I just finished reading Tom Daschle's book:
Daschle, T., S. Greenberger, and J. Lambrew, Critical: What We Can Do about the Health-Care Crisis. 1st ed. 2008, New York: St. Martin's Press. 226.
Given that Mr. Daschle is the new Secretary of Health and Human Services by President Obama, this book, which outlines his beliefs on what should be done to mend our "broken" health-care system, is required reading for anyone hoping to understand and anticipate the changes coming our way.
I would like to therefore submit my “book report”, for those of you who may not have time to read the book and who don’t mind my take on things. There are only 5 chapters, so for simplicity and brevity I am presenting an outline using the chapters as the main points. For those of you who have even less time, I refer you to the final part of the outline, section 6. This is where I highlight what I consider to be the main points of the book.
- The Crisis
- To begin, Daschle outlines why he believes we are in a health care crisis. He starts with a quote from a certain President of the United States:
- “Millions of our citizens do not now have a full measure of opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health. Millions do not now have protection or security against the economic effects of sickness. The time has arrived for action to help them attain that opportunity and that protection.” And
- “People with low or moderate incomes do not get the same medical attention as those with high incomes. The poor have more sickness, but they get less medical care. People who live in rural areas do not get the same amount or quality of medical attention as those who live in our cities.”
- He then points out that while we might believe that President Clinton uttered those words, they were actually spoken by Harry Truman, 64 years ago! (Truman’s speech can be read in entirety at
- He then goes on to quote the figures we are all familiar with:
- 47 million Americans without health insurance
- 16 million “underinsured”
- Only 65% of people earning less than $10 an hour are offered health insurance at work.
- Skyrocketing costs
- Direct to consumer advertising by pharmaceutical companies
- Pathologic supply-side forces such as the fact that physicians both diagnose and treat illness – they thus can create and satisfy demand
- Unpaid bills become hidden taxes
- Inflated hospital bills that punish the uninsured while rewarding large insurers
- Many states have begun to act on their own, frustrated by inaction at the Federal Level
- Massachusetts in 2006
- Vermont – 2006
- California – proposed
- The History of Health Reform
- 1914 – labor reformers tried to get states to legislate free medical care, sick leave, and a death benefit
- Even though the measures didn’t pass, they scared employers
- Hospitals, looking for revenue in the Depression, set up pre-payment plans for groups such as teachers and firefighters – start of the Blue Cross Blue Shield
- After WWII, employers added health insurance as a benefit to attract workers, since they were forbidden to increase wages by federal price controls
- Health Insurance was ruled not taxable when provided by employers
- Clinton campaigned on health care and was elected
- Managed competition
- Use regional alliances to purchase or provide health care
- Offer subsidies to the unemployed and small businesses
- Pay-or-play
- Employers either join the state-sponsored plan or pay a fee to the government for each worker
- Problems with Clinton plan
- Did not involve Congress from the beginning – he convened a task force that excluded and thus offended many legislators
- Size of task force got to be too big
- Managed Chaos
- Tried to keep deliberations secret
- But they had so many members, leaks killed them
- Size and complexity of bill was too much – 1,342 pages
- 90 new councils, commissions, and other bodies
- “A big, fat, ugly bill”
- The embarrassment of the incident in Somalia (think: “Blackhawk Down”) and NAFTA diluted the power of the issue
- Health Insurer’s association and the small business association mightily opposed and carried out a successful grassroots campaign
- Harry and Louise ads
- As the decision on the issue was delayed until the mid-term elections were nearing, Republicans saw a chance to use the issue to seize control of both houses of Congress
- Sen. Mitchell pulled the plug on the bill on Sept. 26, 1994
- Since then, Congress has done little to help the situation
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
- Medicare Modernization Act of 2003
- Handout to drug and insurance companies
- What went wrong and models for making it right
- Timing was bad
- Waited too long after president took office to mount a major push for reform
- KEY POINT: Daschle here is signaling his intent to push for reform as soon as possible- possibly attaching the health reform act to the federal budget
- Wasted time trying to craft their own plan, rather than bringing in congressional leaders almost immediately
- Opponents capitalized on fears and lack of knowledge
- Congress finds it difficult to deal with health care issues because of the nature of politics and the political process
- At this point, laying the groundwork for the main proposal of the book (a Federal Health Board) he goes into a description of the Federal Reserve System, describing how its creation in 1913 separated and insulated the governance of our monetary system from the vagaries of Congress and federal politics.
- The Federal Health Board (FHB)
- Despite its merits, asking for a single-payer system is unrealistic
- Individual insurance market for everyone is similarly unrealistic “High-cost sharing leads to reduced use of both needed and unneeded care”.
