After several years of moderating costs, there are signs the rate of increase in Massachusetts health care prices — and insurance premiums — may soon start accelerating again, exceeding a heralded cost cap set by the state last year.
Three factors are threatening to push residents’ annual health care costs up faster than the state’s overall rate of economic growth:
Comments
That's because of the MA heaath care law. And that's the REAL reason that Deval wants to raise taxes now,,,It has NOTHING to do with improving education or transportation....The WSJ reported on this several weeks ago. And if MA accepts the ObamaCare Medicaid Exchanges, the health care costs will greatly increase.
So if we accept your premise that the current law has not controlled excessive rises in health insurance, let's hear how it would have gone without it. The answer: through the roof. Our law has expanded coverage but not done enough to streamline bureaucracy, provide uniform pricing for the same services, and not allow patients or subscribers select who they feel gives them the care they want. Other developed countries have approached this more rationally with decreased costs and the same or better level of service. By the way was the almost non reference from the WSJ on the front page or the opinion page? The difference in one of accurate reporting on page one versus pure flim flam in their editorials.
Oh poor Miker6, your ignorance continues to amaze. MA has already satisfied the requirement for insurance exchanges, has had one for years, ours was the model for the Affordable Care Act. If you don't like the health care environment here in MA, maybe you should move to Mississippi, or Alabama, I'm sure costs are lower.
"".The result is that a US law intended to increase fairness in health care will make it more unfair — and expensive — for small employers"....GEE, isn't it strange how EVERY government mandated program seems to wind up having "Unintended Consequences"?
Because health care reform has yet to address the greed of insurance companies, the pharmaceutical industry, and for-profit hospitals (and I count many of the so called non-profits as for profits given the salaries of the CEOs of Partners Health Care, et.al)
It's not just greed but the simple fact that medicine is a virtually unregulated business. Can you comparison shop doctors, hospitals, clinics? Can you see a price list of all services? No. The only solution for controlling cost is a single payor system.
Why is Dreyfus from Blue Cross Blue Shield whining about costs? Consider what BC/BS continues to pay politically connected Board members! That's where the premiums of their insureds are going wastefully...bringing down health care costs could start with that kind of needless giveaway.
The Mass Health care, and Obama Care are all destined to fail, why? Because they deal with how we PAY for health care, very little to do with controlling the costs. So for all the people that post comments ask yourself these questions; are you overweight, do you exercise, smoke, ever used or know someone who used the emergency room for a non-emergency (not sure what that is: if you checked in and after describing your health issue Nurses and Doctors didn't pop out from all over and whisk you off to a room...it was a non-emergency), question your Dr. about the test or medication he/she was recommending or asked for a medication you saw advertized on TV, ever check the sugar/salt content in the processed food you consume.... you are the reason COSTS are rising.
The fact that pharmaceutical companies advertise on TV like they're selling cars tells it all...just count the number of "medical" related ads you see in an hour of TV,, they out number all the other ads combined. Why on earth should they need to advertise to the public...because they're selling a product...and we pay.
And your alternative is?
Personal responsibility, recognizing that when it comes to health care everyone pays for the decisions we make as individuals. I know I know, that's too obscure for the average person to wrap their mind around, but it's the bottom line. We, as a nation, need to come to grips with the fact that we are heading down a very treacherous and expensive road, unhealthy habits, aging baby boomers and childhood obesity are going to drive the price of healthcare through the roof.
The 2012 Massachusetts Healthcare Containment Law contained two key proposed provisions that would have specifically addressed several cost drivers mentioned in this article. The proposed provisions were that Hospitals with high prices would have to pay a luxury tax, and Hospitals in networks would have to negotiate their insurance contracts separately. In response, Partners Healthcare Chairman Jack Connors requested a meeting with Massachusetts legislators in which he stated “ ‘This is overreaching,’ he cautioned the speaker and other key House members. Too much regulation, he warned, referring to the health care industry, could hurt the golden goose."* The Massachusetts legislature obediently took out the two proposed provisions. As long as the Massachusetts government, including the legislature and the Attorney General, lacks the power to actually oppose Partners Healthcare on anything meaningful, we will continue to see continued price increases. *Connors meeting quote taken from Liz Kowalcyck, “Hospitals Mobilize on Health Care Bill; Fearing ‘Overreach’ by state, they mount lobbying blitz.” The Boston Globe 20 May, 2012
The amount of money available for health care is a pie. That pie is created by our health care premium dollars and out of pocket payments. Think about how the pieces of that pie are doled out. Every prescription drug ad is evidence of ad execs, tv station owners, news readers on tv, camera operators running the cameras, etc., all getting a piece of the health care dollar. It is no longer available for health care. Meanwhile, another disproportionately big piece of the pie is taken by insurance CEO's, getting salaries to put them comfortably in the 1%. Also in the insurance industry are all the rest of the highly paid management staff. Many of them get paid higher salaries than health care providers who are at least as highly skilled as the business team, if not more so. Again, that money is not available for health care. Further afield we have the landowners who own and charge rent for medical facilities. They get to raise the rent whenever the spirit moves them. Providers have to pay those rent increases independent of any increase in reimbursement. Those landowners are also getting a piece of the health care dollar, without being accountable to anyone for anything.
