RSS
Home
Is the health care bill a takeover?
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
We've discussed the Health Care Bill (HR 3962) before, with respect to the redefinition of "Promote the General Wellness" and the gift to the Trial Lawyers.
The Association of American Physician and Surgeons, has pointed out a major feature in the bill that is sobering. By any reading, this allows the government to come in and dictate health care.
"SEC. 252. PROHIBITING DISCRIMINATION IN HEALTH CARE.
(a) In General- Except as otherwise explicitly permitted by this Act and by subsequent regulations consistent with this Act, all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act shall be provided without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.
(b) Implementation- To implement the requirement set forth in subsection (a), the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall, not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, promulgate such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to insure that all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act are provided (whether directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements) without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services.
So what the heck does that mean? "All health care and related services" sound to me like they mean all of health care. I certainly take them at their word.
There should be no discrimination in providing basic health care.
The real question is what are personal characteristics. Race, gender, religion, ethnic background all make sense. There should be no discrimination in providing basic health care.
Are the person's finances part of "personal characteristics"? Are Botox injections part of "high quality health care and related services?"
Medicare doesn't just pay bills, we also want to make sure that our beneficiaries get the best health care they can" -- Nancy-Ann DeParle, Administrator of the Health Care Financing Administration when the guidelines were released (2002)
Let's look at one simple health care issue, pneumonia, addressed by CMS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, part of the Department of Health and Human Services. (We get a bit medical-geek here, but bear with me).
CMS guidelines call for:
- Timely antibiotic administration when the diagnosis of pneumonia is made
- Initial antibiotic choice consistent with current guidelines
- Blood cultures prior to administration of antibiotics
No problem with starting the right antibiotics quickly. Makes sense. The problem here is the blood culture guideline. Data (scientific studies) do not support the use of blood cultures. One such study says, "Blood cultures are of minimal value".
So what? Is there a point to all this mumbo-jumbo?
Through a function called Hospital Compare, the US Department of Health and Human Services rates hospitals based on their compliance with the guidelines. If you do the unnecessary blood cultures, you get a higher rating and higher payment overall.
And this is just for pneumonia.....
This bill is a financial black hole
Does the nearly $1,000,000,000,000 increase in costs include this and many other unnecessary payments to come?
This bill is a financial black hole as well as an open invitation to allow the government to "promulgate such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to insure that all health care and related services (including insurance coverage and public health activities) covered by this Act are provided (whether directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements) without regard to personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services."
Ever seen a regulator elect not to regulate?
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
