Posted on 11/14/2014 5:20:55 AM PST by maggief
It indicates that economics as practiced today is not really a science.
Did anyone independently verify Gruber’s numbers?
Any of these twits, for example?
Dr. Henry Aaron, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Kenneth Arrow, Stanford University, Nobel Laureate in Economics Dr. Alan Auerbach, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Katherine Baicker, Harvard University
Dr. Alan Blinder, Princeton University
Dr. David Cutler, Harvard University
Dr. Angus Deaton, Princeton University
Dr. J. Bradford DeLong, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Peter Diamond, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Victor Fuchs, Stanford University
Dr. Alan Garber, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Mark McClellan, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Daniel McFadden, University of California, Berkeley, Nobel Laureate in Economics Dr. David Meltzer, University of Chicago
Dr. Joseph Newhouse, Harvard University
Dr. Uwe Reinhardt, Princeton University
Dr. Robert Reischauer, The Urban Institute
Dr. Alice Rivlin, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Meredith Rosenthal, Harvard University
Dr. John Shoven, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Skinner, Dartmouth College
Dr. Laura D’Andrea Tyson, University of California, Berkeley
an email address list would be helpful at this point. this is not just limited to obamacare— think qe1, qe2, and qe-infinity as well as the statistics coming out of the CEA. it’s time to call these economists for what they are, bs artists.
It indicates that economics as practiced today is not really a science.
Did anyone independently verify Gruber’s numbers?
Any of these twits, for example?
Dr. Henry Aaron, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Kenneth Arrow, Stanford University, Nobel Laureate in Economics Dr. Alan Auerbach, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Katherine Baicker, Harvard University
Dr. Alan Blinder, Princeton University
Dr. David Cutler, Harvard University
Dr. Angus Deaton, Princeton University
Dr. J. Bradford DeLong, University of California, Berkeley
Dr. Peter Diamond, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Victor Fuchs, Stanford University
Dr. Alan Garber, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Gruber, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Mark McClellan, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Daniel McFadden, University of California, Berkeley, Nobel Laureate in Economics Dr. David Meltzer, University of Chicago
Dr. Joseph Newhouse, Harvard University
Dr. Uwe Reinhardt, Princeton University
Dr. Robert Reischauer, The Urban Institute
Dr. Alice Rivlin, The Brookings Institution
Dr. Meredith Rosenthal, Harvard University
Dr. John Shoven, Stanford University
Dr. Jonathan Skinner, Dartmouth College
Dr. Laura D’Andrea Tyson, University of California, Berkeley
an email address list would be helpful at this point. this is not just limited to obamacare— think qe1, qe2, and qe-infinity as well as the statistics coming out of the CEA. it’s time to call these economists for what they are, bs artists.
apologies for duplicate post
*Dr. Alan Garber, Stanford University
Page 1
DECEMBER 2007
Research on theComparativeEffectiveness of Medical Treatments
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
EXCERPTS
Preface Rising costs for health care represent a central challenge both for the federal govern- ment and the private sector, but opportunities may exist to constrain costs in both sectorswithout adverse health consequences.Perhaps the most compelling evidence of those opportu-nities involves the significant geographic differences in spending on health care within theUnited States, which do not, on average, translate into higher life expectancy or substantialimprovements in other health statistics in the higher-spending regions. At the same time, onlya limited amount of evidence is available about which treatments work best for which patientsand whether the added benefits of more-effective but more-expensive services are sufficient towarrant their added costs. Together, those findings suggest that generating better informationabout the costs and benefits of different treatment options—through research on the compar-ative effectiveness of those options—could help reduce health care spending without adverselyaffecting health overall.
This Congressional Budget Office (CBO) paper—prepared at the request of the Chairmen ofthe Senate Budget and Finance Committees—examines options for expanding federal supportfor research on comparative effectiveness. It reviews the current state of such research in boththe public and private sectors and discusses several mechanisms for organizing and fundingadditional research efforts. It also discusses the different types of research that could be pur-sued and their likely benefits and costs. Finally, it considers the potential effects that suchresearch could have on health care spending and the difficult steps that public and privateinsurers would probably have to take to achieve substantial savings on the basis of thatresearch—in particular, changing the financial incentives for doctors and patients to reflectthat information. In accordance with CBO’s mandate to provide objective, impartial analysis,this paper contains no recommendations.
Philip Ellis of CBO’s Health and Human Resources Division prepared the paper, with valu-able contributions from Colin Baker and Morgan Hanger. The analysis benefited from com-ments by Dr. Alan Garber, Henry J. Kaiser Professor of Medicine at Stanford University, and Dr. Sean Tunis of the Center for Medical Technology Policy. (The assistance of externalreviewers implies no responsibility for the final product, which rests solely with CBO.)
John Skeen edited the paper, and Maureen Costantino prepared it for publication anddesigned the cover. Lenny Skutnik printed the initial copies, Linda Schimmel handled theprint distribution, and Simone Thomas prepared the electronic version for CBO’s Web site(www.cbo.gov)
Peter R. Orszag
Director
(snip)
pg. 23
Options for Organizing and Funding New Federal Research Efforts
The approach that is taken for organizing and funding any increased federal efforts to support research on com-parative effectiveness could play an important role indetermining their impact. Some approaches would seek to insulate those efforts from political pressure by setting up an organization at “arm’s length” from the governmentand by providing a dedicated source of financing. Many of the options that have been proposed seek to coordinateand centralize existing activities through one entity—which would tend to give any conclusions it reached more weight—but developing several competing sources of information about comparative effectiveness could also have value.
