Immediately after his big speech last week, the Big O began dialing up the heat in Max Baucus’ kitchen.
After all, the Montana Democrat’s Committee, Senate Finance, was the only one of the 5 charged to do so that hadn’t put a reform package on the table, and Obama wants something done before the snow flies.
The pressure forced Baucus to ditch all hope of persuading Chuck Grassley or Olympia (“Don’t blame me, I voted for ARRA”) Snowe to join him in a kumbayah moment of bipartisanship and cut a proposal, like, now.
After all, the Montana Democrat’s Committee, Senate Finance, was the only one of the 5 charged to do so that hadn’t put a reform package on the table, and Obama wants something done before the snow flies.
The pressure forced Baucus to ditch all hope of persuading Chuck Grassley or Olympia (“Don’t blame me, I voted for ARRA”) Snowe to join him in a kumbayah moment of bipartisanship and cut a proposal, like, now.
That's what he did Wednesday, and lo and behold! No one, except perhaps Big Business, seemed to like it.
Baucus must be kicking himself today. Had he waited just one more day, he would have been privy to the results of a recently completed national survey which showed that 63% of physicians favor expanding health care coverage using both public and private insurance options.
Baucus must be kicking himself today. Had he waited just one more day, he would have been privy to the results of a recently completed national survey which showed that 63% of physicians favor expanding health care coverage using both public and private insurance options.
Had he gone with the public option, he’d have had the Long White Coats in his camp, not to mention Pelosi and her minions, Big Labor and the Big O himself.
Relax, Max! You can still be a factor. The real game begins today as the 5 reform proposals get winnowed to one.
In the survey by the way, only 27% of physicians preferred a plan to expand coverage without a public option. The remaining 10% favored a wholesale replacement of the existing mixed public-private system with a Medicare-like public system.
The survey was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. It was conducted between June 25 and September 3, 2009 by Salomeh Keyhani and Alex Federman of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. In all, more than 5,000 physicians from a variety of specialties took part.
The write-up appears in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Differences across specialties were surprisingly narrow: nearly 75% of primary care physicians preferred either a public option or a public system, while nearly 67% of surgeons and medical subspecialists felt similarly. None of these results were impacted by geographic location.
The investigators also asked about extending Medicare coverage to people as young as age 55. Physicians supported that idea by more than 2 to 1.
Interestingly, despite their strong support for something “public,” physicians rated private insurers more favorably on things like amount of paperwork, timing of reimbursement and adequacy of payments.
On the other hand, Medicare scored higher than private insurance on the ease with which patients got prescribed interventions and the autonomy it provided to physicians.
A surprising result of the study was that membership in the traditionally conservative American Medical Association did not predict opinions about the public option. In fact, 62% of AMA members favored both the public and private options, which explains why the AMA reversed its decision to oppose the public option last spring.
Note to Max: OK buddy, you’re down but not out. Dust yourself off, get back in the box and show us some onions!
Glenn Laffel MD, PhD
Sr. VP Clinical Affairs, Practice Fusion
Relax, Max! You can still be a factor. The real game begins today as the 5 reform proposals get winnowed to one.
In the survey by the way, only 27% of physicians preferred a plan to expand coverage without a public option. The remaining 10% favored a wholesale replacement of the existing mixed public-private system with a Medicare-like public system.The survey was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. It was conducted between June 25 and September 3, 2009 by Salomeh Keyhani and Alex Federman of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. In all, more than 5,000 physicians from a variety of specialties took part.
The write-up appears in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Differences across specialties were surprisingly narrow: nearly 75% of primary care physicians preferred either a public option or a public system, while nearly 67% of surgeons and medical subspecialists felt similarly. None of these results were impacted by geographic location.
The investigators also asked about extending Medicare coverage to people as young as age 55. Physicians supported that idea by more than 2 to 1.
Interestingly, despite their strong support for something “public,” physicians rated private insurers more favorably on things like amount of paperwork, timing of reimbursement and adequacy of payments.On the other hand, Medicare scored higher than private insurance on the ease with which patients got prescribed interventions and the autonomy it provided to physicians.
A surprising result of the study was that membership in the traditionally conservative American Medical Association did not predict opinions about the public option. In fact, 62% of AMA members favored both the public and private options, which explains why the AMA reversed its decision to oppose the public option last spring.
Note to Max: OK buddy, you’re down but not out. Dust yourself off, get back in the box and show us some onions!
Glenn Laffel MD, PhD
Sr. VP Clinical Affairs, Practice Fusion
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment