Skip to main content

For years we have been paying the biggest health insurance companies more and more money to insure us against risk where there has been no risk.  It's time to sever primary care from health insurance!

Risk and Insurance…

We spend nearly twice as much per capita as any other country in the world on health care yet on any given night we are treating common colds and the flu in overtaxed emergency rooms all over America.

More than a hundred million households, the fifty million uninsured, fifteen million activists, and five million business owners, all are witness to a badly broken healthcare system.  We all want it to change.  Ten thousand lobbyists, perhaps a thousand staffers from Congress and the White House, and less than a hundred real insiders have been working non stop on Health Reform for six months.

We’re frantically searching for waste in the system, trying to find spare dollars for all the unmet needs of the millions who have been sucker punched by the most inefficient healthcare system in the world.  We know we are broke; having poured untold billions into an economy that teetered for so long at the edge of the abyss and even now is only at the dawn of recovery.  Yet in these desperate hours, haunted by two generations of societal neglect and procrastination, many of us feel the moral imperative to finally get it right this time.

How can we possibly meet this challenge in these difficult times?  The answer is in plain sight, right under our noses, yet we can’t see it.  Even Willie Sutton knew where the money was.  It’s as if we’ve been paying the mortgage on a home we’ve never gotten to enjoy, never lived in. For six decades we have been paying the biggest health insurance companies more and more money every month to insure us against risk where there has been no risk.

Think about your automobile insurance.  It doesn’t cover the small stuff, the oil changes, the broken fan belts, and the tune-ups.  You pay for those out of pocket.  Thirty bucks for an oil change, sixty-five for a tune up, maybe one twenty-five for a new battery.  Would you want to process claims like these through your insurance company with forty percent tacked on?  Do you think the guy down at the car shop would mind waiting three or four months to get paid?  

The reality is that your auto insurance protects you against the real risks you might face: accidents and injuries to yourself and to others, the cost of replacing your new car or someone elses, the kind of expenses that might even wipe out all your savings and more—catastrophes and near catastrophes.

That’s exactly what health insurance should do for you and your family.  And that’s ALL it should do.

We DO need reliable health insurance policies that protect us against the enormous expenses of operations and procedures to preserve the quality of our lives, even to save our lives.  These are the costs most families cannot budget for: serious heart disease, organ failure, treatments for cancer, and chronic illnesses—the catastrophes and near catastrophes that we all hope to avoid but inevitably some of us will not be able to.

But the rest of our health care—primary care.  There’s little or no risk.  We don’t need to be insured against the cost of an office visit or an examination, or simple tests conducted in the doctor’s office.  Most of us already pay for lots of these anyway before we reach the thresh hold level of our deductibles.  These are expenses we can budget for just like we budget for the new battery.

Yet for two generations the insurance companies have been charging us for assuming risks they really did not undertake.  They simply bundled no-risk relatively inexpensive primary care with high cost specialty and catastrophic care, which of course does have risk and “insured” us for the whole package.  For their troubles, they take forty per cent of the overall health dollar.

What they’ve done to the healthcare system however is far worse than if we just gave them the 40% and asked them to walk away.  The insurance carriers are also the major culprits in the crippling of the delivery of primary care medical services in this country.  Despite the enormous profits they’ve gained from a rigged system, post-claims underwriting (denial of claim) is standard practice for many insurers.  Patients, doctors, and hospitals have been forced to navigate in a mostly paper world where insurers can delay reimbursement for ninety to one hundred twenty days for even the most legitimate of claims with a blizzard of form letters and endless requests for more information.

Doctors are also forced to spend precious time (up to twenty per cent) dealing with insurance matters, and must devote more and more staff resources to this area.  This of course further raises the cost of primary care.  It also means that to cover their increased overhead, doctors must take on a higher patient load, meaning less and less of the preventative care that has such potential improve our health and save trillions of dollars later on.

The insidious business practices of the insurance industry further put at risk the financial health of individuals, doctors, hospitals, and other health institutions.  It is no accident that sixty per cent of all personal bankruptcies are related to medical debts, and results in billions of uncompensated care—the principal cause of financial instability in our hospitals as well.

The gross distortion of the real costs of primary care that our health care system has permitted by allowing insurance where there is no risk is the major factor in putting the overall cost of health insurance beyond the reach of millions of Americans and consigning them to the ranks of the uninsured.

It’s time to sever primary care from health insurance!

The New Paradigm.

How would the new system look?  Already it is taking shape before our eyes.  Doctors and Hospitals all over the country, fed up with wasting time with insurance companies are opening up pre-paid subscription-based primary care clinics.  They offer high quality low cost treatment for the overwhelming portion of our medical needs.  Some of them are open 24-7 to relieve the pressure on emergency rooms.  And they are inexpensive, about $50 per month per person, even in the upscale Seattle area.  

How do they manage that?  They don’t take insurance and won’t deal with it.  The time they save is enormous.  Patients get unlimited access to care and short waiting periods.  Doctors have cut their patient load by half and are still ahead because their overhead has been vastly reduced and …bingo:  Doctors newly freed from assembly line medicine actually have the time to interact with their patients and more thoughtfully consider the advice they give and the treatments they employ.  

And this will lead to huge cost savings and vast improvements in our quality of   life, the “preventative medicine” our brightest health experts and economists say is so critical to our financial and personal health.  And your doctor will be smiling: One hospital in the Northwest got 225 applications from physicians for the handful of jobs in their new primary care clinic.

Economic incentives to doctors, hospitals, communities, even corporations forming their own clinics could over the next three or four years stimulate enormous growth in primary care clinics like these all over the country.  In the time it will take to set up the health exchanges we could be well on the way to a vibrant new subscription-based primary care health system largely free from insurance costs.