Specific options that have been put forward for organizing federal research on comparative effectivenesss include the following (each of which could have manyvariants):
Expanding the role of an existing agency that already conducts or oversees research on health services gener-ally—and comparative effectiveness specifically—such as AHRQ or NIH.
B Creating or “spinning off ” a new agency, either within the Department of Health and Human Services or asan independent body that is part of either the execu-tive or the legislative branch. The Federal Trade Com-mission and the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) are potential models for such an option.
B Augmenting an existing quasi-governmental organiza- tion, such as the Institute of Medicine or the National Research Council. Such entities are often Congres-sionally chartered, but they are not subject to regulargovernmental oversight. Even so, the Institute of Medicine receives most of its funding from govern-ment agencies, which is provided to finance specificstudies that have been requested.
B Establishing a new public–private partnership to over- see and direct research. That option could be struc-tured in various ways, but one such approach wouldbe to set up a federally funded research and develop-ment center (FFRDC). FFRDCs are not-for-profitorganizations that can accept some private paymentsbut that get most of their funding from a federalagency that provides oversight and monitoring.
Regardless of the type of organization, several potential mechanisms (either individually or in combination) could be used to fund research on comparative effective-ness. Federal spending could be authorized and appropri-ated annually, as with other discretionary programs. Alternatively, funding could be drawn from Medicare’s Hospital Insurance trust fund (which is financed primarily by payroll taxes) or specified as a percentage of man-datory federal outlays on health insurance programs. Instead of or in addition to using existing sources of reve-nues, another option would be to require direct contribu-tions from the health sector. For example, a new tax on health insurance premiums or other payments within the health sector could be established, with the resulting reve-nues dedicated to research on comparative effectiveness.
++++++++++++
March 8, 2007
CBO publicly establishes panel of health advisers, Garber to sit on panel
CHP/PCOR in the news
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) announced on Thursday its panel of health advisers, one of whom is CHP/PCOR director and core faculty member Alan Garber. The panel consists of 18 members who will meet to discuss research in health policy and advise the CBO on analyses of health care issues.
» Panel of Health Advisers
https://web.archive.org/web/20070312225303/http://www.cbo.gov/aboutcbo/healthadvisers.shtml
Consisting of acknowledged experts in health care, CBO’s panel of health advisers will meet periodically to examine frontier research in health policy and to advise the agency on its analyses of health care issues. The panel will thus help to further the reliability, professional quality, and transparency of CBO’s work. In addition, the agency has a Panel of Economic Advisers.
Joseph Antos, Ph.D.
Wilson H. Taylor Scholar in Health Care
and Retirement Policy
American Enterprise Institute
John Bertko, F.S.A., M.A.A.A.
Vice President and Chief Actuary
Humana Inc.
Michael Chernew, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Health Care Policy
Harvard Medical School
David Cutler, Ph.D.
Otto Eckstein Professor
of Applied Economics
Dean for the Social Sciences
Harvard University
Karen Davis, Ph.D.
President
The Commonwealth Fund
Jose Escarce, M.D., Ph.D.
Senior Natural Scientist
RAND Corporation
Adjunct Professor of Health Services
School of Public Health
University of California, Los Angeles
Amy Finkelstein, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Economics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Alan M. Garber, M.D., Ph.D.
Staff Physician, Veterans Affairs
Palo Alto Health Care System
Henry J. Kaiser Jr. Professor of Medicine
Director, Center for Health Policy
Director, Center for Primary Care
and Outcomes Research
Stanford University
Paul Ginsburg, Ph.D.
President
Center for Studying Health System Change
Sherry Glied, Ph.D.
Department Chair and Professor
Health Policy and Management
Mailman School of Public Health
Columbia University
Jonathan Gruber, Ph.D.
Professor and Associate Head
Department of Economics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Jeanne Lambrew, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
School of Public Health and Health Services
George Washington University
(Forthcoming affiliation with the
Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs
University of Texas at Austin)
Mark McClellan, M.D., Ph.D.
Visiting Senior Fellow
AEI-Brookings Joint Center
Associate Professor of Economics
and of Medicine
Stanford University
Joseph Newhouse, Ph.D.
John D. MacArthur Professor of
Health Policy and Management
Director, Division of Health Policy
Research and Education
Chair, Committee on Higher Degrees
in Health Policy
Harvard University
Mark Pauly, Ph.D.
Bendheim Professor of Health Care
Systems, Business and Public Policy,
Insurance and Risk Management,
and Economics
Wharton School
University of Pennsylvania
Robert Reischauer, Ph.D.
President
The Urban Institute
Jonathan Skinner, Ph.D.
John French Professor of Economics
Department of Economics
Dartmouth University
Professor of Community and
Family Medicine
Center for Evaluative Clinical Sciences
Dartmouth Medical School
Gail Wilensky, Ph.D.
Senior Fellow, Project HOPE
Laura D’Andrea Tyson, University of California, Berkeley
http://facultybio.haas.berkeley.edu/faculty-list/tyson-laura
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.