Should the country adopt a single-payor system? Why or why not?

Rick S. Mohler of RSM Consulting (Indianapolis): It seems to me that until Congress recognizes that tort reform is the single most important issue that should lead to reduction in healthcare cost, little else will have much impact. As for the government provision of healthcare, when can we point to one instance whereby anything has been enhanced by government intervention? I submit to you that once we have universal healthcare the quality will go down, the costs of delivery will increase and the overall increase in costs of healthcare will be staggering. 

Advertisement

Craig J. Bakken, CMPE, CEO of Rocky Mountain Gastroenterology Associates (Lakewood, Col.):
Why do many policy wonks, theorists and others keep bringing this
concept up? The problems of access and cost barriers are no more likely
to be solved by one payor than by the multitude we have now, many of
whom are coalescing as we speak.

To assume that in a country with our varied populations, geography,
economics, transportation etc., we can be served by one entity is naïve
or purposefully self-serving. Let the federal government give a single
insurance card with attendant benefits to its civilian employees,
military and dependents and finally Congress itself. Then we can see if
it works before jumping off this cliff into a model that is ill-suited
to our country. I am sure Congress would step right up and volunteer
for this leadership role in the best interests of all of us.

Share your thoughts on this issue or any other issue by e-mailing Scott Becker at sbecker@mcguirewoods.com.

Advertisement

Next Up in ASC Coding, Billing & Collections

Advertisement

Comments are closed.