Instead of providing comprehensive health insurance for their employees, employers would be asked to pay for a health benefit per employee hour worked. The health benefit would pay subscriptions to primary care clinics for preventative and day-to-day health care.  The health benefit would also be used to purchase umbrella or higher deductible major medical insurance policies to cover the real health risks that pose the potential to wipe out a family financially.  Federal and state government subsidies would be preserved to supplement the health benefit where needed and in those instances where additional resources are necessary: the unemployed, the part-time and seasonal workers.

This approach should lower the overall costs enough to enable many businesses not now providing coverage to comfortably enter into the system for the first time. And it would remove the incentive for employers to game the system by cutting hours for employees so they are unable to qualify for health insurance benefits.

And finally, perhaps we should consider making it standard practice to require a formula for health benefits written into the contracts of the temporary workers, the consultants, and the independent contractors now left out of the system and hence more likely to be “uninsured”.  That would get more people covered by the system.  It should not be lost on us that significant percentages of all health insurance policies are sold to us by agents who themselves are independent contractors with no employer-based health coverage—perhaps the ultimate insult from a greed-driven cynical industry that has done so much harm the quality of healthcare for all Americans.  It doesn’t even take care of it’s own.

Originally posted to Scrapper on Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 09:39 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  I'm not sure I fully agree (3+ / 0-)

      but it's worthy of discussion. My fear is that those near (and especially those below) the poverty level will not be able to afford primary care. They don't have an extra $50 a month. Once upon a time I was there and I haven't forgotten scraping up change for milk or one last gallon of gas to get to work until pay day.

      I know I treat my auto insurance the way you suggest with the largest deductibles I can get. I always have, even when poor. The thing is, no one morns killing a car for lack regular check ups (all you have to do is keep the brakes working longer than the engine lasts.)

      Capital is only the fruit of labor, [...] Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
      President Lincoln, December 3, 1861

      by notrouble on Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 11:26:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry, not workable for some of us (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Charles CurtisStanley

      When you consider "routine" doctors' visits for someone like me, they really add up.

      $300/month for my nephrologist
      $189/month for my primary care physician
      $298/DAY for my dialysis
      $300 every 6 months for my opthamologist
      $250 every 6 months for my podiatrist
      $350/every 2 monts for my physiologist
      $250-$1500 every 3 months for my vascular surgeon
      PLUS LABS every month and IV iron every month

      You know, this can add up to a lot more than anybody can afford, awfully fast. There are a lot more costs to medical care than something like you propose would cover.

      Want to be a living kidney donor? I need one from someone with a bloodtype of B or O. Drop a note at

      by Kitsap River on Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 08:41:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The rest of the Industrialized World has rejected (3+ / 0-)

    this model for government funding. The vast disparities in health and cost are just too great to be adequately covered in a conventional financial transaction. Medical problems are not spread evenly across the population, there are concentrations for the elderly, those with congential conditions, etc.

    I voted with my feet. Good Bye and Good Luck America!!

    by shann on Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 09:59:16 PM PDT

  •  You can't break it out like that (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kitsap River, SciMathGuy

    If people had to pay every penny of primary care, even fewer would get it, it's simply too expensive.  More people would have small issues go untended and become catastrophic, and it would further marginalize those of us with chronic health issues.

    Torture: An act... specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering upon another person within his custody or physical control.

    by MsGrin on Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 10:25:40 PM PDT

  •  I don't like it. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kitsap River, SciMathGuy

    I would prefer a medicare like public healthcare plan, well and consistently regulated.  I think healthcare for profit is obscene no matter who delivers it, private clinics or private insurance.

    "They had fangs. They were biting people. They had this look in their eyes,totally cold, animal. I think they were young Republicans."

    by slouching on Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 12:39:26 AM PDT

  •  Interesting points, but I mostly disagree. (2+ / 0-)

    Tipped and rec'd for an interesting plan, though.

    We don’t need to be insured against the cost of an office visit or an examination, or simple tests conducted in the doctor’s office

    My doc, part of a university group, charges $150 for a single office visit. If I had to pay that much every time I went in, I wouldn't go. Period. The money just isn't there. Even routine tests, like fasting blood sugar, cost way more than they used to cost - and they're out of my reach every bit as much as the $600 I'll have to pay for the 3 rabies pre-vaccination shots if f*cking Humana won't cover them (of course, they'll cover the 5 post-exposure shots, plus all the post-exposure care I'll need if one of our rabid skunks actually succeeds in chewing on me).

    On the other hand, if every city and town had the kind of clinics you described AND everybody who delivers health care would take a bit less money AND I didn't have to pay premiums as well, your plan might work.

    I still think single payer is the best plan for providing health care for everyone. Clinics like yours would still be around where applicable, but nobody would have to worry about either routine care or catastrophic care.

    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." --- Ed Howdershelt (Author)

    by SciMathGuy on Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 04:02:06 AM PDT

  •  The process you are describing sounds (0+ / 0-)

    like the original Blue Cross approach which started with teachers in Dallas, Texas.  They paid into a fund that would cover them for large medical expenses, such as surgery, that usually required a hospital stay.  The idea was simple and experience led them to add coverage until the idea grew into the national Blue Cross/Blue Shield system.  Abd, as you say, things got out of control.

    But individual subscription plans in which the provider of care promises to deliver services in exchange for advance payment will not work.  There will be too many defaults, there will be much cherry-picking, and cost-cutting on the part of the provider including denial or delay of services.  

    A universal health insurance program with a single payer is the way to go.

    Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning.

    by hestal on Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 04:17:17 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site