Over the years, we've chronicled the various pitfalls of RomneyCare (aka MassCare). Long on promises, short on delivering on those promises, it's a glimpse into the (possible) future of how a national health care system would fare. Now, though, the fit has really hit the shan:
"Six community hospitals, squeezed by the economic downturn and the Massachusetts budget crunch, are set to file a lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court this morning seeking millions of dollars from the state for unpaid health care services."
Hospitals are generally taking major hits as their reimbursement rates continue to fall. In this case, the Bay State's much-touted health care initiative has left them reeling with lower reimbursements and unpaid bills. Of course, that's a direct result of the program's own struggles to control costs.
Adding fuel to the fire is the fact that the half-dozen plaintiffs are among those truly at the bottom of the rung:
"[H]ealth care providers known as “disproportionate share hospitals,’’ institutions at which at least 63 percent of patients ... are covered by public insurance plans such as Medicaid or Medicare."
That last is important: "covered by public insurance plans." It doesn't seem much of a leap to substitute "public insurance plans" with "Public Option," and a whole new can of worms becomes accessible. Whom do the hospitals sue when it's the Feds?
RELATED: Over at Ace of Spades, an intriguing discussion of health care as "supply side" driven. This insight is worth more than a passing thought:
"In the US system, there is a theoretically unlimited amount of health care available, you just have to be willing to pay for it.
You've just the nailed the fatal flaw of the Democrat's health care reform; it isn't reform at all, it's simply more regulation ... real reform would involved increasing the supply of doctors, medicines, and hospitals. ObamaCare does just the opposite, it focuses entirely on demand." [italics in original]
Definitely food for thought.
"Six community hospitals, squeezed by the economic downturn and the Massachusetts budget crunch, are set to file a lawsuit in Suffolk Superior Court this morning seeking millions of dollars from the state for unpaid health care services."
Hospitals are generally taking major hits as their reimbursement rates continue to fall. In this case, the Bay State's much-touted health care initiative has left them reeling with lower reimbursements and unpaid bills. Of course, that's a direct result of the program's own struggles to control costs.
Adding fuel to the fire is the fact that the half-dozen plaintiffs are among those truly at the bottom of the rung:
"[H]ealth care providers known as “disproportionate share hospitals,’’ institutions at which at least 63 percent of patients ... are covered by public insurance plans such as Medicaid or Medicare."
That last is important: "covered by public insurance plans." It doesn't seem much of a leap to substitute "public insurance plans" with "Public Option," and a whole new can of worms becomes accessible. Whom do the hospitals sue when it's the Feds?
RELATED: Over at Ace of Spades, an intriguing discussion of health care as "supply side" driven. This insight is worth more than a passing thought:
"In the US system, there is a theoretically unlimited amount of health care available, you just have to be willing to pay for it.
You've just the nailed the fatal flaw of the Democrat's health care reform; it isn't reform at all, it's simply more regulation ... real reform would involved increasing the supply of doctors, medicines, and hospitals. ObamaCare does just the opposite, it focuses entirely on demand." [italics in original]
Definitely food for thought.
Posts
