Can health care be reformed?: Panorama: Rocky Mountain PBS

Masterpiece Mystery!
Miss Marple, Series IV: A Pocket Full of Rye
Sunday at 9 p.m.

Colorado State of Mind
Climate Change Bill
Sunday at 5:30 a.m.

The Ascent of Money
(Part 1 of 4)
Wednesday at 8 p.m.

Soundstage
OneRepublic
Sunday at 12 a.m.

Colorado State of Mind
Climate Change Bill
Monday at 12:30 a.m.

TV Schedule

Colorado State of Mind
"Health Care "

Watch Colorado State of Mind
Complete episodes online. Watch now.

'Critical Condition'
Check out our web page on health care, and go behind the scenes of "Critical Condition." More

Can health care be reformed?

posted Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2008 9:34 a.m.

See more on: Blogs, Colorado State of Mind, Health Care, News & Current Affairs, Vote 2008

Hello from Cynthia Hessin at Rocky Mountain PBS.

This Friday on "Colorado State of Mind" we'll be talking about one of the main campaign promises of President-elect Barack Obama: reform of the American system of health care.

With the worsening economy, more people are losing their health care benefits with the loss of jobs, adding to the estimated 46 million (180,000 people in Colorado) who don't have health insurance.

The experts say that besides being a real problem for these individuals and families, the situation means extra cost for everyone, when they use expensive emergency care instead of regular health maintenance with a family doctor.

During the election campaign, President-elect Obama and Sen. John McCain had different approaches to health care reform. McCain's plan revolved around changing the tax code and easing state regulation of health insurance plans.

Now, advisors indicate Obama could incorporate some pieces of McCain's proposals into his own, in order to forge a consensus.

But what is realistic, given the competing needs the new president will have to address, once in office?

Where would you start, to make health insurance and care more evenly available, at costs everyone can afford?

Let us know your thoughts, and tune in for "Colorado State of Mind" on the air (Fridays at 7:30 p.m.) or online this weekend, when our guests will discuss what they see ahead.

See more on: Blogs, Colorado State of Mind, Health Care, News & Current Affairs, Vote 2008

Tell A Friend

Patricia Allen
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:07 a.m.
We need universal health care like all the other industrial countries in the world have and it works much better than our system. We need to COMPLETELY get rid of the insurance companies, they serve no purpose but to raise the cost of health care and get in between the doctor and the patient.
I am disappointed in both McCain and O'Bama's plans as they both involve the insurance companies.

Herb Homan
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:25 a.m.
Despite protestations of "socialized medicine", we need to launch a realistic pilot or trial program--possibly in a single state--for universal health care. The recent presidential campaign proposals simply involve more timid tinkering.

Robert Peters
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 12:12 p.m.
I agree with Pat Allen, we need universal health care which without the insurnce companies are cheaper cost wise than our present system which leaves maypeople without helth insurance because of costs.

Cathy McCabe
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 12:19 p.m.
I believe that preventing medical problems is a basic step toward addressing health-care needs for everyone. First, we must have a clean food supply - something we now have only in the organic community. (Conventional foods are frequently subjected to pharmaceuticals, chemicals and additives that impair health over time.) Second, we must require chemical companies to prove that their products are safe before they are allowed on the market. These chemicals, too, take a toll on health over time in some populations. Third, we must educate both children and adults about the importance of choosing unprocessed, fresh foods for optimal wellness. A recent local public service announcement espousing water instead of soda for a lunch drink is an example of how this could be done.

jm fay
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 12:28 p.m.
Ms. Allan is correct. We need one universal system for CO w/o any insurance companies involved. Everything goes into the one system from medicare / medicaid; employers contributions; employees; etc that that everyone is covered and everyone gets the same level of care.

Yes this may involve rationing some care to order to get the basics covered. We need to be willing to make these choices.

