Health

Healthcare continues to be one of the main focus items in the presidential campaign. One need only read a headline or turn on a major media outlet and hear the new spin on the old focus. The war, the economy and healthcare remain the top focus in voters’ minds. American media outlets are controlled by the liberal machine and depending on what the daily climate happens to be, will determine how the Obama campaign spins the big wheel.

Don’t like what you hear wait a day

Senator Obama ran his entire smear campaign against Senator Clinton based on her embracing the war. He has been very outspoken from the onset about how he will bring troops home as soon as he arrives in office. Today he takes credit for those exact actions as the machine proclaims Bush is taking Obama’s strategy in beginning troop withdrawal. If one would but listen, this has been the Bush strategy for months. Likewise with healthcare, Senator Obama likes to roll with the machine as to which side of the exam table he sits. Initially he was all for a National Healthcare Plan embracing the American Public who go daily without access to healthcare. When the cost of this venture arose he scaled down to providing healthcare for children in a nationalized plan. When the “nationalized” concept soured with the obvious decline in quality and delivery his plan moved away from a government controlled plan to one that offered a virtual buffet of choices. Today we are back to a kinder, gentler Nationalized Health Plan.

McCain on the other hand has stayed the course on individual tax credits of $2500 for individuals and $5000 for families moving away from the employer based tax credit. Has anyone ever met the qualifications for this deduction? The McCain plan creates competition that allows the buyer to shop the best plan and hold on to it for life. The lack of competitive pressure is exactly what is lacking in today’s system, allowing insurance companies to provide whatever, whenever as they see fit. The government controlled Medicare/Medicaid system under McCain is corralled on improving technology and fixing the broken pieces that now dominate U.S. healthcare.

Obama advocates a different approach. His “new national health plan” would give Americans the choice to remain with a private insurer or enter a new government-created health care plan — similar to Medicare but not limited, like that federal program is, to the poor or the elderly. Obama’s senior health care adviser, Professor David Cutler of Harvard University, also a trained economist, says the new program would be regulated by a National Health Insurance Exchange and offer Americans a benefits package roughly equal to the one members of Congress receive through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. A trained economist focuses on the delivery but will he be available to calculate the cost? The initial calculation is posted at $7000 which is roughly $5000 less than we pay now as a household. So the obvious question becomes how do we pay less and get more.
“What the national health insurance exchanges are all about is bringing the benefits of big firms to individuals and to small firms,” Cutler told FOX News. “So you take individuals and small firms, and say, ‘Look, let’s bring them together, and let’s set the rules of the road the same way that they are for big firms.’ But this is the reason for big and small, they differ in their delivery. You don’t have to be an economist to determine if you are big you must provide less or if you are small it will cost you more.
Who pays the bill? Because the candidates must specify how they plan to pay for their proposals, however, the debate over health care ultimately becomes a debate over tax policy. The McCain campaign argues that Obama, in order to cover the 47 million uninsured Americans with benefits akin to those enjoyed by members of Congress, will have to raise taxes dramatically. The Obama campaign argues that McCain, to make good on his promise to extend the tax cuts enacted by President Bush and Congress seven years ago, will leave the uninsured uncovered and do nothing to reduce premiums for those who are already covered.
So the obvious answer is giving everyone Congressional strength healthcare including the highly over inflated 50 million Americans who are not insured. In fact competition creates price control and one can only examine the facts and know there are truly only about 10 million uninsured in the U.S. and eliminating healthcare for illegals will not only pay for the 10 but supply the nations physicians with electronic medical records.

The big wheel spins.

We are reminded daily of the rising costs of healthcare and for that matter the rising costs of everything. The economy is pushing us into action to find alternative fuel sources and oil reserves. We search daily for lower priced items at the grocery or retail outlets. Cost saving measures and alternatives are the focus of almost every American Company except for Washington. The absolute waste occurring daily in healthcare has gotten us into a deep hole and the hole gets deeper.