- Build on the model we have
- Expand the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) and make it available to everyone without job-based insurance
- Thus everyone would have access to health insurance – either through:
- Their employer
- Medicare
- Medicaid
- FEHBP
- KEY POINT: The FHB would determine coverage
- Mental health parity
- Dental care
- Quality
- KEY POINT: FHB would measure quality of providers. ASCs must obtain the quality outcome data to back up our claims- we need to publicize it and make sure it gets into the hands of these policymakers.
- Develop national quality standards
- Pay for performance
- Coordination of care
- Develop Infrastructure
- EMR
- Community health centers
- Develop Rational System
- KEY POINT: “If there were a single standard of care and coverage in all of these programs, it would be a model for every other provider and payer”. We need to make sure that ASC services are fully covered.
- The Federal Health Board
- Quasi-governmental organization
- Board of Governors
- Clinicians
- Health benefit managers
- Economists
- Researchers
- Appointed to 10 year terms
- Would also have Regional Boards
- Regional Boards would focus primarily on promoting best practices and quality of care locally
- Staff of analysts “Charged with assessing and producing the research required to make sound decisions”
- Board and its staff would have unparalleled resource, and would produce work that would become part of the public domain
- Functions
- Set rules for proposed expanded FEHBP
- Promote “high-value” medical care – recommend procedures backed by solid evidence.
- Align incentives with care- “would counter the smoke and mirrors with hard facts on the value of devices, drugs, and services”.
- Pay providers based on outcomes, rather than services
- Make the health-care system more transparent
- KEY POINT: Guide resource investments. Here we should push to address the resources devoted to ASCs vs. hospitals
- Enforcement
- Power would come because all federal health programs would have to abide by its recommendations.
- Prospects for Health Reform
- Increasing costs are the main driver for reform – business interests, an opponent of earlier attempts, are crying for help
- KEY POINT: here again he says that the bill should be attached to the federal budget to prevent it being stalled by Senate protocol.
- Again he touts the possible benefits of the FHB, comparing it to the Federal Aviation Administration, which has responsibility for airline safety
- Health care consumers, like airline passengers, have little clout in Congress- think of the power of airline manufacturers like Boeing and McDonnell Douglas matched up against the unorganized concerns of the average airline traveler. Similarly, health care consumers as a whole have a difficult time gaining the influence held by the massive lobbying of Big Pharma, hospitals, and providers.
- KEY POINT: “The Federal Health Board would serve as a public framework for a private health system. It would make tough coverage decisions, collect evidence, identify weaknesses in our system, and align federal health programs.” I am thinking of decisions such as coverage of ASC services.
- He finishes with another quote from Truman’s speech referred to at the beginning of the book (see above):
- “By preventing illness, by assuring access to needed community and personal health services, by promoting medical research, and by protecting our people against the loss caused by sickness, we shall strengthen our national health, our national defense, and our economic productivity. We shall increase the professional and economic opportunities of our physicians, dentists and nurses. We shall increase the effectiveness of our hospitals and public health agencies. We shall bring new security to our people.”
- My summary
- Here again, excerpted from the outline above, are the key points for ASCs and the ASC Association that I identified in my reading of the book:
- Daschle intends to push for reform as soon as possible- possibly attaching the health reform act to the federal budget. We must gear up now for the massive lobbying effort that will soon be taking place on Capitol Hill.
- The new Federal Health Board (FHB) would measure the quality of providers. We have the quality outcome data to back up our claims- we need to publicize our favorable outcome studies and progress in quality data collection and make sure it gets into the hands of these policymakers.
- “If there were a single standard of care and coverage in all of these programs, it would be a model for every other provider and payer”. We need to make sure that ASC services are listed on that standard.
- The FHB would guide resource investments. Here we should push to address the resources devoted to ASCs.
- “The Federal Health Board would serve as a public framework for a private health system. It would make tough coverage decisions, collect evidence, identify weaknesses in our system, and align federal health programs.” Again – we must insure coverage of ASC services.
I hope I have given you a clear summary of the important ideas contained in the book. This is important information for all of us. We have 100 days from the start of President Obama’s term- this is often seen as the key time for newly-elected Presidents to get policy implemented, as they can use the impetus of their recent victory to help them drive legislation. We must get our message of the unequalled quality, access, and cost of ASCs into the hands of our legislators as they deliberate on these massive policy issues.
And at the same time, we need to prepare ourselves for the possibility of a Federal Health Board, as well as Regional Health Boards, and make the connections necessary to see that ASCs and their allies are strongly positioned on these new policy-making bodies.
With change comes opportunity. Change is upon us- let us take advantage of the opportunities!
Dan Simonson, CRNA, MHPA
3 January 2009