AHIP Reacts Unhappily To Reid Remarks

Soon after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced today that health care reform legislation taking shape in the Senate would include a provision for a public insurance plan that would compete with private insurers, the top lobbyist for the health insurance industry called the milestone a roadblock.

"A new government-run plan would underpay doctors and hospitals rather than driving real reforms that bring down costs and improve quality," said Karen Ignagni, president and CEO of trade group America's Health Insurance Plans, in a statement. "The American people want health care reform that will reduce costs and this plan doesn't do that.

"The divisive debate about a government-run plan is a roadblock to reform," Ignagni continued. "It's time we focus instead on broad-based reforms that will ensure the affordability and sustainability of our health care system."

AHIP spent $2.4 million lobbying the government over the summer, $6.3 million so far for the year.

Comments

[EndTheEcho]

AHIP talks about government underpaying providers, but we need to look at what that means.

Under paying compared to who? The private insurance industry. But that opens up a line of thought, maybe the government is paying the right amount and private insurance is over paying the providers. That is the flip side of this debate.

If the providers are being underpaid, at the current Medicare/Medicaid rates, then does that mean they are not getting enough to provide services, this would bankrupt them. Yet, I never have heard of a doctor, clinic or hospital going bankrupt because Medicaid/Medicare rates are lower (yes I have heard the whining, but that is different than seeing a clear fiscal impact).

And not all providers take Medicaid, I know that many adoptive families who need specialized mental health services for their adopted children, like for reactive attachment disorder, can't find Medicaid providers that meet their child's needs. These providers can not take Medicare/Medicaid, that is their choice, no one makes them do it now, and I haven't heard that anyone will make them do it with reform.

Also, does the government get a lower rate than everyone else on anything else? Yes, look at the government rate that people can receive at hotels. These lower rates do not run the hotels out of business, so do we really expect this to happen with the providers of health insurance?

Finally, isn't the greatest incentive to cut costs to lower reimbursement rates?

[baseline]

It is easy for Karen Ignagni and other detracters to just say the public option will not reduce costs. Because it is something that has not yet been tried no one can guarantee anything. It does, however have great possibilities. Actually a state under the opt-out provision could probably set up its own single-payer program and save over a billion dollars as a blue ribbon commission in Colorado reported.

[socialtalker]

yo, heather graham! suit up and get your running shoes on, girlfriend!

[pvaz]

The five minutes my doc spends with me for an office visit, I think he's overpaid.

[fabricnthreads]

I love it when you don't even see the doctor, but they bill like you did because he has "oversight" of his employees. They can't bill as much if you just see the nurse or PA.

[iblogleft]

It is interesting that they will do whatever it takes to stop American taxpayers from forming any group large enough to actually negotiate prices from a position of power.

What is more interesting is that this is a common theme in all corporate lobby.

They will do everything in their power to keep us separated and fighting each other, so we never discuss the benefits of negotiating as one taxpaying entity.

National flood insurance is OK, but god forbid we have a Taxpayers Health Insurance Company. They say they want a public plan to compete on a level playing field, no they don't. They do not want taxpayers to be able to negotiate at all.

Imagine what would happen if we put the drug, health care, and insurance buying power of all state and federal programs together under a national health system. We would save hundreds of billions in existing programs in just the first year, still pay doctors and nurses very well, and keep costs down in areas that serve people the least, like administration. Even if we payed doctors the same, we would save 10% the first year in just administrative costs. 10%, that is a lot of cash.

Don't look for anyone bringing these numbers for CBO analysis, it is not even on the table.

[wikwox]

If the Insurance Industries against it must be good. Now if Obama would wake up and support this....

[rughead23]

Our government was penned for the people by the people. There are people going sick, and a majority.

[jaylo]

Well, the doctors can all become bankers.

[ny10013]

Ahh so this is what its been about all this time.
"A new government-run plan would underpay doctors and hospitals.­.."
I think we need a menu and prices

[jaylo]

Well, Snowe can opt out...and lets just see how a state with a small population handles it. Snowe deserves this for holding the rest of the nation hostage.

[fabricnthreads]

She is "disappointed" that reform will go forward. Wow. What a loser.

