We have just posted a White Paper on a Simple Health Care Plan. It expands on our prior comments. One of the issues that I have been struggling with is how does one pay for this? The Simple Plan paper shows this in detail with the sensitivity analyses that go along with it.
In the White Paper we state:
The problem is simply stated; reduce costs while maintaining or increasing the positive outcomes. This is unachievable until we first solve the above simple problem. It is just data gathering and the ultimate responsibility is the Governments, but they seem to have no ability to address this issue.
To summarize what we have proposed and analyzed in this report, it is as follows:
1. It is essential to articulate a simple set of principles about which any plan is constructed and stay within those limited principles. Problems arise when Congress fails in this step and further when Congress uses this opportunity to address a plethora of other parochial issues and interests. A simple and focused statement of principles is the sine qua non for success and acceptance.
2. Proposing a simple Core Plan which achieves the goals established by the principles is the next step. The Plan may be modified as is necessary but the Core Plan must satisfy the principles and reflect the cost target which may be achieved, and the cost target must be materially lower than what is presently the case.
3. It is essential to recognize where the problems are, what is causing the costs to increase. Failure to recognize the way health care works, like any other business, and seeing what the drivers are, the productivity factors or elements used by the drivers, and the unit costs are, will result in not achieving success. Cost can be reduced by reducing demand from disease drivers, improving productivity and/or driving down unit costs. This is a simple and well understood concept in any business and health care is in many ways just another business.
4. Target Areas of cost reduction must be articulated, with action plans, schedules, and accountability applied to them. The Target Areas must be periodically updated in order to have a process which continually drives out costs.
5. Implementation of the Plan requires Government intervention in two areas. First the provision of a supervisory role over the Insurers to guarantee the standards are met and that a competitive environment is enabled and maintained. Second the Government must provide funds to those who cannot afford the Plan based on income. However it is essential that this income support function be managed to eliminate fraud and abuse.
The Plan we have proposed not only does not cost more but it returns $30Billion to the Treasury. What is does require is accountability on the part of people and the Government. It requires that Congress does not view Health Care as another cookie jar to be raided and as another vehicle to expand Washington. We have looked at this problem as we would look at any business in need of a turn around. It is doable, regrettably not by politicians!
In the White Paper we state:
The problem is simply stated; reduce costs while maintaining or increasing the positive outcomes. This is unachievable until we first solve the above simple problem. It is just data gathering and the ultimate responsibility is the Governments, but they seem to have no ability to address this issue.
To summarize what we have proposed and analyzed in this report, it is as follows:
1. It is essential to articulate a simple set of principles about which any plan is constructed and stay within those limited principles. Problems arise when Congress fails in this step and further when Congress uses this opportunity to address a plethora of other parochial issues and interests. A simple and focused statement of principles is the sine qua non for success and acceptance.
2. Proposing a simple Core Plan which achieves the goals established by the principles is the next step. The Plan may be modified as is necessary but the Core Plan must satisfy the principles and reflect the cost target which may be achieved, and the cost target must be materially lower than what is presently the case.
3. It is essential to recognize where the problems are, what is causing the costs to increase. Failure to recognize the way health care works, like any other business, and seeing what the drivers are, the productivity factors or elements used by the drivers, and the unit costs are, will result in not achieving success. Cost can be reduced by reducing demand from disease drivers, improving productivity and/or driving down unit costs. This is a simple and well understood concept in any business and health care is in many ways just another business.
4. Target Areas of cost reduction must be articulated, with action plans, schedules, and accountability applied to them. The Target Areas must be periodically updated in order to have a process which continually drives out costs.
5. Implementation of the Plan requires Government intervention in two areas. First the provision of a supervisory role over the Insurers to guarantee the standards are met and that a competitive environment is enabled and maintained. Second the Government must provide funds to those who cannot afford the Plan based on income. However it is essential that this income support function be managed to eliminate fraud and abuse.
The Plan we have proposed not only does not cost more but it returns $30Billion to the Treasury. What is does require is accountability on the part of people and the Government. It requires that Congress does not view Health Care as another cookie jar to be raided and as another vehicle to expand Washington. We have looked at this problem as we would look at any business in need of a turn around. It is doable, regrettably not by politicians!
Posts