Sandy Adams
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 12:50 p.m.
It's funny that no one has addressed how attorneys and lawsuits fit into the cost of medical care. Are Americans willing to give up their right to sue for malpractice (which becomes part of the insurance cost)? If the wrong leg is amputated in these other "industrial countries" then you simply wait until the correct leg is amputated. In this country, we sue. It's the American way!! The lawyers who take these suits on contingency get at least 1/3 of the proceeds and the plaintiff gets the rest. And the legal costs associated with defending the doctor or hospital are part of the entire cost equation when it comes to setting insurance rates.

Natalie Arnold
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:38 p.m.
I'm 82 years old. My father was a physician. When I was a youngster I used to argue with him that I thought we should have universal health care because no matter who you were you deserved medical care because the individual couldn't help it if he or she got ill and even more than social securiity health care was imperative. Finally, after years of arguments he agreed with me but said he hoped it would happen after he died. Well, he's been gone many years now and still nothing has happened. Too bad...

M E Smith
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 9:05 p.m.
To me it seems that the mention of socialized medicine is like showing a red rag to a raging bull. I have seen first hand the health care in the UK. Yes, it is sometimes abused but, nobody loses their house when they get sick, or neglects their health because they cannot pay for it. My son is a doctor in Colorado and he is frustrated by the mounds of paper work required by the insurance companies and how they make the rules how a patient should be treated not how the doctor wants. The insurance companies waste money when they do not understand what is best for both the patient and the saving of dollars. I think we need to have a system that covers everyone and everyone must contribute to it. It cannot be free

Just Thinking
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:10 p.m.
Have you stopped to consider how we would fund universal health care? I can tell you it would be through additional taxes. Who wants to be the first to volunteer to give up an additonal 25% of their take home pay to cover the costs of an universal health program? Not me.

Herb Homan
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:47 p.m.
Response to "Just Thinking," and his question about who wants to pay a tax bite of 25% to fund universal health care. The recent state Blue Ribbon Health Care Reform Commission studied five different reform proposals. On universal care, the cost would be handled two ways: yes, a tax hike, plus savings from more efficient delivery of care and greater emphasis on prevention. The tax would take the place of insurance premiums. The commission's research showed the net cost would be an overall savings of a billion dollars from currrent total outlays for all health care in Colorado.

Ronald William Kruse
Friday, November 14, 2008 7:56 p.m.
Healthcare for all Colorado should have been represented on your panel....Dr. Elinor Christianson...for one....please sell copies of this program on DVD....I want to subscribe to all programs on this topic.....Thanks

RJ & Buffy H
Friday, November 14, 2008 7:57 p.m.
I'm watching your broadcast (11/14/2008) tonite - with Mark Wallace M.D. speaking about 'improving' children's health care with taxpayer's dollars to improve their ability to learn. . . what concerns me, in what might be a rhetorical question, why do people continue to have more and more children, that they can't afford, they can't pay for schooling, lunches, and yet they expect the 'taxpayers' to pay for their children's healthcare, school, via homeowner's property taxes, now they want us (senior-citizens) on fixed income, to pay for their children's healthcare? What's wrong with that picture? How about legislation to 'limit' people from having children they can't afford? Isn't that a better solution?

Frank Casey
Friday, November 14, 2008 8 p.m.
We continue to look to the government to provide health care for all children. When did become the governments responsibility to take over the responsibilities of the parents? The hospitals are charging exorbenent charges, the insurance companys are negotiating for minimal charges and the public is paying the highest rates for health insurance in the world.

Stop the nonsense. If it requires the insurance companys to be able to function across state lines to provide reasonable rates or the parents required to pay for insurance for their entire family or the greed mongers have to be leashed in lets make a decision that does not cost the tax payer any more than it is already bearing.

M E Smith
Friday, November 14, 2008 8:31 p.m.
I just watched the November 14th State of Colorado program and I am very disappointed. Nothing was said about the insurance companies accounting for about 30% of the medical costs. The insurance companies are working for their share holders not to benefit the people. In addition the insurance companies mindlessly drive up the costs themselves by refusing to pay for a cheaper procedure. I know of one case where a patient required a series of expensive injections which could have been administered in the doctor's office. The insurance company refused to pay for the injections unless they were given in a hospital, which then meant the patient was hospitalized for a week. Does this make good sense? None of these types of issues were addressed.

Cheryl Harris
Friday, November 14, 2008 8:58 p.m.
Frank Casey said it so well. I have always worked hard to have health insurance and believe it is a privilge not a right. It is not the governments responsibilty to pay for health care. My son who is mentally and physically challenged, works as a courtesy clerk at the local supermarket for less than $8.00 an hour so he can have health insurance. I'm sue he would love to pay more taxes to help those less fortunate.

Warren C.
Friday, November 14, 2008 11:11 p.m.
Cheryl Harris and those posters who cannot analyze the issue properly... Yes, it ISN'T the government's responsibility to pay for health care. With universal health care WITHOUT INSURANCE COMPANIES, that WOULD. NOT. BE. THE. CASE. We all would still pay for it, but just in a DIFFERENT way, AND in a way that would end up costing YOU less than you pay NOW with the for-profit insurance companies and their money-grubbing hands in between patients and health care providers for no good/sane reason. And giving YOU and everyone else a BETTER overall health care system to boot. What part of that don't you guys get???? What part of EVERY OTHER WESTERN DEMOCRACY HAVING EVERY ONE OF THEIR CITIZENS WITH HEALTH CARE while 100 million Americans have no or crappy health insurance, don't you get?

John Bronson
Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:14 a.m.
It seems that most comments deal with some form of "Universal" healthcare. Funded by taxes or some other method. What most people fail to notice is that a great majority of uninsured people are uninsured because the insurance companies refuse to insure them because of pre-existing conditions. This "cherry picking" by the insurance companies needs to be addressed first because the universal health care issue will take a long time to resolve. If we do that then we can get the uninsured number of people down drastically.

Frank Casey
Saturday, November 15, 2008 11:50 a.m.
It amazes me how many people think the government can run a socialized health care system when they have proven they can't run anything with efficiency and at minimum cost. If you think the current economic crisis is the fault of those on Wall Street or in the financial industry you might want to look at the past twenty or more years of government involvement in the regulating and overseeing the banking and mortgage industries and the securities industry. Then look at the cost of the current health care system admistration and management and who sets the rules. Once you have done that you might want to discuss socialized medicine with a Canadian who has tried to obtain prompt needed health procedures.

Jay Pratt
Monday, November 17, 2008 1:51 a.m.
I think the people of the State of Colorado need to evaluate the amount of money taken out of the state by insurance companies and compare this with the cost of providing health care for the citizens of Colorado.
At this time auto insurance alone reaches $3 Billion.
I'm not saying illiminate insurance companys they can still insure automobiles but they need to get out of the health Business. I think I would rather go with a socilized Helth care program than a business thats controlled by the stock market were health care is cgoing to be determined by how the stockmarket did that day.

Jay Pratt
Monday, November 17, 2008 2 a.m.
I think the people of the State of Colorado need to evaluate the amount of money taken out of the state by insurance companies and compare this with the cost of providing health care for the citizens of Colorado.
At this time auto insurance alone reaches $3 Billion.
I'm not saying eliminate insurance company's they can still insure automobiles but they need to get out of the health Business. I think I would rather go with a socialized Heath care program than a business which is controlled by the stock market,and were health care benefits are going to be determined by how the stock market did that day.

Frank Casey
Monday, November 17, 2008 8:47 a.m.
If anyone thinks that the stock market and our economic system doesn't control almost everything we do and have is very nieve. The auto insurance industry may be 3 billion dollars but have you looked at how much of that money goes toward paying for accident damage and injury caused by uninsured drivers? You are correct in not wanting the insurance companys to be involved in health issues. That is where regulation and oversight comes in. There needs to be strict oversight and regulation to eleminate fraud and improper restriction of health care services. A patient should not need a lawyer to obtain doctor prescribed treatment. Those are some of the things that have to be accomplished to get the rates down. My insurance costs me $11,000 a year and I don't like that at all.

A.J.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:33 a.m.
How many people paid supplemental health insurance premiums to AIG, and will then be paying with their tax money to bail out the same company. It doesn't seem likley that the "market" will correct itself.

