Saturday, June 13, 2009

Water From a Stone: Obama Will Find 313 Billion in Health Care Savings

Right now we are looking at a trillion dollar price tag so Obama needs to keep health care savings rubbish up as his plans move foward. Today's nonsense, hundreds of billions of savings by giving less to hospitals and the "evil" pharmaceutical industry:

The bulk of the new $313 billion in savings would come from cutting or reducing the growth of payments to hospitals, medical equipment manufacturers and laboratories — though the major cuts don't target doctors, Orszag said.

Over the next decade, $110 billion is slated to come from reducing reimbursements to take account of what Orszag described as the ability of providers to improve their efficiency. “Health care services should be able to achieve and do achieve productivity improvements over time,” he said. According to a fact sheet released by the White House, future increases in such Medicare payments would be reduced based on an assumption that health care providers achieve half the productivity increases seen elsewhere in the economy. The budget official said the reductions would take place even if providers failed to garner the projected efficiencies.


Another $106 billion would come from cuts in so-called disproportionate share payments the federal government makes to hospitals with large numbers of uninsured patients. “As the ranks of uninsured decline under health reform, those payments become less necessary,” Orszag said.


About $75 billion is slated to come from lower payments for prescription drugs. However, Orszag said the White House was “in discussions with stakeholders over the best way of achieving that $75 billion.”Notwithstanding that ambiguity, Orszag asserted that the White House had put forward $950 billion in budgetary offsets that could be use to fund health reform. He called the proposals "hard" and "scoreable," meaning that they were sufficiently certain and specific to pass muster with CBO officials who formally tally the cost of budget items.......


There were signs that the announcement of the additional $313 billion of savings may have been rushed. In addition to the vagueness about the $75 billion in lower drug costs, the White House’s health care reform coordinator, Nancy-Ann DeParle, did not join a conference call with reporters to announce the new proposals. Her presence had been advertised in advance, but a spokesman said she was in another meeting and could not participate.


The cuts and savings are likely to engender warnings from providers that de-facto rationing will occur as patients in some areas find themselves unable to find providers willing to perform lab tests, X-rays and the like, due to the lower reimbursement rates.Hospitals are also likely to protest that the disproportionate share payments, which are targeted for cuts of 75 percent, are vital to maintaining hospitals in costly urban centers, and to keeping teaching hospitals viable



No actual numbers, just ill defined and unverifiable claims, pretty much the same pattern in regards to "saved jobs". They are and the fact that some Democrats plan on ditching the CBO estimates for the make believe OMB numbers that Orszag is giving us should tell you how expensive this package actually is. By the way when they mean scorable its the rational standard the CBO applies to any given item so that the cost or benefit of any given item is a reasonable number. Too bad Nancy-Ann DeParle wasn't there, she might have been able to clarify her original comment on the President "Mis-spoke" about health care savings from industry.

5 comments:

  1. In about a year, Obama will go on one of his wonderful prime-time TV appearances. He'll pull some old lady out of the crowd and say "You know that time you went to the doctor, and he didn't charge you $313 billion? You have me to thank for that!" And Chris Mathews' leg will tingle all over again.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ha, and the left will point out how that 300 billion was kept from evil corperations!

    ReplyDelete
  3. "...future increases in such Medicare payments would be reduced based on an assumption that health care providers achieve half the productivity increases seen elsewhere in the economy."

    Aint. Gonna. Happen.

    If you want more efficiency, you introduce healthy competition and de-regulation, not centralization.

    Besides, we're talking about patient care, not electronics or fast food. There are limits to the kinds of productivity increases you can realistically expect in healthcare.

    "Another $106 billion would come from cuts in so-called disproportionate share payments the federal government makes to hospitals with large numbers of uninsured patients. “As the ranks of uninsured decline under health reform, those payments become less necessary,” Orszag said"

    Yeah, sure. we'll take a glass of water from the deep end of the pool and pour it into the shallow end and that will help us save on the water bill.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So basically, they are going to decrease and slow down payments? When in the last ten years has that been sucessful. They been doing this for years and I fail to see how it's helped reduce costs.

    ReplyDelete