Why Obama’s Failing Big on Healthcare Reform

Reader Comments
Back to article

health care is become A drug-lords business, How many do you take 12, 15 , 19?
I have epilepsy or so the drug pushers say, And I am doing better taking no drugs. Not even aspirin. If you are looking for someone to blame, blame the pharmaceutical companies and doctors who take payoffs from them.Yes I do think the swine flu is another scare tactic to get us to buy more drugs. I have not had the flu or flu shot since my school days because without artificial drugs my immune system is strong Do not blame the lambs who are herded by the Dogs of pharmaceutical companies Blame the people who is destroying our nation out of greed, Blame the people who say "its just business" or "do not take it personal its just business" people that utter those words are not trustworthy you're just another profit source or profit drain for them.
I am 50 years old and I have gone four years without a seizer because I have not been to a hospital and I now live in a small town where I can control the stress issues I had.
Drugs are not the only answer and often we are better off without artificial cures
Don D. Brock

Don D. Brock of AZ 10:42PM August 30, 2009

Mr. Zuckerman,
Your article is accurate and well-stated. However, there is an approach to health care reform which will first deal with the fundamental cause of the heath care mess: the economic structure of health care service. This approach is technical and not political; it will result in a system that is transparent, accountable, with competitive restraints, and real patient choice opportunities.As such it will result in huge expense savings as it will convert health care service from a cost-driven system into one that is price controlled.
I believe that such reform can be accomplished as it provides no real political gain and should be amenable to non-partisan agreement [hopefully]. It could be accomplished by relatively simple mandate to health care providers.
Once this is accomplished the political game can resume as there will then be clear definition of consequences in terms of quality and expense.
Please review editorial in "Surgical Neurology" [Aug, 2009]: "The Demise of Surgical Code # 63020: Why Health Care Costs Must be Transformed into Widgets".
If you have trouble getting it please e-mail me accordingly and I will try to get you a copy
Thank you,
Edgar N. Weaver, Jr. MD

Edgar N. Weaver. Jr. MD, FACS of VA 8:57AM August 28, 2009

Mr.Zuckerman,
Have read your op ed piece in Financial Times and appreciate your perspective. Fundamental reform cannot happen until the health care economics is totally restructured from a cost-driven system to one that has restraint mechanisms based in discrete priced health service entities.
Please take the time to read recent editorial in "SURGICAL NEUROLOGY" [Aug issue] which addresses this issue.
Thank you,
Edgar N. Weaver Jr, MD, FACS

edgar n. weaver,jr.md of VA 8:20AM August 22, 2009

Mort,
You make a great argument that doing nothing is not an option. Wow, what surprise, a millionaire for wealthcare against affordable healthcare for Americans.
Americans can't afford 20% annual healthcare cost increases that support reckless media with endless advertising for viagra and that have purchased opinions to assure advertising revenue.
Cost containment means eliminating the ridiculous expenses that get charged to Americans premiums like the obscene costs of swiftboating healthcare reform. We know you don't come cheap. Cost containment means we can't afford to pay for this manufactured dissent anymore.

Hank of TN 6:59PM August 21, 2009

government interventions such as patent laws are the reason healyh care is unafordable.

Dave of IN 10:30PM August 20, 2009

Matt -
If less Administrators = lower costs, and private industry is more efficient (v. Gov't) according to your theory, explain this:
Healthcare COSTS and premiums have risen faster in the past decade as the Healthcare industry and insurance industry have consolidated to the point where there are lower administrative costs. If private industry is the answer, the costs should have gone down.
PREDICTION: Without single payer / public option these behemoths will crush any coops and the system will spin out of control.

