The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : WH Official Declines to Offer Real-Life Example To Bolster Health Care Claims

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

WH Official Declines to Offer Real-Life Example To Bolster Health Care Claims

By Philip Klein on 3.5.09 @ 12:23PM

White House Domestic Policy Council Director Melody Barnes, who will be heading up today's health care forum, when pressed on a conference call by TAS, could not offer a real-life instance in which a government saved money by expanding health care coverage, even though that claim is central to the Obama administration's push to overhaul the nation's health-care system.

In a conference call, TAS noted that efforts to expand coverage in Tennessee and Massachusetts led to exploding costs in both states, and asked for a counter example in which government was able to reduce costs by increasing coverage. Barnes did not give an example, but instead argued that the difficulties at the state level demonstrated why there needed to be a federal solution.

"One of the things that many of the governors and others in the states who have been focused on the state plans have said is in order to get costs really under control, we're going to have to look at this issue on a national level," she said. "States are doing the best that they can, particularly in the wake of federal inaction, but part of getting this under control will be that we have accessible and affordable health care for everyone so that we're bringing more people into the system, and as a result of bringing people into the system, we're also helping to drive down costs."'

Barnes insisted that the Obama administration would also see savings through "other efficiencies," including Medicare and Medicaid reforms and an expansion of the use of information technology in the medical profession.

"Part of the problem is that though states are taking important steps forward, those are key, but piecemeal answers to an issue that needs to be resolved on the national level," she said.

View all comments (39) | Leave a comment

Real American| 3.5.09 @ 1:02PM

I love it! It hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, so we need to implement it on the national level!

And the plan is so obvious, it hurts:
1. Socialize the country's health care system.
2. ?
3. Savings!

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 1:03PM

"but instead argued that the difficulties at the state level demonstrated why there needed to be a federal solution."

And she is exactly 100% correct.

And for examples of federal solutions to health care costs, see the rest of the industrialized world.

They all do it for half of what we spend, cover everyone (no one loses everything because of poor health), and provide the same level of care.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 1:06PM

Real American,

"It hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, so we need to implement it on the national level! "

It's worked everywhere it's been tried at the national level you imbecile.

That's why the United States is the ONLY country in the industrialized that doens't have a national plan.

Oh, I forgot. We do. Medicare.

JohnnySquares| 3.5.09 @ 1:14PM

Of course nationalizing health care will reduce the cost. All King Xerxes has to do is wave his hand and it will be so.

That was easy.

Philip Klein| 3.5.09 @ 1:15PM

Re: jharp

Obama claims he's rejected the single-payer approach in those other countries, which control costs by rationing care to the sick (see NICE, in Britain, for instance). In any event, Barnes could have cited other countries when I asked for a real-life example, but she didn't.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 1:31PM

Philip Klein,

You are right on both claims except those other countries ration care no more than we do.

And so what? Do you propose we do nothing?

I favor single payer and am disappointed Obama doesn't. I figure he's just being realistic and it is probably politically impossible.

One step at a time. We'll get there eventually.

Bob| 3.5.09 @ 1:46PM

Philip, I've studied this issue somewhat. Taiwan developed a free market health care system with everyone covered. They studied all of the nations and wanted the benefits of the U.S. system in choosing your own doctor, but also wanted everyone covered. In nutshell, they did their homework.

It is the latest and smartest implementation of a national health care system in the world. I think there are a lot of good ideas but would advocate some differences for the U.S. You'll notice they had the same objections there that you see here now. But after several years, the vast majority of citizens like the system. They spend about 6% of GDP and we spend 13%. That's a huge difference that would help our country compete better on the international stage.

You wanted an example. Here is the reference:

http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/22/3/77

MLG| 3.5.09 @ 1:48PM

1.Since when is it the Government's responsibility to take care of us from the cradle to the grave?
2.There is no such thing as ‘Free’, everything has a price and somebody has to pay.
3.Show of hands, who really wants to put this or any Congress and lifer federal bureaucrats in charge of their healthcare?

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 2:02PM

Bob,

I've studied the issue a lot and I have many friends in Taiwan who have shared with me their pleasure in their health care system. And these are smart very successful buisnessmen. As a matter of fact I'm seeing some of them this weekend.

And Taiwan is an excellent example of an effective heath care system.

It blows my mind to hear the knuckle draggers spout off about "socialized medicine", waiting times, and other nonsense while at the same time paying twice what the rest of world pays for the same level of care.

"3.Show of hands, who really wants to put this or any Congress and lifer federal bureaucrats in charge of their healthcare?"