[EGB]

I am once more stunned to see the word "underpay" applied to physicians' and hospitals' charges. Their overcharging (as groups; I'm sure there are individual exceptions) is exactly, along with needless or inefficacious, but profitable, tests and procedures, what underlies the crisis that will soon bankrupt all but the super-wealthy among us. The inflation in these costs has been out of control for decades. Containing them is the heart of the matter. We would not be having a debate about who pays if the costs were sustainable by average citizens.

[NuAgeDok]

Help Wanted:

Numerous openings for Health Insurance Agents/Brokers; Send resume now; Guaranteed rapid response due to sea change in industry; You too can go down with the . . er huh become part of this rapidly growing, high profit, commission driven industry.

[fabricnthreads]

All that money they have spent on lobbying has come at the expense of sick people getting reduced treatment and care, and from the premiums that healthy people have paid, anticipating receiving treatment for themselves and their families.

Could have been much better spent on actually healthcare. A clear example of the industry's motivations.

[TomHunter]

"underpay doctors and hospitals"

Sounds like precisely the sort of reform we need!

What this means, Karen, is that being a doctor will no longer be a guaranteed gravy train to getting rich at the public's expense. For that matter, why should doctors, who generally are not inventing any new kind of medicine, are not innovating and who are just practicing by-the-numbers medicine from a textbook (ultimately) have the justification of getting rich?

And hospitals? Being able to charge $2,000.00 a day just for three-hots and a cot?

Fellow progressives, let's not count our chickens yet--this is not yet law--but it's closer!!!!

[ljrvince]

Gravy train? really? generalizations are never the intellectual's evidence in an argument. My husband and I are certainly on no gravy train. After 8 years of school and 3 years of training, and several years in a busy, well run practice we still live pay check to paycheck. We live in a 1800 square foot home, we drive two old Chryslers, we have no country club memberships, our children go to public schools. Our problem? We went into primary care, a grossly underpaid field. Every day is a struggle with insurance companies to get paid a pittance, while friends working as radiologists make close to a million. There is no equity in medicine and there are certainly few rich in primary care. Additionally when every decision you make comes with the threat of a lawsuit, when a wrong move could kill someone, when you've been training for a career for greater than ten years and start out earning money in your 30's with thousands in debt, yes, I'm sorry, you should be paid well. Work hard enough you could have chosen this "gravy train" --my parents did not pay for my schooling--I worked and took out loans, so if its such an easy cook book job why aren't more choosing this field? Think before you post. Talk to some real life , in the trenches doctors. Personally I'm all for a public option, even if I do get paid less, I'm sick of the insurance companies and misplaced priorities.

[upriser]

You are absolutely correct. I am a retired teacher so I have no reason to support what you say except for the fact that you are correct. We definitely underpay primary care physicians. I am for the public option as well. But there seems to have been very little discussion about how to increase the supply of primary care physicians which will be badly in need in the coming years. We have a shortage of these doctors and we're not building medical schools fast enough.

[TomHunter]

Anecdotal evidence such as yours does not equate to a foundation for public policy. If Radiologists are making millions, they represent the problem. Though you may be the exception, doctors earn much better livings than do other professionals who also had to spend decades learning their professions.
Part of the reason you are paying such high school fees is because medical schools are staffed by overpaid doctors. You are just down stream of them.
You may not think that you are making a lot but compared to most American professionals, you are. I am unswayed by your story.

Doctors, hospitals (something you did not address), service providers and equipment providers are all getting wealthy on our backs. Doctors need to learn that their field does not justify their large incomes--on average. It is obvious how all the various people in the health care chain are getting rich off of the current system. That is precisely why they want to keep it going.

You are also conflating several unrelated issues such as your legal environment. As you recall, the reform will cause physicians to have a different imperative. Instead of just doing as many CPT codes as possible, they will be judged by their outcomes.

Though you may think that you are suffering, you are merely encountering the same hard-core judgments that all Americans are currently dealing with in their professions. There are no more guaranteed paths to wealth anymore. Get used to it.

[normathumb]

They are only interested in their bottom line. Their lackeys have their marching orders. The stockholders have spoken. Defend our primacy and profits at all costs. Gather as much money as you can and deny coverage whenever even vaguely defensible.
They only care about your money. They want to make it theirs.