RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
MarilynH's comments:
on State of the Union
I'm sorry but reforming medical malpractice and decreasing the number of frivilous law suits will do very little to decrease the cost of health care. The cost to physicians to purchase the insurance is pretty minimal for most specialty practices. Malpractice reform or selling insurance across state lines (which is also frequently identified by Republicans) are not solutions to or replacements for the current health reform law.
posted 2 years, 4 months ago
view in context
on Philosophy of Taxes & Spending
That's why I like living in Oregon. There are people here who truly feel that when one has a higher income they have a moral responsibility to pay taxes which in turn can help those less fortnate. Isn't that the Christian thing to do? I always wonder why so many Christians align themselves with the Republican party whose policies have helped the wealthy get wealthier and seem to have little sympathy or regard for the less fortunate. Their focus on taxes is, "how will it affect me (or my business) and my money" versus, "how can taxes provide programs and services that help the less fortunate?"
posted 2 years, 7 months ago
view in context
on Candidate Conversation: Chris Dudley
What exactly is "free enterprise?" No regulations? Large corporations taking advantage of the citizens? It is interesting that people are willing to vote for things that are not in their best interest. Unfortunately too many people are of the belief that "government is our enemy," until of course they need a friend (like unemployment insurance or FEMA, or medicare or medicaid or social secuirty).
posted 2 years, 8 months ago
view in context
on Candidate Conversation: Chris Dudley
Question for Mr. Dudley
What are your views on tax cuts and the creation of jobs in the economy?
posted 2 years, 8 months ago
view in context
on Bracing for Bad Budget Numbers
I've heard a number of people talking about public employees having to pay a portion of their benefits, particularly their health care benefits. I have a friend who is a public school teacher and is faced with having to pay a portion of her premium that is about $240 per month for a single person. I asked her what the total premium is for her health care benefits and she told me it is over $1,000 a month! Having managed a small business and seeking "bids" from health plans and purchasing a benefit plan for my employees, the cost per employee for a plan with a deductible under $1,000 was about $550 a month for a single person in an industry that is known for high utilization of health care and therefore has higher premiums. My plan had comparable benefits and deductibles to her plan. My question is, why are the public employees having to pay such outrageous premiums to the health plans for their benefits??? Who is negotiating these rates? These are not competitive rates and it is no wonder the benefits of these employees look so bloated. The health plans are charging outrageous premiums for these employees. As usual, the health plans are ripping off the public for as much as possible and are contributing greatly to our budget woes.
posted 2 years, 9 months ago
view in context
on Rx: Role of Employers
It looks like most of us who have responded on this blog are in favor of a single payer system, or at least something that would help to eliminate the role insurance companies play in the delivery of healthcare. We are all frustrated and baffled why this option is not being discussed by the Congress. But due to the big money and huge influence these corporations have on our congressional leaders, we should probably not be surprised.
Please take the opportunity to write a letter to your senators Wyden and Merkley and let them know how you feel. I'm sure they are NOT reading the OPB blog to get opinions of constituents.
posted 3 years, 10 months ago
view in context
on Rx: Role of Employers
As a manager of a medical practice if you want to control the cost of health care, one needs to eliminate the for profit health insurance industry. They add absolutely NO VALUE to the delivery of health care yet those who pay premiums are paying for outrageous salaries for health insurance executives. Bill McGuire of United Healthcare was paid over $300 million in salary in 2006. Insurers devise as many ways as possible to deny care to members in order to save themselves money. Wendell Potter, previous executive at Cigna, spoke about this on the July 10 Bill Moyers Journal on OPB. Now the health insurance industry is giving million of dollars to politicians in order to preserve the status quo, which greatly favors them.
If we had no for profit health insurance companies and had a single payer system, employers (and employees) could pay an employment tax rather than monthly insurance premiums and their employees could be covered by a government funded, privately delivered health plan. At a monthly cost of approximately $400 - $500 for each employee for health insurance premiums, a payroll tax LESS THAN CURRENT PREMIUMS would help small business and large business as well. Many manufacturing firms complain they can't be competitive with foreign companies because of the cost of health care. If they had a smaller expense via a payroll tax they could be more competitive, create more jobs, etc etc.
When one compares how Medicare functions compared to for profit health insurers, I know they pay claims faster, more accurately and don't deny coverage for services that are considered covered benefits. Their payment policies are published. Their administrative costs are between 3% and 4% while for profit insurers are 15% to 20%. Medicare IS A GOVERNMENT RUN PLAN and functions very efficiently, much more so than for profit insurers. That is why the insurers are so afraid of a government run plan because they know it can be less costly (as long as not only the sickest of the sick are allowed to join a "public plan.")
Governor John Kitzhaber has some great ideas for health care reform that get at the delivery of and payment for health care. Unfortunately he is not nationally prominent in this debate. I'm disappointed OPB has not involved him and his ideas in their conversations.
posted 3 years, 10 months ago
view in context
on Rx: Doctors' Salaries
These would be W2 wages, therefore "net" of office or practice expenses. This would be after liability insurance was paid and does not consider a doctor's personal debt, such as student loans.
posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context
on Rx: Doctors' Salaries
As a medical group administrator I'm very familiar with the differences in physician compensation. I'd just like to provide some facts on compensation. It varies greatly by specialty, by type of practice (single specialty versus multi specialty), by region of the country, and by the number of physicians in a practice. Some of the best information published on physician compensation is from the Medical Group Management Association in their annual publication on Physician Compensation and Production. For example, 2006 (national) data showed the median compensation level for a primary care physician was $171,519 while specialist compensation was $322,259. In general, the south and mid west parts of the country have higher median compensation levels than the east and the west for both primary care and specialists. A five year (national) trend shows compensation for primary care physicians increased almost 12% while specialist compensation increased just over 17% in the five years.
Family Practice specialty (with no OB) had a median compensation level of about $164,000 in 2006. A pediatrician had a salary of $174,000. A cardiologist who does invasive procedures had a median compensation of about $432,000, an orthopedic surgeon was $425,000, a general surgeon was $305,000, a neruosurgeon was $572,000, and OB was $270,000 are a few examples of the differences in compensation.
Primary care physicians are compensated less than specialists because they don't do the type of procedures or surgery that specialists do. Given the current fee for service methodology of payment by insurance companies, primary care physicians are not able to generate as much revenue as specialists in their daily office visits as a specialist performing surgeries.
posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context
on The Changeover: Health Care Prescriptions
Those promoting a single payer system should not use the phrase ?Medicare for All? since the name ?Medicare? may not have a positive affiliation for everyone. That said, Medicare is tremendously efficient in paying physicians for services rendered. Where most health insurers have administrative costs of 10% - 18%, Medicare is able to function with administrative costs of around 3%. They pay claims within two weeks (many health insurers take 45+ days) and they pay claims correctly (which many health insurers do not).
CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) currently uses a limited number of ?contractors? located around the US. For example the Oregon region uses Noridian located in North Dakota. A single payer system could do exactly the same. Medicare?s contractors have obviously achieved economies of scale which allow them to function more efficiently than small, local health insurers.
posted 4 years, 5 months ago
view in context