So I guess you'd favor the abandonment of Medicare?

You are a moron. No one. No one wants to put government in charge of health care.

Bob| 3.5.09 @ 2:04PM

MLG, I look at this from a different perspective. Having spent all of my career in business, I'm looking at the international competitiveness issue. We have already lost much of our manufacturing base and are at risk for losing even more. Health care costs are crippling our competitiveness in manufacturing. If you look at health care costs from a productivity perspective, those who have insurance are already paying for those who don't because about 1/3 of our population do not have access to preventative care and are overloading our emergency rooms at a huge cost to companies and individuals who pay for insurance. We have one of the least efficient systems on the planet. That's why the Republican oriented Chamber of Commerce is also backing a national health care proposal. If we can't get these costs under control, then we risk our economy -- and eventually our liberty -- even more.

Now this is not a black and white issue. Everyone already pays for the uninsured through their taxes and insurance premiums. If you don't know this, then you need to do some homework. The issues are things like preventive medicine, efficient records, efficient billing, tort reform, and better ways of handling the last year of life which represents 50% of health care costs. So you can be a stupid ideologue or a smart, competitive pragmatist. It is your choice.

MLG| 3.5.09 @ 2:17PM

jharp,

No one mentioned abandoment of the current Medicare and Medicaid programs. They are but a slice of the over all American Healthcare system and are not mandatory programs e.g. you are not forced to join.

We are discussing the proposed expanding of the Federal Government's role in healthcare beyond what it already muddles up. Please pay attention and follow the conversation.

If you want a glimpse of what national healthcare will look like, walk into any VA Hospital or Free Clinic in America and be afraid, be very afraid.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 2:47PM

MLG,

More ignorance from an ignorant right wing hack.

Walk into any health care facility in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, France, Germany and see what an effective health care system looks like. Then look at what it costs.

Then walk into any emergency room in America and see what a sucky system looks like. Then look at what it costs.

And you are misinformed or a liar regarding the VA. I think both.

Where do you draw your conclusion from? Limbo, Hannity, and Fox News?

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 2:50PM

"No one mentioned abandoment of the current Medicare and Medicaid programs."

I'm aware you dolt.

My response was in response to your idiotic comment.

"3.Show of hands, who really wants to put this or any Congress and lifer federal bureaucrats in charge of their healthcare? "

In case you didn't know, Medicare is a single payer system. And it works pretty well.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 3:13PM

MLG,

Here's your health care system that you have the nerve to defend.

The United States is the ONLY country in the industrialized world without some sort of national health care plan. And this is what happens.

You disgust me with your ignorance and hackery. Hard working Americans are having their lives destroyed because of idiots like you.

You are a vile disgusting human being.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/03/screwing-poor

"Karen Tumulty writes in Time this week about her brother, Pat, who was diagnosed with kidney failure and then learned that the private insurance he'd been paying for for years wouldn't cover him. That's bad enough, but then there's this:

A paradox of medical costs is that people who can least afford them — the uninsured — end up being charged the most. Insurance companies, with large numbers of customers, have the financial muscle to negotiate low rates from health-care providers; individuals do not. Whereas insured patients would have been charged about $900 by the hospital that performed Pat's biopsy (and pay only a small fraction of that out of their own pocket), Pat's bill was $7,756. For lab work — and there was a lot of it — he was being charged as much as six times the price an insurance company would pay."

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 5:55PM

Obama doesn't care about the old and infirm. Put 'em in a backroom and let them die, just like the babies born alive during abortions. Monster.

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 6:51PM

I'm not the baby killer--that's you and your evil liberal pals, including -above my paygrade- Obama. I'm not lying and you know it, you steaming piece of crap. Maybe some day you'll be the one on the respirator who gets it shut off. Then you'll understand how it feels, monster. Karma.

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 6:54PM

Yes, a debate that has affected 51 million babies fatally. Heartless bastard.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 7:11PM

correction. "who "didn't" so much as lift as single finger in the past 8 years.

And you're still an ignorant bastard.

Jim| 3.5.09 @ 8:09PM

Jharp,
You are the moron, I have actually experinced nationalized health care in Asia and Europe and the VA, You get what you pay for, it isn't the wonderful system you claim. You are a useful idiot.

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 8:16PM

Correction: JHarp is an evil useful idiot. Abortion is your policy, monster. It elected your idiot Obama. Your time will come. You'll see.