Warning Signs

The best barometer for the healthcare hole is any politician running for office or recognition has healthcare on the short list. Healthcare is a very hot issue in the presidential election and has the candidates choosing drastic sides. Employer health care costs are poised to rise almost 10 percent in 2008 — more than double the annual inflation rate — and nearly that much again in 2009. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Monday “spending on health care is the single-largest component of overall consumer spending — larger than spending on either housing or food. For the federal government, spending on health care accounts for about one-quarter of total spending. By 2050, it will account for almost one half,” Bernanke said.

Keep on Digging

We recognize the issue day in and day out. Healthcare costs and those being left without, make up the headlines every single day. We push the panic button to correct all of our other economic disasters yet we continue to overlook the issues that are easily and inexpensively corrected.

Medicaid paid out $63 billion in 2006 that should have been paid by private insurers. The amount saved by Medicaid alone would pay for technology to be in place, drastically reducing healthcare costs. We allow 11 million illegal aliens to partake of our healthcare and you and I foot the bill for $250 billion per year. Our healthcare technology system has been stuck in the 20th century. We spend $0.80 of every healthcare dollar on paper. American physicians have not adapted to an electronic record which would save over a $500 billion yearly. Physicians are forced to duplicate expensive tests such as MRI’s and blood tests because they do not have access to electronic records from the hospital or referring physician a $50 billion issue. This practice also causes malpractice premiums to soar as physicians live in fear of lawsuits. The incidence of patients harmed by medication mistakes is 1.5 million people per year – an average of one per day – and 7000 are killed. The cost of not having existing technology in place costs $3.5 billion per year.

In recent months CMS (Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services) has closed enrollment on software vendors connecting directly to it for claims submission, insurance verification and claims remittance. Each of these services adds a surcharge to your insurance claim. This action is locking out dramatic costs savings for the physician and the patient. Our insurance claims are submitted typically through a clearing house creating a per claim charge to the physician for these services. Companies such as ASCENT who connect directly to CMS are able to verify insurance, claims status and connect directly to the insurance company saving the physician and thus the patient thousands of dollars per year with these added efficiencies in Electronic Health Record delivery. Yet CMS, our federal government, has blocked cost saving technology from being deployed where it is needed the most.

Throw me a rope

Improving the performance of our health care system is without a doubt one of the most important challenges our nation faces. The technology exists today to prevent a single dollar from mistakenly being spent by Medicaid and Medicare. We should establish association health plans for small business, reform frivolous lawsuits for medical liability and give the consumer the freedom to buy insurance anywhere. Most importantly, we as a country must focus on health and wellness through prevention and be proactive in our own healthcare. We currently spend only $0.04 of every healthcare dollar on prevention. The role of the federal government should be that of enabler, not problem-solver, the engine of healthcare reform. The consumer will drive reform as long as the incentives are aligned around the patient and the physician is again given the reigns to deliver our superior healthcare system. We must educate the public on the need for – privacy and security and the issue of cost.

The cost of illegal aliens alone would place existing technology in the hands of healthcare providers and fund the healthcare programs of either candidate. Add to this the additional savings we have explored every week and we begin to fund additional life saving programs and technology. Get the government out of healthcare, problem solved, climb out of the hole.

We finally have a defined Presidential Race. It seems Barack Obama will be taking on John McCain in the upcoming presidential race. The question one must ask is will we begin to see the details of true healthcare reform or will we continue to see the uneducated misinformation that currently plagues the industry itself. Whatever your flavor let the games begin.

Universal Healthcare All is Lost

I couldn’t help but laugh this past week as the Democrats finally declared a contender so to speak. It was proclaimed by the Wall Street Journal as soon as Senator Clinton “suspended” her bid for the Democratic Nomination that it was a major setback for the national healthcare system. We will all certainly perish from high blood pressure, obesity, diabetes or premature infant death with Clinton out of the race. It seems we have been saved from less is more or in other words higher taxes for less of a delivery of healthcare.

If you recall the Clinton plan would push for a universal healthcare plan that would limit what Americans pay for health insurance to no more than 10 percent of their income. Clinton said she would like to cap health insurance premiums at 5 percent to 10 percent of income. The average cost of a family policy bought by an individual in 2006 was 10 percent of the median family income of $58,526, according to America’s Health Insurance Plans and by the way everyone would have it. So where is the disparity? According to Clinton it lies in the “47 million uninsured” that we have proven to be way off the numbers. Supplying healthcare to these at the current rate would add more than a trillion dollars to the current cost of healthcare. So the solution under the national plan must certainly be to cut the amount we pay now and subsidize the 47 million. Where does the money come from, but I digress.

