The future of socialized medicine is already here, and it looks like this: The government is going to insist that doctors treat patients according to the government's terms and conditions. If they protest, argue, complain, fight or plead, they will be pegged as part of a grand conspiracy and silenced. It's happening already.
Recently, the state and federal governments fought a group of Idaho doctors because they decided they would no longer participate in the government's worker's compensation system.
The doctors were upset with the Idaho Industrial Commission's decision in February 2006 to cut reimbursement rates for orthopedic surgeons. Some of the doctors discussed the commission's decision with one another, exchanged emails and, ultimately, according to the government, the orthopedists began announcing they were no longer going to treat workers' compensation patients. Over the next few months, the government contends the doctors continued to email one another, and doctors continued to drop out of the worker's compensation program. By October, according to the government, 65 orthopedists in the Boise area had stopped treating most workers' compensation patients.
In February 2007, the Industrial Commission announced it would raise workers' compensation rates 61 percent, after which the docs began reaccepting workers' compensation clients.
Separately, in December 2007, the doctors took issue with Blue Cross of Idaho's decision to reduce rates. The doctors again began discussing the issue among themselves, and by the summer of 2008, according to court records, about half of the orthopedists in Boise had decided they would no longer be part of the insurance provider's network. To resolve the issue, Blue Cross offered a compromise, a move that divided the medical practitioners and caused many to rejoin the Blue Cross network.
The government deemed both the decision to boycott the treatment of worker's compensation patients and the decision to drop out of the Blue Cross network conspiracies in violation of state and federal antitrust laws. The government says there was a grand conspiracy to fix prices. No, there was not.
In the Blue Cross case, the state has its own set of anti-free market, pro-monopolistic statues which limits competition and gives insurance providers like Blue Cross a competitive advantage. The government, of course, isn't suing itself over the restraint of trade that it enshrined in statute. Instead, the state is using antitrust laws to hammer doctors who refuse to go along with the rates established by an insurance provider that has a state-sanctioned market advantage. If doctors want to drop out of an insurance network, that's their business, not the government's.
And there was no "conspiracy" among doctors to ditch the workers' compensation program. There was a group of doctors who acted independently in exercise of their First Amendment rights to freely associate with other doctors and express their opinions about the government's actions relative to how much they were being paid. The state shouldn't sanction doctors for speaking out or acting out in defiance of a perceived injustice by the government.
The attorney general's office says there is no correlation to this antitrust complaint and the federal government's designs for socialized medicine. I say there is. If doctors are charged with an antitrust conspiracy for dropping from the workers' compensation program, does anyone believe the same won't happen to doctors who refuse to go along with Obamacare and stage a similar protest? Government is out of control, doesn't take kindly to criticism and thinks it is God. You bet it will.
Comments
IllegalsSubmitted by Bill (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 13:17.
» - reply
Costs are so high so you can pay for the people who don't pay. Welcome illegals, we will pay for your health care, everything is free. If you are a tax paying citizen with health care, you will be stuck with a bunch of bills.
Poor, poor orthopedic surgeonsSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 07/19/2010 - 17:48.
» - reply
If I remember correctly, these physicians were gauging the industrial commission to care for workers comp cases and demanding much more than general market prices. They were not staging a protest, but rather organizing a false shortage of coverage to force the commission and Blue Cross to pay outrageous fees. I find it interesting that you try to tie some physicians organizing to drive up their reimbursement rates to the impact of Obamacare since this all started before Obama was even elected.
What Market?Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 07/17/2010 - 11:34.
» - reply
The post "Reality in medical land" starts with talk about what "the market will bear," and then conveniently forgets that very little of the health care industry is market-driven at all. For starters, the government controls either directly (Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) or indirectly (insurance mandates, heavy regulation of insurers) about 90% of health care spending. Only about 10% of spending is directed by consumers themselves. If consumers were responsible for a greater percentage of the burden of health care costs (perhaps through HSAs, with only catastrophic insurance coverage), then there would be greater incentive to spend more cost-effectively. I would be shocked to find out that the person posting about the costs of their medical care knew those costs before getting the treatment. Who cares, right? Insurance will pick up the bulk of it. People don't shop around for their basic (non-emergency) medical care, because they are not on the hook for most of the bills. As a finite resource, medical care must ultimately be rationed in some way. The big difference is between those who want the government to decide what care patients receive and those who want to decide for themselves. Had you been responsible for paying more of the bill for the pain specialist yourself, you probably would have done more of your homework ahead of time and found a more reliable specialist. In a true market, a person who provides bad service at a high cost will not be in business for long, especially in this age in which information is so easy to distribute and obtain.
Also, for all of the complaining by the pro-government-solution people, they seem to overlook the fact that the structure of our health care system is largely the result of government regulation. For example, the tax treatment of benefits is largely the reason why health insurance is so tied to employment. Insurance mandates at the state level have also driven up insurance costs in many areas, and people are not permitted to buy insurance across state lines. There are plenty of other examples.
