New Op-ed up at Fox News: "Uh Oh…Team Obama Claims Americans Use TOO MUCH Health Care"
The new op-ed at Fox News starts this way:
“If you got health insurance, then you can keep it . . . and we won’t do anything about that,” at least that was what President Obama promised during the campaign last year. Well, add that to a very long list of broken campaign promises, including: cutting government spending, reducing the deficit, and “no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”
Just as bad, on Friday it was revealed that Obama and the Democrats have no problem pushing through Senate votes on these radical health care changes that strip away normal procedural protections for those who oppose such changes.
Last Sunday on “Meet the Press,” Larry Summers, Obama’s chief economic adviser, let the cat out of the bag on health care. In explaining why universal health care wasn’t going to increase the deficit, Summers said that people are just getting too much unnecessary care. Summers claimed: “whether it’s tonsillectomies or hysterectomies . . . procedures are done three times as frequently [in some parts of the country than others] and there’s no benefit in terms of the health of the population. And by doing the right kind of cost-effectiveness, by making the right kinds of investments and protection, some experts that we — estimate that we could take as much as $700 billion a year out of our health care system.”
This sure seems like rationing. . . .
Labels: healthcare, LawrenceSummers, nationalization, ObamaAdministration, Regulation
posted by John Lott at 4:43 PM
3 Comments:
John, didn't you post something last year about how Hawaii had to rescind their program because it was being used too much? or something similar?
No one cares when they are spending someone's money that isn't their own.
Fools and idiots they are. They take circumstances that were created by themselves and then use them as an excuse to increase control.
Let us suppose for a moment that Doctors were not 'under the gun' to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits when it came to malpractice.
If the above were true, would it not lead to less protection of one's self in the regard of said suits? Fewer tests because there was no longer a need to 'protect' one's self?
"Summers said that people are just getting too much unnecessary care. Summers claimed: “whether it’s tonsillectomies or hysterectomies . . . procedures are done three times as frequently [in some parts of the country than others] and there’s no benefit in terms of the health of the population. And by doing the right kind of cost-effectiveness, by making the right kinds of investments and protection, some experts that we — estimate that we could take as much as $700 billion a year out of our health care system.”
No mention of cause and effect I see.
Doctors are being mentally conditioned to be extremely careful when dealing with patients simply because Lawyers are putting them upon the witness stand and grilling them about what they did, and what they didn't do. So, they do everything they must to protect themselves in a Court of Law.
Geez, I wonder whom is to blame for this mess. Surely not the patients, and surely not the Doctors.
Could it be Lawmakers? Nah, not the Lawmakers, for they are pure of soul and intent! Just ask 'em...
You say:
"If people are getting costly, unnecessary procedures, don’t you think that the insurance companies would already have learned about it? For anyone who thinks that insurance companies are too stingy, the Obama administration has a news flash: insurance companies have been paying for too much health care."
It sounds like you are saying:
1) People are not getting costly or unneccessary procedures.
2) if they were, insurance companies would know about it and try to do something about it.
3) The evidence that people are not getting costly unnecessary procedures is that insurance companies are doing nothing to contain costs.
I'd like you to be very clear on this point because your sarcastic tone implies that this is your position.
If that is your position, please explain managed care.
Post a Comment
<< Home