Daschle Care - To save money, House Democrats want the government to decide how to ration...

National Review Online ^ | January 30, 2009 | Michael F. Cannon

[neverdem]

---

January 30, 2009, 4:00 a.m.

Daschle Care
To save money, House Democrats want the government to decide how to ration medical care.

By Michael F. Cannon

The $819 billion “stimulus bill” passed by the House includes $1.1 billion that has nothing to do with economic growth and everything to do with letting government control your medical decisions: House Democrats propose to spend taxpayer dollars researching which medical services work best. The need for such “comparative-effectiveness research” is tremendous, and this work could benefit the economy—but not if it’s done the way the Democrats propose.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Americans waste $700 billion each year—roughly 5 percent of GDP—on services that provide zero value. Reallocating that money to productive uses would essentially make us $700 billion richer every year. Pres. Barack Obama’s budget director, Peter Orszag, testified before Congress last June that “there do not appear to be other examples that credible analysts can identify that offer a potential efficiency gain of that magnitude for the U.S. economy.”

However, the economic argument for taxpayer-funded comparative-effectiveness research is shaky, and experience suggests that it will fail to achieve any savings. Under Orszag’s direction, last year the CBO estimated that a measure similar to the House Democrats’ would reduce federal health spending by a mere “one one-hundredth of one percent” over the next ten years. But due to their desire to see a bigger government role in health care, Democrats persist.

One argument in favor of using tax dollars to fund comparative-effectiveness research is that the information produced has characteristics of a “public good”: Some people who didn’t invest in the research might benefit from its results. When the investments don’t reflect all the benefits, markets may fail to produce (some) research even when the benefits would exceed the costs.

The extent of this problem, however, is unclear. It is even less clear that government provision could improve on a policy of laissez-faire. Private health plans like Kaiser Permanente are powerful engines of comparative-effectiveness research, thanks to corporate structures and financial incentives that encourage such research. If the government were to provide this work at taxpayer expense, it could crowd out these private efforts.

Also, the government is not well-positioned to reduce wasteful medical spending. Every dollar of wasteful spending is a dollar of income to somebody—and that guy usually has lobbyists working to squelch unwelcome research. For the crime of producing research that questioned the value of their services, the health-care industry has already killed the National Center for Health Care Technology (d. 1981), the Council on Health Care Technology (d. 1989), and the Office of Technology Assessment (d. 1995). The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has twice escaped the gallows, but only because Congress effectively neutered it in 1995. Indeed, the only agencies that Congress seems capable of eliminating are those that produce comparative-effectiveness research.

Why do Democrats think this time will be different? Because Health and Human Services secretary Tom Daschle has a plan.

In his recent book, Daschle proposed a new federal board that would generate and use comparative-effectiveness research to make “specific coverage decisions” for all government health-care programs and “exert tremendous influence on every . . . provider and payer, even those in the private sector.”

Daschle understands that refusing to cover specific services is “not so clean cut,” that patient advocates often view those decisions as “matters of life and death,” and that “doctors and patients might resent” the board’s decisions. He therefore proposes to have the board operate under “a decision-making process that is one step removed from Congress and the White House.”

That’s a delicate way of saying that Daschle wants government bureaucrats to have more room to ignore you, even if you have good reason to think your child would respond better to a non-covered chemotherapy agent than the average patient would.

Lefty health-care blogger Matthew Holt predicts that Daschle’s rationing board, “if it gets established, will get defanged by lobbyists immediately.” House Democrats disagree: Their “stimulus” package would give Daschle $400 million to get his rationing board going.

History suggests that government money will do nothing to reduce health-care costs. And even if Democrats could create a rationing board that could deny health care to people without accountability, is that kind of savings we want?

 — Michael F. Cannon is director of health-policy studies at the Cato Institute and co-author of Healthy Competition: What’s Holding Back Health Care and How to Free It. His paper “A Better Way to Generate and Use Comparative-Effectiveness Research” is forthcoming from the Cato Institute.

[neverdem]

When they ration medical care, you can forget about the promise of genomic medicine.

All that funding will have been wasted.

[Sacajaweau]

Always said one of the objects of socialized medicine would be the government choosing “when to pull the plug”....

[originalbuckeye]

National Health Services deny care all the time. I WISH someone would clue in the American public to that fact. I believe I heard Pelosi recently say that Americans who are over 55 are using too much of our health care resources. The 2008 stealth campaign of 0bama and the other Democrats is being peeled back like an onion. Very sad.

[digger48]

Have a friend getting robotic surgery on his prostate.(robotics lessen the chance of impotence, I understand)

350 of these units in the US....Great Britain has 6

[DoughtyOne]

Man the lifeboats...