Chemman| 3.5.09 @ 8:20PM

jharp,
The only poster that happens to make any sense is Bob. As to the examples you give they are dependent upon the innovations from our system. If you price out those systems what will you have left. They then regulate the costs of what they will pay which in turn gets passed back to the U.S. consumers in terms of higher costs so that the innovators can get a reasonable return on investment. My question for you again is if these systems are so great why do those who can come here for care when their systems fail them.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 8:25PM

Chemman,

Why is a major U.S.health insurer flying it's patients to India for treatment when we have such a wonderful health care system?

http://topnews.us/content/294-indianapolis-wellpoint-outsourcing-medical-treatment-india

"Health insurer WellPoint Inc. will be indulging in medical tourism next year. A pilot program will be launched to send patients to India for some surgeries.

Wellpoint is willing pay for travel expenses to India for a small set of its beneficiaries who are willing to travel to India for health care.

According to the insurer this program can save thousands of dollars.

"This is a leap of faith, obviously, to say if you go to India, we'll pay for the whole shebang," said Linda Buntrock, Serigraph's senior vice president of human resources."But the cost difference is so monumental."

A joint replacement surgery costs $65,000 and $80,000 in the U.S. whereas it costs between $8,000 and $10,0000 in India. This means it is nearly 50,000 to $60,000 less in India."

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 8:29PM

Nationalized healthcare is a disaster wherever it's enacted. This is just another moronic marxist demo power grab. They don't give a damn about the people, it's power they crave.

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 9:08PM

You are just a dried up, brittle husk of a human being. There is no heart beating within your chest, no soul to radiate goodness throughout your life. You are just an inhuman cog in a mindless wheel spewing your garbage on every one around you. I dismiss what you write because you lie. If your lips move--you are lying, it's your second nature. Unlike you, I make up my own mind, you are the political whore. Nationalized medical care will be like going to the DMV--always an efficient, pleasant experience, right? I can hardly wait until I have to depend on the government for complicated heart surgery. But unlike you, JHarp, at least I have a heart. Monster.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 9:21PM

"I can hardly wait until I have to depend on the government for complicated heart surgery."

Hard to believe but with this one you have even topped your previous stupidity.

You will no more depend on the government for heart surgery than a medicare patient is today.

And utterly ignorant, moronic, completely misinformed post by an imbecile.

Seriously, educate yourself. You are a drag on American society.

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 9:47PM

No, I'm the productive Conservative, I work and provide jobs; liberal bloodsuckers like you are the parasites. Monster.

jharp| 3.5.09 @ 10:05PM

Matt| 3.5.09 @ 9:47PM

So nothing to defend your preposterous and utterly ridiculous "I have to depend on the government for complicated heart surgery" claim.

I didn't think so. It's indefensible. And I was aware you were a conservative. The complete lack of thought and reason on this critical issue was a dead giveaway.

Basil Plumley| 3.6.09 @ 12:16AM

Dang it all jharp, is there any subject you are not an expert?

You really should be on the show, Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader. I'd bet you would really illuminate the nation with your brilliance.

Yes, I am being serious.

Matt| 3.6.09 @ 12:36AM

Thought and reason = no heart, no soul. That's you JHarp.

CH| 3.6.09 @ 12:59AM

JHarp should be on the Gong Show.

jharp| 3.6.09 @ 1:14AM

Good posts, gentlemen.

Really added a lot to the debate.

In case you didn't know this is exactly why you bozos just got taken to woodshed the past two elections. Completely ignoring critical issues.

Matt| 3.6.09 @ 1:32AM

Yeah, I know, 'we won'. That's original, and the way the stock market's tanking, shortlived. One term wonder, monster.

jharp| 3.6.09 @ 3:13AM

Matt,

Do you have any idea of how idiotic your posts are?

The subject is health care. You add nothing.

It is better to keep quiet and let folks think you are an imbecile than to make ignorant posts that remove all doubt.

ConservativeWanderer| 3.6.09 @ 8:04AM

jharp, tell me, how much does it "add to the debate" to call other posters bozos, imbeciles, and other derogatory terms?

Methinks the next time you see fit to bloviate about "adding to the debate," you look in the mirror first. Or, to put it another way, check out the plank in your own eye before you complain about the mote in ours.

I anticipate that you'll just insult me... please, prove me right.

Pecos Pete| 3.6.09 @ 8:20AM

I agree with jharp. The USA's health care system should be nationalized, including drug companies. All health care costs and prices should be regulated. In fact, there shouldn't be any prices, all health care, including dental, should be free to any person in the USA, including illegal aliens.

Costs will go down with government ownership because costs will be spread across more people. Service will go up because all health care workers will be driven by their desire to help those in need.

Costs will be paid by higher taxes on those earning more than $250,000.