Where do we go from here?

We can now look at two opposing sides and determine the outlook of healthcare in the coming 4 years. One thing is certain, as enormous as the healthcare industry is at this time, nothing will happen fast.

While the Democratic candidate wants to use government as a lever to aid the 47 million people in the U.S. without health insurance, Sen. John McCain would rely much more heavily on the free market. The likely Republican nominee has begun charging that his Democratic rival “wants government to take over the health-care system.”

Obama attacked McCain’s health care plan for weakening the employer-based insurance coverage system. McCain’s plan would use tax credits to help shift from that system to a more open-market approach where people could choose from competing policies. McCain’s plan also addresses the real issue and that is cost containment and reform. Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, agrees with the Democrats that the health system needs major repair. But his solution would stress cost-containment over assuring coverage for all. Its most controversial elements would fundamentally alter the employer-based insurance system through which 71 percent of insured Americans now get their health coverage. We have shown throughout the campaign that the issues plaguing healthcare are an antiquated IT infrastructure, the lack of controls in the insurance industry and a government system that is literally wasting hundreds of billions of dollars per year all of which are remedied under McCain’s plan.
We spend $250 billion on healthcare for illegals, we lose $50 billion a year on claims paid by Medicare which should have been private pay, and we allow insurance companies to deny claims at a 35% rate forcing physician and their patients to suffer. All of these issues and I mean all of these issues are remedied with the implementation of a national health information system that would cost a fraction of the one year losses we experience today.

It is about choice

Democrats might regret how much time they spent discussing government mandates, and the tax increases they have proposed to support broad expansions of coverage. Paying more and delivering less is not the way you want to deliver healthcare reform. That is the obvious choice offered by Senator Obama.

Using new language to convey how little he differed with the Senator Clinton on the issues, Obama joked their matters of disagreement were “infinitesimal tiny, minute, trivial, inconsequential when compared to the differences we’ve got with the Republican Party and John McCain.”. McCain is for healthcare reform, Obama is for healthcare refrain and you will not be surprised how little he differs from Hillary. Let the games begin.

Mark Tumblin CEO, ASCENT Integrated Medical Solutions

The winds of change are blowing through healthcare and in the last few years many states have taken the initiative to build a foundation for reform. Presidential hopefuls have jumped on board thrusting healthcare into one of the hot issues for political debate. The state of healthcare has been in the dark ages and reform seems to be passing through a slow burn into the 20th century much less the 21st. Will politicians create a healthcare house of cards only to blow it over with the winds of change?

How sick is our Healthcare System

We continue to lead the world in life saving technology. We see 15,000 new drugs hit the market each year. Lifesaving protocols and procedures are created daily yet we continue to operate the business of healthcare in the dark ages. Visit your physician and you will trigger a chain of events that will take up to 90 days to complete. This is the same process that Wal-Mart can complete in seconds. We pay out billions of dollars yearly in false claims and support every illegal alien with free healthcare. This happens because our current healthcare system cannot track a patient from one doctor to the next, one pharmacy to the next or bill it properly in a 90 day period of time. Your bank will record an ATM transaction before you get back to your car yet our healthcare system lies comatose to 21st century technology.

Sensing that our healthcare system might remain forever on life support, President Bush passed legislation for reform. In the last 7 years hundreds of millions of dollars have been granted to states to begin the process of building an IT network for exchange of data. States have constructed regional health information organizations as a conduit for transporting information from physician to pharmacy to diagnostic and insurance provider. This foundation is important in constructing layers of technology supporting exchange at every level of healthcare.

House of Cards

The immediate danger that lies within healthcare is to completely ignore the symptoms. Senator Clinton would have you believe that 47 million Americans are without healthcare because of the irresponsibility of the current administration. Analysis of this number will show only about 10 million do not have insurance and an issue easily remedied by the proper addition of technology.. Senator Clinton would reform our healthcare system by mandating healthcare to every citizen. This solution would require a minimum of $500 billion in new funds just to finance the 47 million not to mention billions of dollars to correct the failing IT system currently lacking in Medicare and Medicaid.

Senator Obama would also require mandates for those Americans under the age of 19 or roughly 35% of the aforementioned noninsured. This solution does not address any of the actual problems in healthcare not to mention address reform needed to change our technology systems, tort reform or government aid programs. While claiming there has been no leadership from President Bush, Obama promotes sending money to the states so that they can continue to experiment with technology reform.
The democratic wannabes would have you believe they have the solution to healthcare reform when as a matter of fact neither addresses the current issues which have gotten us into a terminal state. The failure to recognize we lose $75 billion per year on false claims to Medicare because we have not implemented the technology to track insurance is at best irresponsible. To suggest the solution to healthcare is a single payer system this week and next week suggest a multi-tiered single payer system is the solution is nothing short of democratic. In other words if what I say this week doesn’t work wait until next week and it will change with the wind.

Reform that is concrete

An analysis of the waste within our current healthcare system reveals hundreds of billions of dollars in misfiled claims, illegal payments, and an open system of delivery without controls. Information technology built at the state, local then physician and patient level will create enough efficiency within healthcare to reform it as well as support it. The cost is less than one year of illegal aliens receiving healthcare in the U.S. Shall we choose the construction of a house of cards that will quickly add to the waste or continue on a path of reform by building on the stable foundation currently under construction.

Mark Tumblin CEO ASCENT Integrated Medical Solutions

The business of healthcare at the physician/patient level is 10-20 years behind in technology. All patient records are recorded on paper. Comparing lab results and the diagnosis of the physician is a manual operation and takes several days to process. The insurance company charging premiums gets a claim that has been handled by not less than four pairs of hands who each stake a claim to the financial outcome of the office visit. Combine all this inefficiency and it is no wonder physicians collect $0.63 on the dollar and are satisfied. This is unacceptable to every other business in the U.S. why do we accept it in healthcare.

We as Americans have to recognize the absurdity of driving a car that will monitor all of its internal systems and alert us to any failings yet we refuse to channel our health information into an IT network that would literally save lives. We, as consumers, allow our local grocery store to provide us with a frequent user card that attaches all of our banking, consuming, functioning records on convenient magnetic cards. However, we allow a small faction to convince us Healthcare IT is a very bad idea because someone might have access to our lifesaving healthcare records. We have the technology at our disposal why can we not reason our way past utilizing it to increase our quality of life. I find it an outrage that we can track an 8 year old with a cell phone anywhere in the world down to a meter square yet we cannot track a Medicaid recipient from one pharmacy to the next at less than 100 feet apart.

So, do the costs outweigh the benefits or is the cost as prohibitive as some would have you think. Health IT would eliminate costly duplicate testing. If you were given an x-ray in a hospital on Monday and your physician needed this same diagnostic information on Tuesday at a different location, chances are the test would be duplicated in order to speed access to information. Connecting healthcare information alleviates this problem and would save an estimated $50 billion per year . The same technology that instantly tracks your ATM card usage can link doctors to secure and complete patient information, history, and prescription usage. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reports electronic medical records would reduce the cost of healthcare by 30% or $690 billion annually.

Health Information Technology is available to the physician that literally pays for itself in generally less than a year. When paper changes to electronic charts each physician saves over $15,000 per year or an estimated $300 billion nationally. Add to these the elimination of duplicate tests, lost charts, lost charges, coding, diagnostic testing, and on and on we need to wake up and realize the reality is we cannot afford to put this off any longer. Current technology tracking illegals in the system saves $250 billion per year. Health Information IT billing private pay instead of Medicare/Medicaid saves $75 billion annually.

The solution lies in technology but don’t be fooled as all technology is not created equal. A health IT system which is interoperable and fully integrated provides the best economy of scale as well as the most efficient system available. Systems that are fully integrated operate off of a single database eliminating the need for keying in redundant information such as insurance carriers and what they will pay for service. Total integration provides the most functionality in one comprehensive system and eliminates costly and deadly mistakes. Most technology offerings in Healthcare today have been built separately then pieced together. This positioning of systems is called interfacing but they would have you believe their systems are integrated. When they do connect the information through interfacing it becomes a costly system to maintain as each interface must be maintained and updated each time a change is made in any of the modules. Just because a system is CCHIT certified does not mean it is an efficient effective solution for healthcare reform at the patient/physician level.

The solution to reforming our national healthcare system does not lie in the dismantling of the most advanced healthcare system in the world in order to provide socialized medicine to the masses. It lies in utilizing the most advanced information technology in the world into the everyday business of saving lives. We must start with 21st century technology implementation so that it can be about the business of managing of 21st century medicine.

Health Information Technology Reforms Healthcare
Mark Tumblin CEO ASCENT Integrated Medical Solutions
May 25, 2008

Healthcare has taken a front seat in the political debate as well as one of the glaring issues in the gasping economy. Gas is through the roof, mortgages are in trouble and healthcare costs seem to prevent us from taking advantage of the world’s best system. Costs for the simplest procedures are growing exponentially and it is evident we need change. The big question is do we really need a big change or a small one.

Why has the cost risen so quickly?

We do celebrate the most advanced healthcare system in the world. We as Americans demand the best and receive the best and therefore should expect to pay for the best but our current healthcare system has given us a false sense of entitlement. The reality is healthcare is expensive.

We spend $2.3 trillion a year on healthcare of which the US government contributes 44%. Almost one third of our population receives some type of government subsidized healthcare. When so much is provided at so little cost to the consumer we tend to take it for granted. In addition, our employer based insurance system creates a false sense of cost for the employee. The employer pays a portion and the rest is deducted from payroll making the employee out of touch with the true cost of that insurance premium. Rising healthcare costs has forced the employer to shift increases to the employee casting a critical eye on the industry.

Our government run system is unable to track enrollees and what they spend and where they spend it. We pay out $75 billion dollars a year in claims that should be paid out by private insurance but we lack the technology in place to account for it. We allow 11 million illegal aliens to partake of our healthcare and you and I foot the bill for $250 billion per year.

What are the real issues?

Our healthcare technology system has been stuck in the 20th century. We spend $0.80 of every healthcare dollar on paper. American physicians have not adapted to an electronic record which would save over a $500 billion yearly. Physicians are forced to duplicate expensive tests such as MRI’s and blood tests because they do not have access to electronic records from the hospital or referring physician a $50 billion issue. This practice also causes malpractice premiums to soar as physicians live in fear of lawsuits.

Who has the solution?

Our would-be presidential candidates agree on several issues. They agree that costs are rising and reform is the solution. They agree that we need tort reform to stop unwarranted lawsuits against physicians. They agree that all Americans should have access to healthcare but they each have a different approach to resolution.

Senator McCain’s healthcare plan puts families in charge. He proposes a multi-tiered system where government subsidized healthcare is provided for the elderly and underprivileged. He believes in a fair market system creating competition with the private sector insurance providers that also allows for portability and uninterrupted coverage from early adulthood to grave. He believes in providing tax deductions for individuals and shifting the responsibility to the employee so that a focus is on the consumer and what they have to contribute. McCain proposes incentives to improve preventive care and develop a national medical records network to enhance care of people with chronic diseases. He also proposes Pay-for-performance standards that will provide substantial financial rewards for organizations that are able to meet best practices and efficiently report quality data.

Both Clinton and Obama have called for more government involvement to expand health care coverage. The major difference is that Clinton mandates coverage for all Americans. Obama would make all parents provide coverage for their children. Clinton and Obama would not make any major changes in the tax treatment of healthcare benefits just the tax increase to pay for it. The government picks up 44% now making the only way to increase coverage is to increase taxes.

Clinton’s plan would cost $110 billion a year, Obama’s between $50 billion and $65 billion. The US currently picks up the tab for almost 1/3 of Americans at a cost of almost $1 trillion. Both candidates want to ensure the additional 47 million Americans without insurance are covered or an increase of 50%. The math does not add up as we would have a trillion dollar shortfall or a trillion dollar tax increase. Either way I would not want the role of economic advisor to either candidate.

The solution is Obvious

Big changes in our antiquated healthcare technology system would solve rising costs. Adding an electronic system to healthcare would save $75 billion on Medicare/Medicaid, $50 billion on duplicate testing, $250 billion on illegal aliens, and $500 billion on wasted paper. The onetime cost, which is often described as prohibitive, would be less than $30 billion. Couple this with consumer focused changes and a fair market system and U.S. healthcare will continue to dominate the world. Solving the healthcare crisis with technology, big change, the cost, small change, voting for the wrong candidate short changed.

Mark Tumblin CEO ASCENT Integrated Medical Solutions

Healthcare has taken a front seat in the political debate as well as one of the glaring issues in the gasping economy. Gas is through the roof, mortgages are in trouble and healthcare costs seem to prevent us from taking advantage of the world’s best system. Costs for the simplest procedures are growing exponentially and it is evident we need change. The big question is do we really need a big change or a small one.

Why has the cost risen so quickly?

The reality is healthcare is expensive.

Rising healthcare costs has forced the employer to shift increases to the employee casting a critical eye on the industry.

We allow 11 million illegal aliens to partake of our healthcare and you and I foot the bill for $250 billion per year.

What are the real issues?

Our healthcare technology system has been stuck in the 20th century.

Who has the solution?

Our would-be presidential candidates agree on several issues. They agree that costs are rising and reform is the solution. They agree that we need tort reform to stop unwarranted lawsuits against physicians. They agree that all Americans should have access to healthcare but they each have a different approach to resolution.

The Solution is Obvious

Big changes in our antiquated healthcare technology system would solve rising costs. Adding an electronic system to healthcare would save $75 billion on Medicare/Medicaid, $50 billion on duplicate testing, $250 billion on illegal aliens, and $500 billion on wasted paper. Solving the healthcare crisis with technology, big change, the cost, small change, voting for the wrong candidate short changed.

Mark Tumblin CEO of ASCENT Integrated Medical Solutions

The great debate for 2008 has healthcare playing a major role as we select a president. Gasoline, the economy and the rising cost of healthcare are the focus of our daily lives and now we are at a crossroads to define healthcare for the coming years. Shall we reform the most advanced healthcare system in the world to be more efficient and streamlined for the consumer or allow the government to transform it into a generic delivery of government policies where everything has strings attached?

Facts on Rising Costs

Nationally over the last five years we have seen an increase in family premiums paid out by the employee by 24% while their pay increased only 15% over the same period. If gas and milk price hikes seem steep, check out health insurance premiums. They have increased 10 times faster than incomes in recent years, a study shows. At the same time about 1% of employers dropped health insurance as a benefit offering to the employee.

Most current information puts the number of uninsured at 47 million Americans. The majority of these uninsured Americans are of the young adult age group where it is not a high priority to the other extreme of low income families who just don’t know how to enroll. Almost 25% of this number is represented by illegal aliens who receive care by walking into any emergency room and receive coverage.

These are trends in which we should be concerned but are not as alarming as politicians and the media portray them. They do however target an issue of reform where our healthcare system needs a fair market competitive system for purchasing insurance that would drive down premium costs. We need to implement information technology for tracking patients in our public systems so that duplication of services and provision of healthcare to illegals is eliminated. This alone would save over $75 billion annually in charges to Medicare and Medicaid.

Dems/GOP

It is a lot simpler to spend more money — like the Democrats want to do — than it is to stop spending money. To provide health insurance to all Americans, Sens. Clinton and Obama would spend about $110 billion a year, relying on raising taxes and on cutting services to help pay the bill.
Sen. McCain’s proposal is one of reform to include information technology, tax benefits to the employee and a fair market system to drive down the costs of premiums. A regulated government system coupled with affordable premiums and personal responsibility to improve health initiatives and add health savings accounts makes much more sense than moving to a diluted government controlled healthcare system.

All three candidates would promote use of generic medicines, including the introduction of generic versions of biotech drugs. All three say some sort of tort reform is needed to prevent doctors from ordering unneeded tests and procedures because they fear lawsuits if they don’t, though the candidates disagree on the scope of the solution.

