Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP source: $2 trillion offered in health savings from health care industry

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:04 PM
Original message
AP source: $2 trillion offered in health savings from health care industry
AP source: $2 trillion offered in health savings

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Top representatives of the health care industry plan to offer $2 trillion in cost reductions over 10 years in a bid to help pass President Barack Obama's health overhaul, a source familiar with the negotiations said Sunday.

Industry officials representing health insurers, hospitals, doctors, drug makers and a major labor union plan to be at White House on Monday to present the offer.

Costs have emerged as the biggest obstacle to Obama's ambitious plan to provide health insurance for everybody. The upfront tab for the federal government from Obama's proposed expansion of health coverage will be due right away while the savings he expects from wringing waste and inefficiency from the health care system will take longer to show up.

A source outside the administration told The Associated Press that the savings would come from slowing projected cost increases by a small percentage each year for 10 years. The result over time would be an estimated $2 trillion in savings on health care costs. The source requested anonymity in order to speak before the public announcement.

In a rare move before the administration has unveiled all the details of its proposal, the industry groups are trying to strike a deal now with Obama officials to help get coverage for all Americans in the hopes they can stave off legislation that would restrict their profitability in future years. Obama has courted industry and provider groups; he invited representatives to a health care summit discussion at the White House. There is a sense among some of the groups that this may be the best opportunity to strike a deal before public opinion turns against them, fueled by anger over costs.

Insurers, for example, want to avoid creation of a government health plan that would directly compete with them to enroll middle-class workers and their families. Drug makers worry that in the future, new medications might have to pass a cost-benefit test before they can win approval. And hospitals and doctors are concerned the government could dictate what they get paid to care for any patient, not only the elderly and the poor.

more...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_OVERHAUL_SAVINGS?SITE=CONGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Gee. I wonder whose hide those cost savings are going to come from.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Ain't gonna happen.
If they don't maximize profits, they're open to lawsuits brought by stockholders.

It's just not possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
20. Imaginationland
That's $2 trillion off a fantasy scenario. It is mathematically impossible for health care costs to keep rising at present rates, in 10 years from now they'd eat up half the economy.

The simple act of tort reform - which requires only the will of Congress - would save more. The single highest expense for almost every single doctor in America is malpractice insurance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sounds like Obama has put the word out. That there WILL BE a tasty Public option
Edited on Sun May-10-09 04:08 PM by Thrill
And now they've shown their hand. We know they've been inflating the cost
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coyote_Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
3. Big frickin deal
I will not support anything less than single payer.

I can only dream that someday our self interested corporate financed politicians will have the political will and personal courage to do the same. But I don't expect that to happen during my lifetime.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. +1
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmileyRose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Werd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imdjh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. Really? Who did they have to kill? Us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
5. Hmmmm. . Their blank check days are clearly over... they are
desperate to keep a "public option" off the table.

I say

FULL SPEED AHEAD!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
droidamus2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. Wait a minute
Edited on Sun May-10-09 04:23 PM by droidamus2
Am I reading this right. They are saying they will save money by not increasing how much they raise the cost as much as they 'intended'. This sounds like when my significant other tells me she is saving me money by buying something on sale. Maybe, if you were sure you would have purchased it at sometime, but if you are only buying it because its on sale then you didn't 'save' me anything you just spent a little less money than you 'intended'. What's to keep these companies from inflating the amount they intend to raise so that when they 'give 1 trillion' they aren't actually giving anything. In my opinion they aren't giving anything anyway. If they want go give 1 trillion then lower your costs from what they are today to achieve that end. Yes I know somebodies going to say that's not how capitalism works. I say who cares. This is an obvious attempt by those that see health care as a cash cow to short circuit the change for some sort of public health care whether that be a form of public health insurance or government paid singe-payer. I think this goes to show that the insurance companies are really scared that if the public gets to experience the public health care solutions that the insurance companies days will be number. Hope Obama doesn't fall for it.

Edited to add:

"And hospitals and doctors are concerned the government could dictate what they get paid to care for any patient, not only the elderly and the poor". Sure like I'd much rather have some pencil pusher in an insurance company making that decision. At least if it is being done by the government you have a way to put pressure on them, voting, to change the way they do things. If you try to make the insurance companies change they just tell you to talk to they lawyers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. The most important line of the article...
"the savings would come from slowing projected cost increases by a small percentage each year for 10 years"

So there's no decrease being offered here, just a slowdown in increases.

Not only that, but how do we know how honest those "projected cost increases" are? This may be a case of inflating the projections and then offering to cut them back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-11-09 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
21. ^^Yep. It's all bullshit.^^
"slowing projected cost increases"

Hell, why not claim they could save $5 trillion? $10 tillion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
10. It's not worth sacrificing the public option
If we passed the public auction, the private side would have to cut costs to compete anyway. We could be certain. Now all we have is their word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
11. Sorry, Insurance Giants-- not good enough for a Hail Mary pass.
The savings would come from slowing projected cost increases by a small percentage each year for 10 years. Zippity doo dah. Ring a ding ding. Not good enough.

Does that mean that if you had been desperate enough ten years ago to "slow projected cost increases by a small percentage each year", you could have slowed our health insurance cost increases by 2 trillion by now? And you just didn't bother to do it?

Well then, I just can't be bothered to help you guys out by taking your "generous" offer.

A true Hail Mary would require a return to non-profit operating status. No more multi-million dollar CEO salaries and corporate jets and stock options and pharmaceutical sponsored holidays.

A real Hail Mary pass would require covering everyone. Not slowing the increases on the fewer and fewer of us that can afford insurance.

Try again you Den of Thieves!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crazy Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:48 PM
Response to Original message
13. I think it means more life saving and necessary procedures will be denied
Just a hunch
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
15. Any decent negotiator never opens with their best offer..
You can rest assured that if their 'nads are squeezed ungently enough there can and will be further concessions.

That being said, nothing less than single payer is acceptable.

To me, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
16. It's amazing how quickly they offer concessions when the cow is about to be slaughtered
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
17. the cost of many hospital procedures are based on medicare payments
the insurance companies make people pay 20% of the bill and make them pay 1000 or more deductible. then once the hospital submits a bill the insurance company will take 30 or more days to pay the hospital.

my last hospital bill took three months before the insurance company paid the hospital. that is a nice three month chunk of change in interest.

something i have`t seen mentioned is the freeing up of wages for family and the business that employees the wage earner/s..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
18. My guess
They'll do more HMOs. You know, where you CAN'T PICK YOUR OWN DOCTOR and the righties will have no problem with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-10-09 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
19. SINGLE. FUCKING. PAYER. NOW!
Fuck these assholes.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC