|
Massachusetts Rationing
Proposals Show Danger of Federal
Bill
By Burke J. Balch, J.D.,
director, NRLC's Powell Center
for Medical Ethics
"Over-promising plus
under-funding forces rationing."
For months, the National Right
to Life Committee has been
hammering that point, as regular
visitors to our blog at
http://powellcenterformedicalethics.blogspot.com/.
We have repeatedly warned that
rationing will result if the
federal government creates a
major new entitlement to health
insurance for the uninsured, yet
relies on vague hopes that
greater efficiency will restrain
health care costs instead of
providing an adequate,
sustainable funding mechanism to
pay for the entitlement.
Now we are seeing clear evidence
that NRLC is not
exaggerating--it comes from
Massachusetts.
 |
|
Massachusetts Gov. Deval
Patrick |
In 2006, Massachusetts enacted a
widely heralded plan essentially
mandating universal health
insurance coverage, with
subsidies to enable the
low-income uninsured to afford
it. To pay for the subsidies,
the state bill cobbled together
a series of funding sources,
including federal payments,
existing state funds for health
care for the uninsured, and
other sources of revenue that
shared one commonality--they
were not based on what people
actually pay for health care.
(For background on why this is a
fundamental error, see
http://www.nrlc.org/MedEthics/SaveNotRation.html
and the webinar that links to
that page.)
After the first couple of years
of the new program,
Massachusetts began to face a
mounting gap between the cost of
health care subsidies and the
available funds. Last year it
relied on one-time funding from
the federal stimulus bill to
help bridge the gap.
This year, faced with mounting
evidence that the state simply
cannot afford the increasing
outlays, Governor Deval Patrick
on February 11 sent the
legislature a bill that embodies
precisely what NRLC has warned
will happen on the federal
level. Presumably to avoid a
"two-tier" system in which the
subsidized health insurance
would be worse than the health
care the rest of Massachusetts
residents get, Patrick's bill
proposes sweeping measures to
limit what any of the citizens
of Massachusetts would be
ALLOWED to pay for health care!
The governor's bill would
authorize the state's insurance
commissioner to limit what
hospitals and other health care
providers, as well as insurers,
could charge. In short, it would
mandate price controls for
health care services and
insurance.
Now, everyone would prefer to
pay less, rather than more, for
health care, just as for
everything else. So price
controls sound appealing, and
are often initially popular. But
what must be understood is that
when the government limits what
can legally be charged for
something, it is limiting the
ability and right of citizens to
use their own money to get the
amount and quality of that thing
they want or need.
If, concerned about the price of
food in restaurants, the
government prohibited charging
more than $5 for a meal,
consider what would happen.
Restaurateurs couldn't afford to
charge less for providing food
than they had to pay for its
ingredients--so the only food
they'd offer would be things
like hamburgers and tacos.
Forget about being able to order
lobster or steak!
The same--in a far more
dangerous way--is true of health
care. Limit what providers and
insurers can charge for health
care, and you get less of it,
and poorer quality. Instead of
allowing individual consumers
and employers to balance cost
against benefit in choosing
among competing insurance
plans--as they would when
purchasing anything from a car
to a photocopier--the government
would rob us of the ability to
get health care of higher value
than it was willing to
authorize. People literally
would be unable to use their own
money to save their own lives.
The whole country must not
repeat Massachusetts' mistake.
Now is the time to contact
senators and representatives to
urge them to vote "no" on the
rationing proposals before the
U.S. Congress--including the
Senate passed health care bill
that Speaker Pelosi intends to
take to the floor of the
House--before, as in
Massachusetts, it is too late. |