Bob Laszewski addresses in his Healthcare Policy and Marketplace blog a recent idea by the Congress and the White House for paying for the proposed healthcare “reform.” They want to tax insurance companies. Let’s set aside for a moment that Ohio and most other states already have a state premium tax that insurance companies pay and instead look at what this really is. It is simply an attempt to stick somebody with the price tag for the legislation currently being discussed. And since, as Mr. Laszewski points out, everyone else has fought back against being saddled with that price tag, the Congress and the White House are picking a target that the general public would never defend: insurance companies.
Well, Mr. Laszewski is asking that you in fact defend the insurance companies against this move, and he is right. It is NOT a tax on insurance companies, it is a tax on consumers and businesses. In order to pay a new tax, which will simply be viewed as a cost of doing business, insurance companies will increase premiums by the amount of the tax. Does this action help solve the problem of rising healthcare costs?
Our leaders in Washington need to focus on addressing the waste in the current system and on the true reasons behind the rising cost of healthcare. Taxing insurance companies may be a politically convenient way to pay for universal coverage, but it hides the truth that each taxpayer will be forced to pick up the bill.
Link: http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2009/07/health-insurance-premium-tax-would-be.html
- Kevin Hignett, Herbruck Alder - khignett@herbruckalder.com
Friday, August 28, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Change Vs. Security by Grace-Marie Turner, Galen Institute
The following is an article written by Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute. The Galen Institute is a non-profit research organization devoted exclusively to health policy. They work to promote a more informed public debate over ideas that advance individual freedom, consumer choice, and competition in the health sector.
Grace-Marie Turner will be the keynote speaker at Herbruck Alder's event "Coming Together to Explain Changes in Healthcare Legislation" on August 20, 2009 at LaCentre. Click here for additional event information.
Ms. Turner's article -
ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson shook his head after Wednesday night's broadcast from the White House, frustrated he had not been able to draw out more details from President Obama about the sweeping health reform plan that he is pushing.
Gibson, as well as the doctors, patients, businesspeople, and others in the audience, posed some tough questions. But most of the president's answers came from his standard talking points and went unchallenged. He spoke for 45 minutes of the 75 minutes of actual airtime.
His comments about who controls medical decisions got a lot of attention. A neurologist in the audience asked the president if he would say that he wouldn't seek extraordinary help for his wife or daughters if they became sick and if the government health plan he's proposing limited the tests or treatment they could get.
Click here to read the remainder of the article.
Grace-Marie Turner will be the keynote speaker at Herbruck Alder's event "Coming Together to Explain Changes in Healthcare Legislation" on August 20, 2009 at LaCentre. Click here for additional event information.
Ms. Turner's article -
ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson shook his head after Wednesday night's broadcast from the White House, frustrated he had not been able to draw out more details from President Obama about the sweeping health reform plan that he is pushing.
Gibson, as well as the doctors, patients, businesspeople, and others in the audience, posed some tough questions. But most of the president's answers came from his standard talking points and went unchallenged. He spoke for 45 minutes of the 75 minutes of actual airtime.
His comments about who controls medical decisions got a lot of attention. A neurologist in the audience asked the president if he would say that he wouldn't seek extraordinary help for his wife or daughters if they became sick and if the government health plan he's proposing limited the tests or treatment they could get.
Click here to read the remainder of the article.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
A Few Thoughts...
In an effort to provide insurance for the uninsured, President Obama appears to favor a “Federal Option” aimed to compete with private carriers. Such a plan would spell the end to competition in healthcare as we know it. I am not suggesting employers and employees don’t want change. The change most want is for the prices to come down or at least flatten out. However, the cost will not come down without rationing -- either by reducing services (rationing of care), reducing payments to providers (rationing of dollars), reallocation of services (taking from the older with coverage and giving something to those without), or reducing demand (people behaving differently and needing less service).
Presently, there is a limit on resources. If the supply is fixed (limited number of hospitals and physicians) and the demand increases, costs tend to rise. If the supply of providers increases and the demand stays the same or reduces, costs will tend to fall. To have any chance of cost stabilization as a nation (no increase to the current % healthcare represents in the GDP), we need to use the same or less service in the aggregate.
New and improved technology may reduce administrative cost but offsetting that will be new technologies which cost more money. People tend seek out treatments which save, improve and offer convenience – even if they cost money.
I live to the east of Cleveland – just the other side of 271. I have noticed that both the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals are increasing the supply of their services to Cleveland residents who live east. With the increase of supply, will our costs go down? I don’t think so, but I do appreciate how convenient these services are for my wife and me. I am just hoping I don’t have to use them.
Remember, eat less and exercise more – and try to eat an apple a day.
- Mark Alder, President, Herbruck Alder - malder@herbruckalder.com
Presently, there is a limit on resources. If the supply is fixed (limited number of hospitals and physicians) and the demand increases, costs tend to rise. If the supply of providers increases and the demand stays the same or reduces, costs will tend to fall. To have any chance of cost stabilization as a nation (no increase to the current % healthcare represents in the GDP), we need to use the same or less service in the aggregate.
New and improved technology may reduce administrative cost but offsetting that will be new technologies which cost more money. People tend seek out treatments which save, improve and offer convenience – even if they cost money.
I live to the east of Cleveland – just the other side of 271. I have noticed that both the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals are increasing the supply of their services to Cleveland residents who live east. With the increase of supply, will our costs go down? I don’t think so, but I do appreciate how convenient these services are for my wife and me. I am just hoping I don’t have to use them.
Remember, eat less and exercise more – and try to eat an apple a day.
- Mark Alder, President, Herbruck Alder - malder@herbruckalder.com
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
2009 Mid Market Employee Benefits Survey
2009 Mid Market Employee Benefits Survey
Have you asked yourself the following questions?
- How do my employee benefits compare to other companies in the area?
- Are my premiums on par with similar size companies relative to my plan designs?
- What is the prevalence of high-deductible health plans in my area?
- What kinds of cost control strategies have other employers been using?
At Herbruck Alder, we are continually hearing these types of questions from our employee benefits clients. Although some information is available from national sources, most of it is too general to answer an employer's most important questions.
Clearly, employers need customized benchmarking - a comparison of their unique plan(s) to others of similar geographic area, industry, and size. As a participant in the survey, a customized benchmarking report is provided to you at no cost.
The survey is being offered to companies in Northern Ohio and was designed with your needs in mind:
- Quick - it only takes an average of 30-60 minutes to complete.
- Easy - in a user-friendly, web-based format. You can complete it at any time and even save results for later completion or editing.
- Comprehensive - all of your benefit plans are covered.
- Thorough interpretation - your individual results will be provided in a clear, easy-to-understand format by a qualified and knowledgeable consultant.
Click here to complete the 2009 Mid Market Employee Benefits Survey.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Author Lays Out Nutrition Tips for the CDC
Author Michael Pollan was recently invited to speak to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regarding U.S. food policies and the Western Diet. Among his suggestions were his 7 Rules for Eating. Normally, I’m skeptical of anything that tries to simplify a person’s diet to such a degree; and I do have some issues with Pollan’s list, like accounting for those who require more protein. However, most of it makes sense.
Some of Pollan’s rules are funny and also point out what we should already know -- things like, “Don’t buy food where you buy your gasoline.” That one is pretty obvious, I would think, but worth remembering.
Other rules seem to throw down the gauntlet to those of us who don’t eat very well and likely know it. “Don’t eat anything with more than 5 ingredients.” Have you seen the ingredient lists on the stuff you buy at the supermarket? The ingredients in bread alone (even the “healthy” wheat bread!) is enough to make a normal person check out a chemistry book at the library. We don’t even know what’s in bread anymore!
That said, in today’s society it is very challenging to avoid consuming massive quantities of chemicals, preservatives, and other junk that’s shoved into seemingly innocuous food. Pollan is essentially advocating the “whole food” approach. It’s probably the gold standard for the American diet, but not easily obtained. I would suggest starting off on the path to a whole food diet by identifying the easiest changes you can make today.
Do you like coffee? Certainly avoid the big specialty coffees at Starbucks, strictly because they are calorie bombs. Go ahead and have a cup of joe at work, but watch what you put into it. There are at least 8 ingredients listed on the container of powdered creamer in my office. I don’t have a clue what the last 4 or 5 of them are, but they don’t sound good. So, drink it black or add actual milk to it.
Go through that sort of process for everything you eat in a given day and pick off the items that are easiest to change. Then, make it an ongoing process to push yourself towards healthier “whole food” choices and ditch the processed foods most of us grew up on.
Kevin Hignett, khignett@herbruckalder.com
Some of Pollan’s rules are funny and also point out what we should already know -- things like, “Don’t buy food where you buy your gasoline.” That one is pretty obvious, I would think, but worth remembering.
Other rules seem to throw down the gauntlet to those of us who don’t eat very well and likely know it. “Don’t eat anything with more than 5 ingredients.” Have you seen the ingredient lists on the stuff you buy at the supermarket? The ingredients in bread alone (even the “healthy” wheat bread!) is enough to make a normal person check out a chemistry book at the library. We don’t even know what’s in bread anymore!
That said, in today’s society it is very challenging to avoid consuming massive quantities of chemicals, preservatives, and other junk that’s shoved into seemingly innocuous food. Pollan is essentially advocating the “whole food” approach. It’s probably the gold standard for the American diet, but not easily obtained. I would suggest starting off on the path to a whole food diet by identifying the easiest changes you can make today.
Do you like coffee? Certainly avoid the big specialty coffees at Starbucks, strictly because they are calorie bombs. Go ahead and have a cup of joe at work, but watch what you put into it. There are at least 8 ingredients listed on the container of powdered creamer in my office. I don’t have a clue what the last 4 or 5 of them are, but they don’t sound good. So, drink it black or add actual milk to it.
Go through that sort of process for everything you eat in a given day and pick off the items that are easiest to change. Then, make it an ongoing process to push yourself towards healthier “whole food” choices and ditch the processed foods most of us grew up on.
Kevin Hignett, khignett@herbruckalder.com
Thursday, March 5, 2009
New Leadership
Our new leadership hopes to get our economy back on track by spending big on a wide spectrum of government initiatives from education to healthcare. The more than 800 pages of the new stimulus package describe close to $800 billion of spending – about $1 billion per page. Some experts say that spending is medicine our economy needs now.
Healthcare spending has been an ongoing stimulus package, and most employers have been at the tipping point for years. Employers and employees want to spend less, not more -- and that would be a good thing. When people pay an ever increasing amount for their healthcare (whether employer or employee – for insurance premiums, deductibles or co-pays) it robs money from other parts of budgets, thus reducing spending flow to other sectors of the economy.
No doubt coming up with a more effective way to extend healthcare or insurance to our non-covered population will be beneficial. However, simply moving dollars around is not the solution. Rationing care on the elderly has been discussed, but if the purpose of this is only to provide care to the previously underinsured, it’s more like a very dangerous game of musical chairs.
Using and needing less healthcare service will lead to lower costs. Does the stimulus package include spending on incentives to be healthy? Eating less and exercising more with better nutrition? I hope so.
- Mark Alder, President, Herbruck Alder - malder@herbruckalder.com
Healthcare spending has been an ongoing stimulus package, and most employers have been at the tipping point for years. Employers and employees want to spend less, not more -- and that would be a good thing. When people pay an ever increasing amount for their healthcare (whether employer or employee – for insurance premiums, deductibles or co-pays) it robs money from other parts of budgets, thus reducing spending flow to other sectors of the economy.
No doubt coming up with a more effective way to extend healthcare or insurance to our non-covered population will be beneficial. However, simply moving dollars around is not the solution. Rationing care on the elderly has been discussed, but if the purpose of this is only to provide care to the previously underinsured, it’s more like a very dangerous game of musical chairs.
Using and needing less healthcare service will lead to lower costs. Does the stimulus package include spending on incentives to be healthy? Eating less and exercising more with better nutrition? I hope so.
- Mark Alder, President, Herbruck Alder - malder@herbruckalder.com
Monday, March 2, 2009
Real World Example Shows Benefits of Getting More Sleep
A recent article on MSNBC chronicled an experiment done at the Glamour Magazine office. It involved a handful of women following the simplest of regimens for 10 weeks to see what the weight loss effects would be. All they had to do was get 7.5 hours of sleep per night.
The results were pretty amazing, especially when you consider the subjects really changed nothing else in their daily routine. The women lost between 6 and 15 pounds over those 10 weeks. Three of them lost a pound or more per week. The article goes on to explain that the extra sleep allows growth hormone to break down stored fat. So, we can be sure that the weight lost was fat, which of course is what we all want.
Sometimes scientific studies have a great message, but the average person loses the point in all the technical details. That’s what I like about this article. It’s not a controlled study at all, but it’s simple enough that anybody can try it. And really, what’s the harm in trying to get more sleep? We all know sleeping more is a good thing for our bodies. Now we have a real world example that shows just how good it could be.
- Kevin Hignett, khignett@herbruckalder.com
The results were pretty amazing, especially when you consider the subjects really changed nothing else in their daily routine. The women lost between 6 and 15 pounds over those 10 weeks. Three of them lost a pound or more per week. The article goes on to explain that the extra sleep allows growth hormone to break down stored fat. So, we can be sure that the weight lost was fat, which of course is what we all want.
Sometimes scientific studies have a great message, but the average person loses the point in all the technical details. That’s what I like about this article. It’s not a controlled study at all, but it’s simple enough that anybody can try it. And really, what’s the harm in trying to get more sleep? We all know sleeping more is a good thing for our bodies. Now we have a real world example that shows just how good it could be.
- Kevin Hignett, khignett@herbruckalder.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)