President Obama’s soaring healthcare rhetoric got a huge PR boost last night, as he addressed Congress head-on for the very first time on this issue. Reform is necessary in the healthcare sector as it is needed in practically every financial sphere. After all, it’s all about wasteful government spending during economic distress. The difference, according to Obama, is that healthcare delivery in this country — a largely unregulated gentlemans’ agreement between Big(s) Pharma, Insurance, and the providers — will ultimately need to enlist “buy-in” from those whom it directly affects, the individual patient.During his campaign, Obama’s campaign estimated his health care reform plan would cost between $50 and $65 billion a year and that it would be paid from savings in the system and from discontinuing the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 per year. Okay, that much everyone knew before his speech to Congress last night.
But there are rumblings within Obama’s circles that he could be flip-flopping on the issue of “universal” coverage. As you may recall, the cornerstone of Obama’s healthcare initiatives during his run for the White House was in achieving access for all — with a catch: implementing it without a mandate for coverage from the government. He had to find some way of differentiating himself from Hillary Clinton, whose entire healthcare reform package as presidential candidate rested on that foundation of government subsidy.
It appears that Obama will have no other choice but to resort to some sort of federal subsidy to guarantee universal access as so many on the Left see it. It probably will not get written into the budget, but that probably isn’t Obama’s goal right now. There’s the bigger issue of getting Congress on board with the scenario of getting every citizen covered, an impossibility without an individual mandate and minimal involvement of private insurers. Could there be a fight in store?
Related Posts Within Doctor Pundit:
Originating from Saint Paul, Minnesota, [doctorpundit.com] is a weblog about the policy of healthcare and where it intersects with politics and public opinion; it is edited by Michael Douglas, MD, MBA. Welcome, and please consider my take on what is Healthcare 2.0, complemented by a few of my thoughts on my personal avocations and guilty pleasures: music, prose, and writing. Follow Doctor Pundit via RSS above.
North, GA #hospital job for Physical Therapist #jobs on 2/7 - @careerbarn Details http://t.co/wORGjzp9
RT @RichmondDoc: In the absence of #MDChat, should you be interested: @NPALive is covering a health policy conference call with Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel.
Grant Will Aid Hunterdon Medical Center for Community Needs Program http://t.co/FliewVHM #hitc #hcsm
RT @HealthIsSocial: RT @farristimimi: Psychologists Debate Social Media's Role in Suicide Interventions
http://t.co/tG2eFCkv #hcsm #mhsm #mentalhealth #hcsmca
RT @pjmachado Just ask what they want... RT @dsgold Consumers aren't too keen on personalized search results http://t.co/JZT0Whxr #hcsm
DOCTOR PUNDIT @ ONE YEAR | An occasional DP series from 2010 highlighting healthcare policy trends over the period from 2009-2010 in a compare/contrast format.
Is the “problem” one of universal coverage? Or is it one of global costs? The latter is a significant problem. If you don’t have enough resources, then you have to either operate in a less costly way (pay providers less, use providers that will cost less, be more efficient) or ration care.
There are no other options is the issue is one of limited resources, in this case dollars to pay.
That, at the end of the day is the main problem and is not easily solved.
Thanks
Wes