PRS
Friday, November 21, 2008 9:02 p.m.
Americans, understandably, have at least three criteria for their medical system, viz. 1) The best system on earth; 2) Fast service and 3) Free or nearly so. We can't have all three.

Frank Casey
Saturday, November 22, 2008 8:38 a.m.
PRS, you are right on on all three criteria. The only change I would make is that based on the recent election results I think a majority of the people want Free health care not just almost free.
It isn't much different than those that feel they should be given a $150,000.00 home even if they don't have the means to pay for a $1000.00 dollar home. Many of our legislators think the same way and that is why the mortgage industry was not only allowed but encouraged to make loans that were almost certain to default.
If we could get the Government to establish meaningful and efficient regulations with effective oversight for the Health Care and Insurance industries we might see a Health Care System that is affordable. I doubt we ever will but we will see increased taxes and medical costs

PRS
Saturday, November 22, 2008 9:57 a.m.
Frank,

I am a "mostly" retired physician and have been very discouraged with the evolution of our medical system. Insurance company greed and idifference; fearful, angry & depressed doctors; fearful, angry & depressed patients; unafraid, calm & elated attorneys. Don't get me started.

Government, effective, efficient? Hmmm. And I'm a Liberal Democrat with Conservative leanings. I'm hopeful that Obama, et al "get it."

PRS

jm fay
Sunday, November 23, 2008 8:36 a.m.
PRS is correct. A good friend of ours is a physican as well who doesnt do that any more to advocate for universal health care. She says the same things.

A while back on this same program Gov Romer was talking about this; give people basic preventative care; decide what we can afford as a state; and ration the really pricy treatments that would pay for alot of basic care.

Insurance companies earn a very large profit; play games with people's lives; cost the physicans hours of paperwork; etc. Medicare / aid does the same thing for a fraction of the costs so we do not understand why our legislature wont go with a Colocare or something similar; put all the monies in one big pot; the state runs it and we dont need any health insurance companies in CO!!!

Raymond Bilyeu
Monday, February 9, 2009 2:25 a.m.
The healthcare system has been broken since they found out that they can make money from it. Cathy McCabe is correct in that the first step is to clean up the food chain which is currently saturated with toxic chemicals in "safe levels" they tell us...right...
The industry will not correct itself, it makes billions of dollars a year from its inefficient, bloated system of streets that lead no where.
The truth is that the medical corporations and hospitals do "NOT" want to cure you, they cannot make money from someone whom is not sick. Take more pills and see me twice a week for the rest of your life so we can bill your insurance company has been the mentality for years. Sad how far the noble eagle has fallen in the land of no morality, where life is given a dollar value instead of love.

Philip R. Shalen
Monday, February 9, 2009 8:48 a.m.
Raymond, I can't blame you for being angry about our medical system but its transformation has been tolerated as long as someone else was paying the bills. It is likely common knowledge that as medical costs have increased the incomes of the frontline providers has decreased. Physicians, et al, get blamed for not encouraging preventative medicine. Please tell me who's listening to "don't smoke, don't eat so much, don't drink so much, get more exercise, etc.?" Allopaths are trained to diagnose & treat illness. We all share a responsibility to learn about how to stay healthy.

Frank Casey
Monday, February 9, 2009 10:29 a.m.
It looks like we all want to shot at this problem from a different direction. Lets consider the medical profession and the cost of their education. I wonder how many Doctors or nurses or medical technitions leave school and internship oweing less than $250,000.00 in loans that enabled them to obtain their education. Then if they go in to private practice they have to go further in debt for equipment to enable them to properly treat their patients. Then they have to pay enormous insurance bills to protect them from sensless law suits.
Then we have the insurance companies that have to abide by archaic government regulation that minimizes their ability to provide resonably priced coverage.
Then we have the good old American greed in Insurance Industry management.
Where to start?????

