Medical debt in MA remains unchanged after reform

[eridani]

The reason most MA residents approve of reform is that 85% have never been expensively sick. The mandatory underinsurance is a disaster for the 5% who incur 50% of all health care costs, and for the 15% who incur 85% of costs.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/massachusetts/2012/09/09/medical-debt-massachusetts-persists-despite-health-law/QztpbflGjmUfVcf8J8tjbI/story.html

Architects of the pioneering 2006 Massachusetts health law, which required most residents to have insurance, expected it would reduce families’ medical debt. But the most recent data suggest the scope of medical debt has remained largely unchanged.

Temporary lapses in insurance coverage and increasingly common plans with high deductibles and copayments have contributed to medical debt, leaving some people struggling to pay bills for hospitals, doctors, and ambulance companies. Rising health costs and the recession also probably played a role.

[dkf]

1. Which is why the ACA won't solve things. We need to focus on costs.

[eridani]

2. In civilized countries, the government controls the costs one way or another n/t

[Honeycombe8]

6. The 85% rule should help. I got a letter from my ins. co.-refund because of the ACA's 85% rule.

Romney's plan didn't have this, I believe.

There's an 85% rule that ins. cos. must spend at least 85% of premiums collected on paying claims. If they don't, they have to refund monies enough to get them to the 85% mark. The letter I got from my ins. co. specifically said I was entitled to a refund of part of my premium because of the 85% rule. (but it didn't tell me if I had to do anything to get it.) I paid COBRA for one month, so it won't be much, but it's something.

There is an 80% rule in some instances, but I forget who that is for. Maybe group policies for small businesses?

[eridani]

9. Not much.The government gets massaged data from the insurance companies

Remember the health care crisis due to rising costs back in 1993? The MLR average nationwide was about 95%.

[former-republican]

8. how?

[eridani]

10. Like we do with public utilities

If providers (or insurance companies in those countries with private insurance) want to raise their prices, they go to the appropriate government commission and prove that they need to. My husband got an emergency root canal in the Netherlands in 1996 for $25 American.

[former-republican]

11. But how would you start now?

How do you go to a hospital and tell them every thing they charge is going to be reduced by 50 , 60 , or 70%
Example , no more MRI's for $3000
Now you have to charge $200

How would we go about doing that. Does the pay for the medical staff , nurses , doctors stay the same?

What about college cost and medical school . Do we tell the colleges they have to reduce tuition costs by 70%?


That's why I'm asking how all this could be implemented.

[eridani]

14. The outrageous loan burden is a real problem--civilized countries either pay for or

--highly subsidize all professional training. Any price control here is going to have to start at a much higher level than is the norm elsewhere. Those levels would be lowered gradually as the government subsidized medical education. I'd suggest starting with general practitioners and gradually adding the most needed specialties.

Another thing we could do right now is have Medicare bargain down drug prices the way governments in other countries do.

[former-republican]

15. Wasn't it Bush that stopped medicare from being able to do that

with the prescription drug plan?

[eridani]

17. +1000, and go to the head of the class n/t

[dkf]

18. Nothing is etched in stone.

It needs to be changed and should have been changed or we are stuck with an unaffordable system. Listen to the problems people are still posting about. Same old.

[former-republican]

12. Another example

I went to the pharmacy today for some migraine medication.
9 tablets cost was $209
I have insurance so I only paid $20

How do we get pharmaceutical companies to lower cost.

To me the whole health care system has run amok with the drug companies in tow.
Also medical equipment is priced like it's made out of gold.

Would a hospital spend 2 million dollars ( or what ever it cost) on a MRI machine if all they could charge was a couple of hundred dollars ?

[eridani]

16. Japan dictated that MRIs had to cost $10,000 or less

The result was that MRI companies engineered a low cost machine that could do 90% of what the high end machines do for 1/20th the cost. They got a major export boost selling them to developing countries. They still have some high-end ones around for when the extra tech goodies are really needed, but the cheapie works for most needs very well.

[JRLeft]

3. Medicare for all or a state by state single payer system.

[woo me with science]

4. K&R

[HiPointDem]

5. kr. universal coverage is the only rational system.

[former-republican]

13. To me that is the only acceptable answer

Nothing else is going to fix this.

[meaculpa2011]

19. Universal ACCESS to a public healthcare delivery system...

like the VA and NHS is the only rational approach.

Remove the profit from the entire medical care delivery system, NOW!

Do not run the medical system as public utility, but as a basic public service like police and fire.

[avaistheone1]

7. Medicare for all.