It is very common these days for politicians to do everything in their power to prevent market forces from operating, and then blame all of the failures of their policies on "market failures." It is hard to tell if people are dishonest, misinformed, or perhaps a hefty dose of both.
Who am I?Submitted by John Galt (not verified) on Fri, 07/16/2010 - 21:27.
» - reply
Who am I?
Government Doctor Prices?Submitted by Dan Woods (not verified) on Fri, 07/16/2010 - 14:25.
» - reply
First off, I know its great to say "Government" and stir the folks all up. But it was a private company -Blue Cross Blue Shield - that set the price. Not the government.
The Doctors do not have to work for that wage. This is true. But they dont have the right to organize and form a monopoly either. The issue is that the Doctors organized.
What if all the repair shops got together and decided they werent going to work for less than $300 per hour. The Free Market no longer applies - everyone sets their rate to $300 per hour. That is in essence what the Doctors did.
Its amazing how you can take a Free Market principal people and twist em into non-free market people.
Re: Government Doctor PricesSubmitted by Devil's Advocate (not verified) on Sun, 07/18/2010 - 23:40.
» - reply
In the first instance, it was the government that was setting the price for reimbursement of WC care.
In the second instance, it was a private company establishing the reimbursement rate, but it was only about half of the doctors that were dropping the coverage. The others were free to continue to practice at the going Blue Cross rates. Doctors should be free to decide whether or not they think that Blue Cross is adequately reimbursing them for their services, and if not, then they can elect to not work with Blue Cross. At the same time, other doctors are free to accept the lower rate and take the Blue Cross business from those doctors who did not find such work worth their while. If nobody is willing to accept the Blue Cross rate, that would be a sign that the rate was indeed too low, and Blue Cross could decide whether to increase it or not. If, however, some doctors were just trying to squeeze Blue Cross for more money, that creates an opportunity for other doctors to step in and fill the void. Generally, charges of "monopoly" are overblown, even when the licensing barriers to entry necessarily make the medical field a less responsive market.
This does, however, demonstrate the problem with labeling health care as a "right." Once it is deemed to be a right, any failure to provide the care is labeled as a deprivation of the patients' rights. If these were factory workers banding together to demand a higher wage, the administration would be falling all over itself to praise them, not to sue them.
Reply to Government Doctor PricesSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 07/17/2010 - 14:12.
» - reply
I disagree with your comments regarding the issue of Doctors organizing.
Doctors have as much right to organize, meet, discuss and plan actions as do any other group of like minded people.
Do not union members organize and meet, discuss and plan actions?
CLW
Join the ClubSubmitted by Jon (not verified) on Fri, 07/16/2010 - 05:06.
» - reply
In "no-fault" dissolution cases (NWO-fascism), children are seized from their natural guardian without trial, and then the natural guardian's income is plundered, bank accounts seized and credit trashed, all without notice or due process. When men complained, they were fired from their job and arrested for violating orders written in court rooms without their knowledge, but not a word of assistance or help from their neighbor.
Ok Doc, it's your turn.
Ok neighbor, you are next.
Go UndergroundSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 07/15/2010 - 13:44.
» - reply
Sound like doctors and associated healthcare professionals should drop out of the system entirely, but still practice -- i.e. don't register, don't form a business entity, etc... but become a known, valued, and protected member (i.e. the neighbors and customers won't report you to gov. thugs) of the community to whom one can go for medical help and take only cash, gold/silver, barter as payment for services rendered.
New Health Care ReformSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/14/2010 - 13:50.
» - reply
I worked in the health care field for many years and no longer am practicing. When I heard about the new health care bill, I immediately thought of several obstacles. Doctors aren't going to put up with the unrealistic demands. Some will will stop practicing and those choosing to go into medicine will choose another career. Nurses will follow suit. Thinking that there are going to be enough nurses and doctors to absorb 30 million more people is crazy. You thought your wait to see a doctor now is long, the wait will be increased. Those that remain in the medical field will be way overworked. There is no way around rationing either. They will steal from Medicare to cover younger people. Bad, bad idea.
results of the antitrust complaintsSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/14/2010 - 13:23.
» - reply
Great article, where is the state/federal gov't at in fighting the doctors on this?
talk cost controls in health-care plans they mean price controlsSubmitted by Bill Hurst (not verified) on Wed, 07/14/2010 - 12:42.
» - reply
Fact: All government health care plans are “Socialized Medical Care.” One thing is for sure…those hell-bent for statism have not given any thought to basic economic principles. When liberal candidates talk cost controls in health-care plans they mean "price controls." This would limit the number of individuals entering into the health care field. Those that have skills that would produce more money elsewhere, will leave the health market. Meaning the health care providers left, will demand higher wages because the work load will increase. Resulting in very limited (rationed) or substandard care provided in any socialist plan. Liberals loving statism just don’t understand the law of supply and demand~!