Philip R. Shalen
Monday, February 9, 2009 3:50 p.m.
Frank, many of us who finished medical school in the 60s never intended to or expected to be rich. Independent - yes. Always employed -yes. Nice house & family - yes. Rich - no. Disappointed - no. Those physicians I know who are "normal" rich have achieved that status with enormous effort. We are, you realize, highly paid hourly workers. The education debts, lawsuits, managed care, malpractice & disability insurance costs are just icing on the cake. I loved my patients and was always fairly compensated. Physicians have time issues - too many patients, not enough hours. Look for a different source to explain run-away costs.

Raymond Bilyeu
Monday, February 9, 2009 6:35 p.m.
Philip is correct in that it is not the doctors who are inflating the price. It is all the little things between the doctor and his patient that drive it up rapidly, insurance being top of the list. I have often wondered why hospitals do not offer contractual services allowing people to purchase treatment plans directly from them, eliminating the insurance company and the accompaning torrent of paperwork followed by months of waiting to receive payment for services rendered.

Frank Casey
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:14 a.m.
I apologize for not being more clear in my comments. I do not believe that doctors are at the core of the Health Care debacle. With the cost of their education without scholarship or significant family financial assistance its a wonder there are as many as there are. It is a combination of the Insurance companies and the Government regulations. My insurance premiums would be eaten up many times over by one serious illness over. The remainder has to come from other's premiums or return on investments. The Government only has one source and that is you and me and the business community. Look at the roadblocks the Government puts in the Health Care System and then see if there is a logical resolve to the problem. Yes we will still have some people on Gvmnt care but at a far less cost.

Frank Casey
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 10:26 a.m.
Ms. Allen and her followers need to do a little more investigation into the value of our medical care and compare that with the Socialized Systems elsewhere. If the Government is so effective and efficient managing the Business of caring for the public why is it that Welfare, Health Care , Social Security, Immigration, Banking, Infrastructure, Education and many more of the Government programs are failing and almost broke. I paid taxes on the income that I am losing due to the Government's failure to properly regulate the Banking industry. I am retired and on a fixed income and cannot afford more taxes and would like to see some efficiency built into the Government systems and save us all some taxes.

jm fay
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 1:10 p.m.
Mr Casey; we need people who actually care about the public and doing their jobs without a profit motive; power tripping; etc. In 8 years of Bush; only HHS seemed to fit that bill. That is how the heatlh care crisis in CO and in the US will also be dealt with.

One system; no opting out; everyone including govt employees pays into it and we can cover all the legal residents of CO / USA with emergency care only for illegals.

Alot of people feel that mandates by the govt / supreme court to cover all kids for k through 12; including health care for immunizations; emergency care etc is bankrupting this country and they are correct. Legal residents who need care cant afford to go to the hosptial because they cant afford to be hounding for years if they cant pay; their credit hurt; etc

Frank Casey
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 3:53 p.m.
jm fay
I am not certain what you mean by doing your job without a profit motive. If you have a job earning a salary the only profit motive is to advance in that job. On the other hand if you are the owner of a business you had better have a profit motive or your business will fail. If however you are suggesting that we as individuals should have compassion for those that have health care problems and need financial assistance I don't think there is another Country that comes to the aid of those in dispare faster than the U.S.A.. The past 8 years is only a part of the problems with our Governments failure to provide effective and efficient public support systems.

jm fay
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:05 p.m.
Mr Casey:
Friends who are Doctors have complained to us about the large profits the insurance companies make while at the same time denying care. That is why alot of them are advocating for a single payer system so we dont need the insurance companies. There are making profits to stay in business and then there are making profits so CEOS and shareholders can make huge returns while at the same time people cant afford health care with double digit annual premiums.

As for compassion to those in need of health care; maybe for a very few people; the vast majority do without preventive care and that would include us since medicare for the disabled doesnt cover much!!! no dental; no vision; very little preventive and we cant afford to get sick!!!

Herb Homan
Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:13 p.m.
By implication,Jim Fay, you apparently feel most government employees don't currently pay part of of their health costs. That's incorrect, and they also pay deductibles and co-pays out of their own pockets.

1-10

11-20

21-30

31-37

What do you think?
Add your comment about "Can health care be reformed?."

61°F
Mostly Cloudy

Denver