The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Health Care "Game Changer"?

The White House is expected today to announce a major agreement in which the major players in the health care industry pledge to reduce the expected rate of growth of health care by $2 trillion over the next 10 years.

Policywise, there are reasons the be skeptical, as the Washington Post reports:

Despite such heady predictions, many aspects of the plan remain unclear. The groups did not spell out yesterday how they plan to reach such a target, and in a letter to Obama they offer only a broad pledge, not an outright commitment.

In addition, White House officials said, there is no mechanism to ensure that the groups live up to their offer, only the implicit threat of public embarrassment. And it would be difficult to track whether they come up with the promised savings, other than the imprecise measure of comparing current projections of health-care cost increases with future actual costs.

Furthermore, it's important to draw a distinction between a reduction in the rate of growth in overall health care costs and the reduction in the rate of growth of government spending on health care. If legislation, as expected, dramatically expands the role of government, then government spending will rise even if projected costs decline for the sector as a whole.

With that said, politically this is a major development, one which may very well be the "game changer" the White House is touting it as. I wrote a few months ago that while conservatives had a lot of allies in the private sector in 1993 and 1994, that they'd be alone like Gary Cooper in High Noon this time around, and it's now coming to pass.

Most Americans who pay attention to the news today won't care about all the details. All they'll see is the major industry groups (American Medical Association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the American Hospital Association, and America's Health Insurance Plans) and the Service Employees International Union coming together under the leadership of President Obama. Remember, in 1993/94, it was the predecessor group of America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) that took out the famous "Harry and Louise" ads opposing HillaryCare.

The theatrics of this alone will create a lot of momentum for health care reform and put pressure on Congress to get something done this year. Conservatives, and those who advocate a free market or consumer-driven approach to health care, will be further marginalized as obstructionists. Say what you want about Obama, but he continues to find creative ways to out-maneuver his opposition.

View all comments (6) | Leave a comment

gjdagis| 5.11.09 @ 9:57AM

Obama can't be serious to suggest that providers are even able reduce costs AND provide "quality care" care. Practitioners are already forced to limit patients to 12 minutes (which must include history taking, examination,diagnosis, treatment and comprehensive charting) in order to make ends meet. We are TOLD how much to charge unlike auto mechanics and many others in the various service industries who set their own prices. If it gets any worse there will be NO providers since we will all practice on a cash only basis. Look to where the real problem lies; in the insurance bureaucracy and the trial lawyers who ruthlessly pursue malpractice suits just to name two.

Tim| 5.11.09 @ 1:00PM

I imagine that the model for future healthcare will be much like education: inner cities will be doomed to patronize filthy and ill equipped hospitals staffed by the dregs of the profession.
Suburbs will compete on the basis of who offers good hospitals, not just good schools.

Paul| 5.11.09 @ 1:15PM

The American Hospital Association, and America's Health Insurance Plans and the Service Employees International Union coming together under the leadership of President Obama.

Jim Fister| 5.11.09 @ 1:23PM

I'm not sure that I see the power of a single-provider (government-run) system. I would think that most of the health services would be able to set a price and then cut their own costs to meet that, which probably degrades service and choices.

If being against this is going to be unpopular, then I'm with the "out" crowd on this puppy.

micky&vicky;| 9.4.09 @ 3:22AM

ghd Hair Straightener
classic ugg boots

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/05/11/health-care-game-changer

ADVERTISEMENT

The Spectacle Blog

Sulllivan Silliness

Ross Kaminsky | 5:40PM

Meghan McCain Doesn't Get It

Jeffrey Lord | 1:36PM

The Paul Factor

W. James Antle, III | 1:29PM

Bain v. Solyndra

W. James Antle, III | 12:11PM

Illusionist

Yogi Love | 10:06AM

At Least He Apologized

Ross Kaminsky | 8:34AM

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

Terror by Any Other Name

Robert Stacy McCain | 5.29.12

The White House Sieve

Jed Babbin | 5.29.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Osceola Who?

Reid Collins | 5.29.12

The Bain of Romney's Existence

W. James Antle | 5.29.12

ADVERTISEMENT