PNHP Logo

| SITE MAP | ABOUT PNHP | CONTACT US | LINKS

NAVIGATION PNHP RESOURCES
Posted on August 18, 2003

NABE Panel: Federal deficit a risk, monetary policy about right,health care needs major reform

PRINT PAGE
EN ESPAÑOL

National Association for Business Economics
NABE Economic Policy Survey
NABE Panel: Federal deficit a risk, monetary policy about right,health care
needs major reform
August 2003

From the Survey Details:Health Care
NABE introduced a special topic into this economic policy survey and questioned our panelists about healthcare in the United States. Given the choice of high cost or the large number of uninsured Americans, 57% felt high cost was the most important issue to address and 42% were more concerned with the increasing number of uninsured. That a survey of economists did not escalate the issue of high cost to a greater degree may indicate that most people in America, even economists, are conditioned tothink of healthcare differently from other choices we make each day,i.e.,noneconomically.
Regarding high costs, the most blame was assigned to insurance and third-party payer systems that left consumers with little or no incentive to hold costs down. Reasons of medium importance for high and rising healthcare costs were that healthcare providers lacked incentives to economize,improved technology allowing better outcomes, and excessive liability costs.
Costs were indeed seen as harmful to companies’ profitability. More than 90%
of respondents said escalating healthcare costs would be at least somewhat significant to companies’ profit margins over the next two years.
What’s the answer?
Two-thirds of respondents felt the answer to the problems in our healthcare
system needed to involve fundamental changes in both healthcare delivery and
its financing.
We asked panelists to identify specific changes to the U.S. healthcare system that would provide for improvements in cost, access, or quality.There was an overwhelming response against government involvement; neither nationalizing the healthcare system nor government regulation of insurance premiums and drug prices received much support. Most panelists advocated the spread of consumer-directed health insurance, which would give more incentives, choices, and responsibility for their healthcare to consumers.
http://www.nabe.com/publib/pol/03/pol0308.pdf
Comment: It is fully expected that economists employed by the business community would conduct surveys and make recommendations that would enhance corporate performance. It is their responsibility to assess costs,including the costs of employee health benefit programs, and make recommendations to control those costs. Making recommendations to improve the social welfare of employees is not in their job description. So it is not surprising that business economists support shifting costs of health benefit programs to employees.
The reason that this report is important is that it is being used by advocates of “consumer-directed” health care to support their cause, as if the findings and resulting recommendations of this survey represented the moral imperative. It does only if you believe that greater corporate profit is a higher moral goal than ensuring the welfare of workers. On the contrary, many of us advocating for improved access and coverage believe that worker welfare must first be ensured, and only then corporate financial adjustments be made to ensure adequate profit. (Of course, the best way of ensuring affordable worker access to health care would be to eliminate employer-sponsored health programs, and to establish a universal system of publicly-funded and publicly-administered social insurance.)
But the NABE economists must bear responsibility for supporting policies
that are clearly insensitive to the health care needs of the workers.When asked for recommendations to improve cost, access and quality, they respond by opposing government involvement and by recommending dumping the problem onto the employees (using the highly deceptive “consumer-directed”rhetoric). Their solution is not responsive to the problems. It shifts cost to individuals, thereby impairing access with an inevitable decline in quality.
When you hear reports that the “nation’s economists support consumer-directed health care,” be prepared to expose the potential impact of these cruel and inhumane policies being supported by the -anti-government sector of economists from the right.
_____________________________________________
Quote-of-the-day mailing list
Quote-of-the-day@mccanne.org
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/quote-of-the-day