Posted by
LouGanzo on Monday, August 24, 2009 12:00:00 AM
Time and time again we hear the hyperbole about the lack of competition in healthcare. This is B.O.'s mantra and the mantra of all his cronies and the robots who follow them. I have a question for you people - and I guarantee that this question has occurred to Bill Gates as well - WHERE HAS ALL THE TALK ABOUT ANTI-TRUST IN FIGHTING MONOPOLIES GONE? It used to be that any time a monopoly became to large everyone cried for anti-trust legislation or oversight. Telecom's couldn't merge. Cable companies had to be reviewed. Computer companies - one in particular - were broken up. The government's nose couldn't get any further into the equation on these things. However, with healthcare we see more and more mergers buyouts and expansion by the big companies - United Health Group for example - and the government says narry a word. Why is that? Why do they allow all this growth in monopolies for healthcare but nowhere else? Was there a plan here? Is the growth in monopolies a means to an end? Does this presence of monopolies today only make it easier for the debate to move toward a non-competition argument and a larger monopoly to slide toward government administration? I think it's obvious that nobody has been against healthcare monopolies in recent years due precisely to the fact that things are positioned perfectly for the arguments for one-payer health.
Of course, we could make jokes about the need for a government oil company to create competition at the pump, or a government doughnut shop to keep the price of Boston Cremes down, or a government baseball franchise to create financial competition for the Yankees - but that would be too easy. Instead let's just point out that the government option isn't needed for competition. There are many options that don't have anything to do with a government option and the competition in the market is pretty broad. Every time Healthplans start charging too much and cutting back on treatments TPAs (Third Party Administrators) get a bump in marketshare, for example. Why not work on things that make sense like HSAs, TORT Reform and discussion of the existing laws that the departments of insurance in every state are already empowered to enforce if someone is denied care inappropriately. ERISA reform in 2000 was put in place (by Mr. Clinton and Donna Shalala at HHS) to verify fair treatment and DOI law impacts non-ERISA plans. Independent Review is a $200 million/year industry providing objective physician review of denials to ensure proper clinical determinations. This is never addressed in the discussions in the media. These IROs (independent review orgainzations) overturn denials generally 50% of the time. Answers are in place. Deal with the realities of TORT reform, not the pretend lack of competition. The mechanism for a lack of competition is called Anti-Trust legislation not one-payer health, and if there is a real competition issue, shouldn't we have heard about that from the FTC?