[Tarpon]

Soylent Green, abortion for the young, and ration medical care for the old age. Granny you are too old for the procedure to be cost effective. Soon the top age was 40, you had to have a government permit for a child. Everything else was turned into food for the ones in between.

And what happened on your fortieth birthday, you had to turn yourself in to the food factory, for recycling.

Scary movie.

[ritewingwarrior]

“$700 billion each year—roughly 5 percent of GDP—on services that provide zero value.”

If they are claiming that much a year on medical waste alone, then tack on another $500 billion for the income tax compliance, and pass the Fair Tax.
Wow we just made $1.2 trillion in two seconds.
What else can we cut?

[meyer]

Always said one of the objects of socialized medicine would be the government choosing “when to pull the plug”....

And when that time comes, and it will be soon, it will be time for the people to "pull the plug"...

[browniexyz]

We have the greatest health care system on earth! An elderly lady was explaining me how in the middle of her heart operation, something went wrong and her local hospital had her AIRLIFTED to a regional hospital where the proper equipment SAVED her life. When I explained to her how fortunate she was, however, to live in America—because NO other country would expend that money on a 78-year old female, she looked at me totally uncomprehendingly. She had never heard of such a thing!!!! You are absolutely on the money!

[originalbuckeye]

I worked in the British NHS in the 80s. I am really sad that the Left has convinced so many Americans that Socialized Medicine is the way to go.

[Semperfiwife]

And I have always said here come Planned Grandparenthood Clinics where you can kiss your old loved ones good bye, unless they work in Congress. All those old people will be exempt, Daschle included.

[4Liberty]

Just like the road UK has traveled.

Here come the hospices, etc.

If we didn’t have to pay for HC for the WORLD’s poor, meaning poor illegals in the U.S., we’d be OK.

It’s so unfair that failed nation states dump their problems on us. We’re only 300 million! On a planet of 6.5 billion.

It’s bleeding our free market county dry.

[FlingWingFlyer]

The government will then be able to tell you when you ARE REQUIRED to “cash in your chips.” Once your name hits the government’s “bucket list,” kiss your ass goodbye.

[Secret Agent Man]

How Dems will ration it:

Questionnaire for Health Care Services

1. Are you white? If yes and you are a guy, you don’t get health care.

2. Are you a white female who’s pregnant? You only get abortion health care. Anythign else, no.

3. Are you a registered republican? If yes, you don’t get health care.

[HoosierHawk]

Daschle understands that refusing to cover specific services is "not so clean cut," that patient advocates often view those decisions as "matters of life and death," and that "doctors and patients might resent" the board’s decisions. He therefore proposes to have the board operate under "a decision-making process that is one step removed from Congress and the White House."

So it sounds like this board would operate as a government-sponsored enterprise, similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Hardly a confidence booster.

We could call it Mabbie Liv.

[ridesthemiles]

They can start saving money right now by denying any SSI money to the woman who just had 8 kids- all preemies- in Los Angeles.

For those of you who didn’t know: ANY preemie” gets SSI from it’s moment of birth FOR LIFE!!!

This woman just hit a jackpot of $600/month/per kid=$4800 a month- out of Social Security.
If these kids live to be 50 years old each, I calculate that to mean $2,880,000 at the current rate of $600/month per kid.

She already had 6 kids.
No mention of who the daddy is of these 8, and she is living with her parents and those 6 kids in a 3 bedroom house in a modest area of Los Angeles.
Parents filed for bankruptcy about 18 months ago, and they walked away from the house they were living in.

Does this make all the bleeding hearts feel warm and fuzzy???

Supporters of in-vitro fertilization were up in arms this AM on the morning ‘news’ shows. One guy used the words: “I am stunned” that any doctor would implant 8 embryos into a woman with 6 kids already and no apparent husband.
Makes me wonder who provided the sperm???

[ridesthemiles]

I believe I heard Pelosi recently say that Americans who are over 55 are using too much of our health care resources”

Just how old is Pelosi and when can we cut back any health services to HER????

[anniegetyourgun]

I was a preemie....but born to a military father who was told (after my 1 week in the single incubator that facility had) that they had to make room for another. So, my parents took me home and prayed for me to get to 5 lbs. I made it....and we never saw any SSI.

[HoosierHawk]

Or Mommie Med. Or Minnie Med. Or Minnie Mel.

(Don't mind me, just thinkin' out loud.)

[sergeantdave]

“Daschle Care - To save money, House Democrats want the government to decide how to ration... “

The little socialist prick wants to be stomped under the feet of several million stampeding seniors. He’s got more balls than me. Hope the recovery team can find enough pieces to fill a rat hole.