Lance of KS 9:26PM August 20, 2009

JOHN R: WHO DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO ADMINISTER SINGLE PAYER? I AM NOT A ROCKET SCIENTIST, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATORS IT TAKES TO MANAGE THE HEALTHCARE OF A GIVEN NUMBER OF PATIENTS WILL NOT CHANGE WITH THE SIGNATURE ON THE CHECK. OUR GOVERNMENT HAS DEMONSTRATED WITH ABSOLUTE CONSISTENCY THAT IT CAN'T MANAGE ANYTHING EFFICIENTLY.
I SERVED IN THE ARMED FORCES FOR 22 YEARS. I CURRENTLY WORK INDIRECTLY FOR THE ARMED SERVICES TRAINING SERVICE MEMBERS. IN 25 YEARS I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY REAL DEMONSTRATION OF EFFICIENCY FROM THE ARMED FORCES OR ANY OTHER BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.
THE REGIONS OF OUR COUNTRY WHERE HEALTHCARE IS LESS COSTLY ARE MORE EFFICIENT BECAUSE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND LOCAL ENTERPRISES ARE WORKING WITH PATIENTS TO INCREASE EFFICIENCY AND LOWER COSTS.
MORT Z. IS ABOUT RIGHT IN HIS EDITORIAL. THE MORE THE GOVERNMENT RUNS THE LESS EFFICIENT WHATEVER THEY ARE RUNNING WILL BE. GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO MANAGE THE HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY BY MAKING IT LESS PROFITABLE FOR THEM TO BE LESS EFFICIENT, MORE COSTLY TO THE INDUSTRY WHEN THE INDUSTRY MAKES HEALTHCARE MORE COSTLY TO THE PATIENT. UNFORTUNATELY WASHINGTON IS FULL OF PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO MOSTLY SERVE THEMSELVES AND TO MANY ARE LAWYERS WHO DID POORLY IN LAW SCHOOL AND NEVER ACTUALLY PRACTICED LAW, SO IT IS DOUBFUL THAT THERE WILL BE A POSITIVE CHANGE IN HEALTHCARE OR THE ECONOMY WITHOUT A TOTAL CHANGE OF OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS IN WASHINGTON

MATT OWENS of TX 9:57AM August 20, 2009

We need a rational and lengthy health reform discussion that excludes politics and has the common interest of the country at heart. This does not mean everyone will get everything they want. There will be winners and losers but overall the national interest and what we can afford at this time should be the decisive factors.
Let's show the world that we are a country that believes in the intelligence of human beings to reach rational decisions after democratic debate.
Isn't that what other nations expect of the US and we expect of ourselves?

Terry Olbrysh of AZ 7:13PM August 19, 2009

Obama seems to be aware of this, so Zuckerman is wrong.
France and Germany have some resemblance as to employer provided insurance but have provided supplemental insurance for everyone. If we had single payer we could lay off all those clerks whose jobs clog payoffs to providers. These clerks are found in doctors' offices, hospitals, Blue Cross, etc.
But single payer is not what France and Germany do, so it's not essential. I think doctors are well paid in Western Europe though not in England perhaps. So Mortimer you are not the only one who has noticed that medical outlays are out of control. So let's control costs, not throw up our hands in despair.

John Rooney of WI 7:11PM August 19, 2009

I quite agree, it was avery inciteful article.
But it ignores the reality of our situation, That is, we have become a nation for the priviledged. Millions unable to obtain decent health care while the elite among us, enjoy programs that care for the very least of their ailments. Yes, there are escalating costs, but haven't we enjoyed an economy that has continued to prosper for the past several decades. Are we not the world's leader in developing new technology? There are answers to be discovered all over the place, but the savants who currently occupy the seats of priviledge in our Congress are want to wring their hands over this investment possibility.
If I recall, they bought into George W. Bush's program to extend democracy throughout the Middle East a few years ago, a proposition that still has us mired in an insane war that has no real prospects for success, at a cost of how much?
Enough probably, to assure a level of healthcare for all of our citizens, equal to that provided for those folks who occupy seats in our Congress.

Sherwood MacRae of TN 5:35PM August 19, 2009