Reality in medical landSubmitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/14/2010 - 10:59.
» - reply
At some point you have to look at what the market will bear in costs- examples of this are the $120.00 screw drivers that major defense contracts charge DOD, $500 dollar toilet seats etc...Medical costs have been artificially forced up because of MD greed, insurance industry over charging to show profits to their share holders and justify ridiculous salaries of their CEO's and upper management costs. I work in Health and Government-and you know what we call it as we see it- price fixing is price fixing- are ortho docs worth more than GP's? hell no if anything less. Are heart specialists more or better trained than a GP? No again they may know more about one organ but a hell of alot less about total body systems and interactions. Where you see conspiracy I see an agency working towards a balance and fairness and extending the value of the dollars by getting more services, nothing different than insurance companies do when they contract with a provider.( I deal with the whining of the medical specialists all the time about them being underpaid) So before you go all "here come the commies" like that fool McCarthy from the 50's take the time to talk to the experts, ask questions -explore the reality- EXPLORE BOTH SIDES - believe it or not most folks who work in government health systems management are not there for the salary, but we are there for the betterment of the people we serve. Recently I went to see a pain specialist, I waited in his office 40 minutes for him to show up from the gym, I paid a $30. copay, my insurance was billed $550. and paid #400. he spent 4 minutes with me and offered me no suggestions saying I had to live with the pain. On the other hand my GP charged me $15. billed insurance 65 got paid $50, spent 35 minutes with me and found a solution- in a $100. medical device. Where was the real value? You always talk about socialized medicine like it is a bad thing. The only place it might be bad is on the auto dealers and real estate brokers pocket books - but on the general public it will make for a much better experience.
Why go to the specialist?Submitted by Kyle (not verified) on Fri, 07/16/2010 - 08:31.
» - reply
Digging into your pain specialist situation - it sounds like you won't go again. If that's the result of most or all of the specialist's patient visits, why do you suppose people haven't dried up the well for that doctor and dropped his/her fees by market force? I'm not hiding a snippy answer, by the way - I'll be thinking about that question until we figure it out.
Interesting reality. Have some moreSubmitted by MPAS (not verified) on Thu, 07/15/2010 - 18:39.
» - reply
I find your comments very interesting, however, highly incorrect. Let’s put it in perspective: “are ortho docs worth more than GP's? hell no if anything less. Are heart specialists more or better trained than a GP?” OK, following your thinking, a private pilot is no better than a commercial airline pilot or a fighter pilot. They all have a certification to fly. What the hell is the difference? You might feel different when you get on that 767 that the Cessna pilot is playing Captain for. Good luck.
The GP is there to handle and identify health problems and treat the majority of injuries and illnesses. If he or she finds signs of a slipped capital femoral epiphysis or signs of unstable angina, he is not educated, trained or willing to jump in, put in screws, bone grafts or stents and does not want to do a three vessel coronary bypass graft. Once again, if you feel that is the case, PLEASE feel free to contact that doctor, give a couple of bucks to the non-trained gas passer that will be guessing how much anesthesia you need while getting cut open and have a good time. I can bet, due to your vision of the perfect medical system, none of these folks you will be dealing with will be able to afford the $125k a year malpractice insurance the specialists have to carry. So, when your kid can’t walk because the GP screwed his femur to his pelvis, or your heart fails to restart after surgery because of that extra two millimeters the scalpel penetrated. . . remember, you were the cause of the problem. Deal with it and don't expect a $10 million "They did me wrong" payout. Specialist obtain years of ADDITIONAL training, have more expertise, and understand specific systems MUCH better than the average GP, no different than the F-16 pilot who STARTED by being a Cessna pilot.
Your comment about working for the government does however give me an understanding of your position. It is your wish to make sure everyone has their share of the pie. Doesn’t matter that they didn’t help plant the seeds, grow the fruit, harvest it, prepare the dough, cook the pie or even set the table; everyone gets the same share. “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.” I believe that is the definition of communism. No thanks! You can have that, too. Enjoy your pie. I added special spices just for you.
Workers Comp and State Industrial CommissionSubmitted by Wayne Harper (not verified) on Wed, 07/14/2010 - 10:27.
» - reply
It is simply time to replace Workers Compensation and the State Industrial commission with a simplified program from the private sector. I would be interested in finding out how many claims filed by Idaho Workers were denied and then settled months or years later before going to court. Also I wonder how many scum sucking bottom feeding attorneys work for the Industrial Commission.
TIME FOR A CHANGE ... Harper, Spirit Lake, ID
Government doctor pricesSubmitted by JIMV (not verified) on Wed, 07/14/2010 - 09:53.
» - reply
There is no power under the law that can force any man, doctors included, to work for compensation that man does not consider adequate. The 13th Amendment ended such horror.
Post new comment