spendmatters
 

February 09, 2012

 

Friday Rant: Healthcare and the Supply Chain: The State of the Union -- How Not to Reform Healthcare

The President made health-care reform (now known as "health-insurance reform") one of the signature items of his agenda. And in spite of what seemed like a resounding rejection of his health-care approach by the voters of Massachusetts in electing Republican Scott Brown to fill the seat held by Ted Kennedy for decades, he made it clear in his State of the Union address that he remains resolute in moving the plan forward, even if no one really understands it, or knows what is in either bill, or what will really happen if it's passed. For example, both bills appear to create large new government beauracracies with the power to take whatever would pass and turn it into whatever the President ultimately wants. Underlying the push for reform is the belief on the part of the administration and the Democrats that health care is a fundamental right.

Once healthcare becomes a right, it opens the door for the federal government, the "protector of rights," to control more and more of what happens, and who gets what. Both bills could just be Trojan Horses sold to the public as gifts (a few months ago Speaker Pelosi pushed it as a Christmas gift to the American people), but if it's passed, no one really knows whether the hollow horse is empty or filled with unintended consequences.

While the President's goals of eliminating pre-existing conditions, loss of coverage when a job is lost, or exceeding lifetime policy maximums seem laudable, he seems to either not understand business economics, or just chooses to ignore them. Increasing the costs to a business will require increases in prices; those price increases will be passed on to the customers of that business, or the business will fold. The notion that we can fix it all, have everything we need, and save the world is simply not realistic unless he plans to cap what insurance companies can charge. And that opens a whole new can of worms. In the supply chain If you change a specification, a design, or a service level, you know that the supplier's cost will change, and that the price you pay will also change.

The Bottom Line: The fundamental issue surrounding healthcare reform Is whether or not health care is a right granted by the U. S. Constitution. That issue must be resolved before moving forward with any kind of sweeping legislation; otherwise, anything passed becomes another unfunded liability that might bring comfort to some in the short term but damage the republic in the long term. If this cannot be resolved by lawyers and constitutional scholars, it should be brought before the people as a referendum. Our representatives are sent to Washington to pass laws, but they should not have the power to determine our values as a people. - Lynn James Everard


Commodity Edge Conference

TweetBacks
Comments
Jeremy H's Gravatar Just want to say, as a MA voter, we have almost universal healthcare in our state. A lot of voter therefor had other issues as a higher priority. The national media cannot get enough of this Healthcare as a rpimary issue here in MA. please do not fall into the same trap.
While some people did vote on this, we are more economy focused here in MA.
And most importantly Coakley ran the worst campaign I have seen in my life (and that includes pathetic campaigns for middle school class presidents 20 years ago). If you were able to live in Ma the TVs were littered with ads that Scott Brown put on telling the voters that he was independent (he never once said conservative or republican...both swears in MA) and Coakley ran an ati-Brown Campaign...so all we heard was Brown...no one really knew what the patform was that was goign through Coakleys cold and detached mind.
# Posted By Jeremy H | 1/29/10 6:41 AM
JC's Gravatar I love how, when the subject of healthcare comes up, the Specter of Cost Increases is always invoked. In their insistence that this be looked at as a business decision, detractors to reform don't look at it as...a business decision. This relentless framing of health insurers as quasi-viable companies struggling to get along, who will be forced to the brink of bankruptcy is absurd. None of it takes into account the massive profits they already generate, the huge salaries paid to top executives, and the fact that many are publicly traded companies, which means you have a layer of shareholders who need their cut on top of it all. There's room to maneuver.

Look, if you provide a service you need to provide a service, and right now health insurers are ridiculously unregulated to the point of racketeering. No business should be allowed to operate this way. I won't go into the overall economic and social benefits that can be gained when people aren't held hostage to health costs, because that's been discussed before.

As for regulating our values, what do you think the Constitution is? "We the People in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare..." All of these have values implied. Should healthcare be a right or a privilege? Ask someone who's sick.
# Posted By JC | 1/29/10 9:46 AM
T's Gravatar JC,

Should FOOD be a right or a privilege? Ask someone who's hungry.

Should HOUSING be a right or a privilege? Ask someone who's standing outside in the rain.

Should TRANSPORTATION be a right or a privilege? Ask someone who has to walk to work.

Should UNIVERSITY EDUCATION be a right or a privilege? Ask someone who went to public school.

Where does it end?

Should PERFECT TEETH be a right or a privilege? Ask a crackhead in jail, they already get new teeth!

Should LARGE MAMMALIAN PROTUBERANCES (as Zappa called them - trying to keep Jason's blog clean here) be a right or a privilege? Google what goes on in Europe and you'll see that it apparently IS a right...

It boggles the mind what some people expect other people to pay for on their behalf.

As Margaret Thatcher once said: "the trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

The current FEDERAL deficit level "limit" was lifted yesterday by another $1.9 trillion to $14.3 trillion.

It was a "mere" $9 trillion as recently as March 2006. That is a 60% debt increase in less than 4 years!!!

That's change I can believe in!
# Posted By T | 1/29/10 3:42 PM
Kevin McCormack's Gravatar Who is John Galt?
# Posted By Kevin McCormack | 1/30/10 7:11 AM
BF's Gravatar I am also from MA and Jeremy H's comments were spot on. A final tally of 53-48 is not an overwhelming reforendum on healthcare, but rather a reflection that the Democratic candidate did a terrible job. The campaign she ran was more about anti-Brown and devoid of articulating where she stood on the national issues.

Second, I thought that Spend Matters was a blog focused on the challenges of the sourcing and procurement community as opposed to a political front to express views of the right.

I would suggest that commentary be more focused on the critical financial state of the supplier community in many industries, and how healthcare reform may or may not help these suppliers survive. Readers should expect a perspective of both sides of an issue, as opposed to a political commercial.
# Posted By BF | 1/30/10 9:12 AM
Jason Busch's Gravatar Given that the typical US company spends well over $10K in benefits for full-time employees (and full-time employees also contribute increasing percentages of their salary to benefits as well), I think this is a topic worthy of discussion on Spend Matters.

I am open to printing all perspectives and encourage debate on the topic.
# Posted By Jason Busch | 1/30/10 2:34 PM
Maverick's Gravatar I'm glad I'm not the aging grandparents of "Mr. T" above looking for some help from him! Hey, while we're at it, why even pay for roads, firefighters, cops, soldiers, hospitals, etc. The market will provide, right? Yeah, right.
Funny, the market actually credit default swaps and interestingly also created healthcare GPOs - which is one of the things that the author of this orginal post is very much against.
Be careful what you wish for!
# Posted By Maverick | 2/1/10 7:32 AM
About Us | Advertising and Sponsorships | Advisory Services | Contact Us    © 2004-2012 Azul Partners, Inc. and Spend Matters. All Rights Reserved.