AP source: $2 trillion offered in health savings from health care industry

[babylonsister]

AP source: $2 trillion offered in health savings

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Top representatives of the health care industry plan to offer $2 trillion in cost reductions over 10 years in a bid to help pass President Barack Obama's health overhaul, a source familiar with the negotiations said Sunday.

Industry officials representing health insurers, hospitals, doctors, drug makers and a major labor union plan to be at White House on Monday to present the offer.

Costs have emerged as the biggest obstacle to Obama's ambitious plan to provide health insurance for everybody. The upfront tab for the federal government from Obama's proposed expansion of health coverage will be due right away while the savings he expects from wringing waste and inefficiency from the health care system will take longer to show up.

A source outside the administration told The Associated Press that the savings would come from slowing projected cost increases by a small percentage each year for 10 years. The result over time would be an estimated $2 trillion in savings on health care costs. The source requested anonymity in order to speak before the public announcement.

In a rare move before the administration has unveiled all the details of its proposal, the industry groups are trying to strike a deal now with Obama officials to help get coverage for all Americans in the hopes they can stave off legislation that would restrict their profitability in future years. Obama has courted industry and provider groups; he invited representatives to a health care summit discussion at the White House. There is a sense among some of the groups that this may be the best opportunity to strike a deal before public opinion turns against them, fueled by anger over costs.

Insurers, for example, want to avoid creation of a government health plan that would directly compete with them to enroll middle-class workers and their families. Drug makers worry that in the future, new medications might have to pass a cost-benefit test before they can win approval. And hospitals and doctors are concerned the government could dictate what they get paid to care for any patient, not only the elderly and the poor.

more...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_OVERHAUL_SAVINGS?SITE=CONGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[geckosfeet]

1. Gee. I wonder whose hide those cost savings are going to come from.

:eyes:

[DCKit]

12. Ain't gonna happen.

If they don't maximize profits, they're open to lawsuits brought by stockholders.

It's just not possible.

[notesdev]

20. Imaginationland

That's $2 trillion off a fantasy scenario. It is mathematically impossible for health care costs to keep rising at present rates, in 10 years from now they'd eat up half the economy.

The simple act of tort reform - which requires only the will of Congress - would save more. The single highest expense for almost every single doctor in America is malpractice insurance.

[Thrill]

2. Sounds like Obama has put the word out. That there WILL BE a tasty Public option

And now they've shown their hand. We know they've been inflating the cost

[Coyote_Bandit]

3. Big frickin deal

I will not support anything less than single payer.

I can only dream that someday our self interested corporate financed politicians will have the political will and personal courage to do the same. But I don't expect that to happen during my lifetime.

[mike_c]

6. +1

:thumbsup:

[SmileyRose]

9. Werd

[imdjh]

14. +1

[aquart]

4. Really? Who did they have to kill? Us?

[annabanana]

5. Hmmmm. . Their blank check days are clearly over... they are

desperate to keep a "public option" off the table.

I say

FULL SPEED AHEAD!

[droidamus2]

7. Wait a minute

Am I reading this right. They are saying they will save money by not increasing how much they raise the cost as much as they 'intended'. This sounds like when my significant other tells me she is saving me money by buying something on sale. Maybe, if you were sure you would have purchased it at sometime, but if you are only buying it because its on sale then you didn't 'save' me anything you just spent a little less money than you 'intended'. What's to keep these companies from inflating the amount they intend to raise so that when they 'give 1 trillion' they aren't actually giving anything. In my opinion they aren't giving anything anyway. If they want go give 1 trillion then lower your costs from what they are today to achieve that end. Yes I know somebodies going to say that's not how capitalism works. I say who cares. This is an obvious attempt by those that see health care as a cash cow to short circuit the change for some sort of public health care whether that be a form of public health insurance or government paid singe-payer. I think this goes to show that the insurance companies are really scared that if the public gets to experience the public health care solutions that the insurance companies days will be number. Hope Obama doesn't fall for it.

Edited to add:

"And hospitals and doctors are concerned the government could dictate what they get paid to care for any patient, not only the elderly and the poor". Sure like I'd much rather have some pencil pusher in an insurance company making that decision. At least if it is being done by the government you have a way to put pressure on them, voting, to change the way they do things. If you try to make the insurance companies change they just tell you to talk to they lawyers.

[drm604]

8. The most important line of the article...

"the savings would come from slowing projected cost increases by a small percentage each year for 10 years"

So there's no decrease being offered here, just a slowdown in increases.

Not only that, but how do we know how honest those "projected cost increases" are? This may be a case of inflating the projections and then offering to cut them back.

[leftstreet]

21. ^^Yep. It's all bullshit.^^

"slowing projected cost increases"

Hell, why not claim they could save $5 trillion? $10 tillion?

[creeksneakers2]

10. It's not worth sacrificing the public option

If we passed the public auction, the private side would have to cut costs to compete anyway. We could be certain. Now all we have is their word.

[Overseas]

11. Sorry, Insurance Giants-- not good enough for a Hail Mary pass.

The savings would come from slowing projected cost increases by a small percentage each year for 10 years. Zippity doo dah. Ring a ding ding. Not good enough.

Does that mean that if you had been desperate enough ten years ago to "slow projected cost increases by a small percentage each year", you could have slowed our health insurance cost increases by 2 trillion by now? And you just didn't bother to do it?

Well then, I just can't be bothered to help you guys out by taking your "generous" offer.

A true Hail Mary would require a return to non-profit operating status. No more multi-million dollar CEO salaries and corporate jets and stock options and pharmaceutical sponsored holidays.

A real Hail Mary pass would require covering everyone. Not slowing the increases on the fewer and fewer of us that can afford insurance.

Try again you Den of Thieves!

[Crazy Dave]

13. I think it means more life saving and necessary procedures will be denied

Just a hunch

[Fumesucker]

15. Any decent negotiator never opens with their best offer..

You can rest assured that if their 'nads are squeezed ungently enough there can and will be further concessions.

That being said, nothing less than single payer is acceptable.

To me, anyway.

[DainBramaged]

16. It's amazing how quickly they offer concessions when the cow is about to be slaughtered

[madrchsod]

17. the cost of many hospital procedures are based on medicare payments

the insurance companies make people pay 20% of the bill and make them pay 1000 or more deductible. then once the hospital submits a bill the insurance company will take 30 or more days to pay the hospital.

my last hospital bill took three months before the insurance company paid the hospital. that is a nice three month chunk of change in interest.

something i have`t seen mentioned is the freeing up of wages for family and the business that employees the wage earner/s..

[safeinOhio]

18. My guess

They'll do more HMOs. You know, where you CAN'T PICK YOUR OWN DOCTOR and the righties will have no problem with that.

[hootinholler]

19. SINGLE. FUCKING. PAYER. NOW!

Fuck these assholes.

-Hoot