Tax in Massachusetts” by an author named Wendy Williams. In it, Ms. Williams lamented that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts changed the definition of acceptable coverage. Her family’s policy no longer meets the requirement, so she must either (a) buy a more expensive policy, which she does not think she needs, or (b) enroll in the government option.

What caught my eye was the following:

“Mr. Romney and Sen. Ted Kennedy publicly promised that the middle class – that is, people like us – would not be taxed and that our health-care costs would actually decrease if the plan became law.

My husband and I weren’t convinced. It all seemed inane, but we are neither politically or socially conservative and figured the plan wouldn’t affect us much. Besides, who could be against a plan that covers more people for less money?”

Here in the South, we might respond to that statement by saying, “I’m not sure I would have told that”, but I am afraid the subject is too serious to be that dismissive.

Ms. Williams, in four sentences, has summarized the debate.

First, in order to get elected, politicians have to tell people (us) what we want to hear. Politicians rarely make the call for sacrifice, and today’s America is not interested in that much anyway. Elections for 473 of the 535 positions will be held in 2010. For each of those 473, the calculus over the next 60 days is about how a vote on healthcare reform will play at home between now and November 4, 2010 (Note: “what will get me reelected” is sometimes phrased as “what my constituents want” but rarely as “what does my country need” or “what does courage require”).

Second, We, the People, know better. What is wrong with us? We aren’t that stupid, and we don’t even like Congress. On the other hand, we do seem to like something for nothing. The members of the Greatest Generation have given way to individuals who are more interested in their personal good than the common good. Most of us just listen for what we want to believe and ignore the rest; some of us listen to talk radio and shout at the rest. The Greatest Generation gave way to the Baby Boomers, who seem to be the majority of those in power. The generation of Timothy Leary and “Turn on, tune in, drop out” seems to have taken the “drop out” part to heart, except that Leary’s hope for self-reliance has morphed into singular self-interest.

*********

It is time for We, the People, to wake up:

• As we proved spectacularly in Tennessee, you cannot cover more people for less money. No one in Washington, D.C. should know that better than Nancy-Ann Deparle.
• The results of the Massachusetts experiment are that costs have increased, while quality and access have decreased. These results should be terrifying since Massachusetts had one of the lowest uninsured rates in the nation at the start of the Massachusetts Connector program. Up next, “global payments”, aka capitation – good luck with that at Partners.
• In The Washington Post, Alec MacGillis reports that maybe the Mayo Clinic is not a model for reform since they restrict access to Medicare and Medicaid patients. As we continue to report, the Mayo Clinic does not deliver high healthcare value.
• The Senate Finance Bill pretends that physicians will take a 25% cut in pay in 2011 to achieve the $900B cost; it appears that AMA has convinced Senator Reid otherwise.

Sir Winston Churchill famously stated that:
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” He also said, “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Let’s hope that we do not allow Washington, D.C. to test the former, and let’s see if America can prove Sir Winston wrong on the latter.