Canada's council for health policy and accountability
Toronto Star
Sep. 26, 2003
Ottawa, provinces agree to national health council
The federal government and provinces have reached agreement on the creation
of a 27-member national health council, a key source said today.
The council, which would monitor health policy and accountability, would be comprised of a chairperson, 13 government representatives and 13 people
from outside government.
Roy Romanow recommended the council last year in his royal commission
report on the future of health care.
click here to view the article
Comment: Imagine a national health council in the United States monitoring
health policy and accountability. Just to begin with, what would such a commission have to say about our very high costs in the face of the profound
deficiencies and inequities in our system?
Such a council would be invaluable to help fine tune a comprehensive health
care system such as Canada’s. But, in the United States, we don’t need to
fine tune a system. We need to establish a system. The sooner the better.
Sat, 27 Sep 2003 11:06:15 -0700
Subject: qotd: Federal regulations produce a return on our investment
The White House
Office of Management and Budget
Informing Regulatory Decisions: 2003 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and
Tribal Entities.
OMB reviewed 107 major Federal rulemakings finalized over the previous ten
years (October 1, 1992 to September 30, 2002). The estimated total annual
quantified benefits of these rules range from $146 billion to $230 billion, while the estimated total annual quantified costs range from $36 billion to $42 billion.
Table 2: Estimates of the Total Annual Benefits and Costs of Major Federal Rules, October 1, 1992 to September 30, 2002 (millions of 2001 dollars):
Health & Human Services
Benefits: 9,129 to 11,710
Costs: 3,165 to 3,334
Environmental Protection Agency
Benefits: 120,753 to 193,163
Costs: 23,359 to 26,604
(six other agencies are listed, and each shows a significantly greater benefit than cost.) http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/2003_cost-ben_final_rpt.pdf
Comment: One of the most common objections to the role of government is the cost of regulatory requirements. Although the social benefits of many regulations may be priceless, it is very reassuring to know that President Bush’s OMB has provided a report that demonstrates that the regulations of each agency also produce a significantly greater dollar value in benefits than are the costs of fulfilling the regulations.
Although the greatest return has been through EPA regulations, agencies such as HHS have also produced a positive dollar return on the regulatory requirements.
The benefits of regulatory oversight are further evidence that our government is not our enemy. And we could benefit even more if we would begin to use a Universal, “government-run,” social insurance program to improve the value of our health care investment.