Either way, with annual health spending close to $2.7 trillion in 2006, experts agree that controlling costs is an important matter. If successful, cost controls would benefit every business, consumer and, dramatically, the federal government, which spends more than $400 billion a year on health care. State and local governments kick in another $300 billion-plus every year.

Pros/Cons

We do have the most advanced system in the world in place however, one in four Americans — about 12 million people — who don’t have health coverage are eligible for Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) but aren’t enrolled. Reasons cited for the lack of enrollment include: They’re not aware of the programs; they don’t know how to enroll, they fear being linked with a publicly financed program; and it can be difficult to stay enrolled. We should support an education program which consistently enrolls these people on the provided plan and keeps track of their usage through available information technology.

We should demand a fair market system controlled by information technology that empowers the patient and the physician to be in control of healthcare. Insurance companies need to find themselves competing for the consumer dollar while at the same time work closely with physicians to provide 21st century medicine at a reasonable price. Our current system encourages labor intensive efforts by physicians to collect payments, dramatic inefficiencies among insurance companies to waste dollars and the patient holding the final bill.

No Strings Attached

We possess the most advanced healthcare system in the world. The facts will show a system that is gaining yearly in healing technology but grossly inefficient in information technology. It is time our most advanced healthcare system adopted our most advanced health information technology. The facts will also show that a government controlled national healthcare system is not our guide for when it comes to Politics and Healthcare there should be no strings attached.

Mark Tumblin CEO of ASCENT Integrated Medical Solutions

Shall we reform the most advanced healthcare system in the world to be more efficient and streamlined for the consumer or allow the government to transform it into a generic delivery of government policies where everything has strings attached?

Facts on Rising Costs

Nationally over the last five years we have seen an increase in family premiums paid out by the employee by 24% while their pay increased only 15% over the same period. If gas and milk price hikes seem steep, check out health insurance premiums. They have increased 10 times faster than incomes in recent years, a study shows. At the same time about 1% of employers dropped health insurance as a benefit offering to the employee.

Dems/GOP

Dems spend GOP reforms.

Either way, with annual health spending close to $2.7 trillion in 2006, experts agree that controlling costs is an important matter. If successful, cost controls would benefit every business, consumer and, dramatically, the federal government, which spends more than $400 billion a year on health care. State and local governments kick in another $300 billion-plus every year.

Pros/Cons

We do have the most advanced system in the world in place however, one in four Americans — about 12 million people — who don’t have health coverage are eligible for Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) but aren’t enrolled.
Our current system encourages labor intensive efforts by physicians to collect payments, dramatic inefficiencies among insurance companies to waste dollars and the patient holding the final bill.

No Strings Attached

The facts will show a system that is gaining yearly in healing technology but grossly inefficient in information technology. The facts will also show that a government controlled national healthcare system is not our guide for when it comes to Politics and Healthcare there should be no strings attached.

We may spend more on any industrialized nation but we get more.

What do we spend?

We spend $2.1 trillion a year on healthcare. On hospitals, physicians, pharmaceuticals and diagnostic tools. Why do we spend more money on healthcare?

Our advanced healthcare system has eradicated 8 diseases through vaccines in the last 100 years. We are now curing many cancers and can prevent up to 35% of them by simply understanding how our personal eating habits affect our health.
From 1980-2000, the overall mortality rate from heart attack fell by almost half.

We now lose less than 1% of babies born premature in the United States.

From 1980 to 2000, every dollar spent on healthcare led to between $2.40 and $3.00 worth of health gains. Much of the technology advancements in the last several years have enabled us to be proactive with our healthcare with home testing as well as preventive testing.

How can we save?

One is to promote technology, such as electronic medical records, to increase efficiency. The other is to streamline care for millions of Americans who have chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and asthma. Early care for those patients could reduce expensive hospital stays or other avoidable complications.

A word of caution

When political leaders pass a law requiring everyone to have health insurance, government authorities must decide what qualifies as acceptable coverage. The insurance market quickly morphs into a government-regulated utility, as politicians, rather than the marketplace, determine the terms of the coverage and regulate how much people must pay for the premiums.