It is safe to say that lobbyists, for either side of the debate, are probably getting health care dollars, siphoned off from someone's account somewhere. Lobbyists appear to all be talking through their hats. They come up with numbers which seem to be pulled out of thin air. But it is their job to fight for the side that purchased their fighting skills. Again, the money used for that fight is now diverted from patient care. How many people are actually getting part of your health care premium who have no direct connetion to the health care you're going to need? The list is rather impressive. It could go on for pages.
Keeping health care costs down cannot be limited to finding new models to pay the direct provider, such as accountable care organizations. Holding costs down, realistically, needs to be taken on with a realistic appreciation for the vast web of people who are all taking a piece of the pie.
There seems to be a direct relationship between the price of a new Lexus, BMW and Mercedes and healthcare costs. The doctors and upper management in healthcare don't drive no Kia.
nor does Governor Patrick - who is worth more to society - the person who operates on your kids heart or a attorney for a failed mortgage company ?
I knew someone was going to play the "kid card".
How muchof the cost is brought on by providing health care to ILLEGALs, who have no right to be here but can DEMAND free (to them) healthcare, housing, schooling etc. and our pandering politicans like Deval, McGovern, Tsongas and Eldridge advance their claims at the expense of the TAXPAYERS.
Yawn. So, you're still at it, eh?
::::yawn:::: so you are still willing to pay for everyone else, huh? Our only problem is YOU expect the rest of us to pay right along with you, and your silly ideas.
I know someone on MassHealth who visits her primary care doctor at least once a week, he also gives her vitamin B12 shots. She also sees her specialists at least once a month. She is not particularly sick, but figures it doesn't cost anything and she likes chatting with the secretaries at the offices. Her allergy meds and stomach meds that are over the counter are covered. The rules that govern private pay insurance do not apply to MassHealth, so she spends thousands a month and she is not alone. "Free" for her translates to increased costs for us.
MassHealth has a 24-hour toll-free fraud hotline where you can report fraud, waste, or abuse relating to MassHealth:
Hotline hours are Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM, to speak to a person. At all other times, you can leave a voicemail message. You can use the hotline to report member or provider fraud, identification theft, or any other concern about misuse of MassHealth benefits and services.
Does Obamacare mean the MA health law will go away or will we be running both?
We will be running BOTH.
This comment has been removed.
A lot of bloggers do not have it right as far as what ObamaCare is vs. the MA health care law. At this stage, MA like 24 other states has accepted responsiblity for implementing the Medcaid health care Exchanges. That's because they re expecting to receive "Free Money" from the Federal government for startup costs. ..No state, including MA has actually set up Medicaid Exchanges. The hospital lobbies in every state has asked governors to accept the federal money. But what none of the states' governors want to hear is that the Free Money spigot will be reduced or end in short order afterwards...But then when the states want to reduce coverage Kathleen Sibelius will invoke the "Maingtenance of Effort" provision in the Act. That states once a state has accepted federal money that a state cannot reduce coverage for any reason..Even if this means that the state has to cut essential services elsewhere..In the worst case scenario, in order to avoid being SUED by the Justice department, a state would have to declare bankrupcy...If you don't believe this, I would suggest that you READ THE LAW...Since the Globe never will supply a link to the 2009 Affordable patient care and Protection Act, here is a link...
The Affordable care Act 2209 pages PDF
Read the part about "Maintenance of Effort"
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/resources/authorities/patient-protection.pdf