Senate smothers the life out of health care reform

I shouldn't be surprised. Mark Twain himself once said, "Imagine that you are a senator. Now imagine that you are an idiot. But I repeat myself." (or something like that). Why did I think that the Senate would produce a health care reform bill that would accomplish what President Obama set out to do?

I hope I am wrong in predicting that the Senate will fail to pass meaningful health care reform legislation this year. But here's why I think I'll be proved right:

1. The Republican bloc has chosen to derail health care reform, rather than to work to bring to a vote a package that they could live with. Their motivation can be only short-term political gain, and their act is one of destruction, rather than edification. The Republican bloc is not acting on behalf of American citizens, but on their own political behalf. For that reason, every one of them should be voted out of office at the very next possible chance.
2. Liberal Democrats have been surprisingly willing to compromise, but I suspect that they're tired of (in their eyes) selling out and will soon tire of compromise and will return to demanding more socially inclined legislation, led by their party chairman Howard Dean, who is now publicly calling for the current Senate bill to be thrown out.
3. Joe Lieberman is becoming drunk with the delusion of power, and will insist on his way, which in summary is to defeat any and every idea and amendment offered by the liberal Democrats.

The result will be a compromise that nobody is happy with.

Here's what I would be happy with: a private health care plan chartered and managed by the Office of Personnel Management and priced by market forces. Subsidies will be awarded to purchasers based on their income level. Don't expand Medicaid. Don't offer Medicare to persons aged 55-64. Instead, put all of these folks in the OPM-managed health plan. While ostensibly more expensive than the Medicare and Medicaid options, it would in fact end up being more affordable, because both government insurance plans (Medicare and Medicaid) are priced on misconceptions and are not adjusted by the market.

Without a "semi-public" option, as some are calling this, the private sector will not deliver affordable health plans for the currently uninsured. And without some form of public option, the bill won't pass the Senate.

But, for the sake of argument, let's say the Senate does pull itself together and passes a health care reform bill. Whatever squeaks out of the Senate will be a far cry from what the House generated, and the Conference Committee will have a herculean task pulling a mash-up out of these two disparate pieces of legislation.

President Obama, may I make a suggestion? While the clowns of Congress are performing on the current three-ring circus, bring your staff together in the West Wing and write a Health Care Reform Bill that accomplishes what you set out to do. As soon as the current effort flops, bring your bill to both houses, and commence twisting arms until they break or pull off. You won't have to water it down like the current bills because you'll be able to leverage Congress' failure to empower your negotiating position.

The pundits say that your presidency will live or die by the success or failure of health care reform. Pundits are stupid. They said the same thing about Bill Clinton, and his presidency, though sullied by failing to reform health care, was nonetheless very successful. BUT, if the pundits are right, and health care reform will define your presidency, wouldn't you rather be responsible for what ultimately passes?

First amendment to pass, first to fail

First I must apologize for not having yet read the Senate bill. I've been busy reading the 669 pages of the Federal Register that updates the Medicare outpatient prospective payment system for hospitals for calendar year 2010. Since this piece of executive rulemaking has direct impact on my everyday job, it had to take precedence. It took me a long time to read because I kept it at my bedside. Best sleep I've gotten in years.

The Baltimore Sun reported today that the Senate passed the first amendment to the health care reform bill currently on the floor, that amendment requiring all insurers to cover women's preventative health and screening tests with no copay. I suspect the impetus for this amendment arose from the backlash to the US Preventive Services Task Force's recent publication of relaxed breast cancer screening recommendations in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Truth is, the amendment, as I understand it, won't really prevent any deleterious changes to insurance coverage arising from such research. What it will do, however, is increase access to diagnostic services, hopefully allowing us to find cancers earlier and thereby decrease mortality from these diseases. At least that's the conventional wisdom. Ironically, what the USPSTF discovered is that screening women in their 40s by mammography doesn't have an impact on breast cancer mortality.

Overall, though, I think it's a good thing to improve access to preventive care and screening. In fact, in my experience, most insurance plans are migrating to coverage of preventive care and early detection and exempting these interventions from patient financial responsibility. The reason: it's good business. Insurance companies have already discovered that they save money by treating disease earlier.

The other amendment - the one that failed - was sponsored by John McCain and attempted to restore funding to Medicare that was being shifted to expand coverage to the 31 million or so uninsured the bill proposes to cover. Those of us on the provider side would have loved for that amendment to pass. It would mean little or no money being taken out of our pockets. It means we're going to have to figure out how to be good business operators, reducing waste and spurring innovation in order to adapt to the significant financial hit we're going to take when the bill passes.

If you look at this from another angle, however, you realize that the provider community isn't losing as much as it initially seems. Even though we'll lose some Medicare reimbursement, we'll offset that by significant reductions in unreimbursed care provided to the uninsured. If the math works out as it should, two-thirds of folks who currently do not have insurance will be covered when the bill passes.

Tonight I'll start reading the Senate Bill, so that I can speak half-way intelligently about it. Don't expect me to be blogging by the weekend. The bill is 2,074 pages. And judging by my experience with the Federal Register, I'll be sleeping like a baby until the New Year comes.