One third of health care spending in Massachusetts is wasteful.

[No Elephants]

One-third of health care spending in Massachusetts is 'wasteful'
by Marisa Taylor @marisahtaylor January 9, 2014 3:10PM ET
Report: State's health care spending is the highest per capita in US, though quality and access are strong


A significant chunk of the money that the state of Massachusetts spends on health care is wasteful, according to a new report from the state’s Health Policy Commission (PDF).

Since Massachusetts was the first state in the U.S. to institute universal health care and its system inspired President Barack Obama’s signature health care law, the Affordable Care Act, the state is often viewed as a bellwether in terms of the future of health care spending.

The commission, an independent agency formed in 2012 to analyze the state’s progress on health care reform, found that between 21 and 39 percent of Massachusetts’ spending on health care in 2012 was “wasteful,” which it defined as spending that could have been eliminated without harming customers or lowering the quality of health care.

That’s anywhere from $14.7 billion to $26.9 billion.

much more at: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/1/9/mass-health-carespendingthehighestinus.html


Oddly enough, the story does some comparisons between Massachusetts and the rest of the nation today, but does not mention a single thing g about Massachusetts today versus Massachusetts before Romneycare.

Thing is, quality and access in Massachusetts before Romneycare were probably stronger than the rest of the nation, too. For one thing, Massachusetts is a blue state with a fair amount of very rich people per capita (which affects revenues from state income taxes) and a high property values compared to the rest of the nation (which affects revenues to the state from local real estate taxes). Those things affect how willing and able the state is to pay for medical care.

Massachusetts also has long had a high number of institutions of higher learning compared with, not only the rest of the nation, but with the rest of world. That results in many teaching hospitals per sick person.

For example, I get medical care at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, to which oil shieks and others of the wealthiest people from all over the world send their relatives when they are very sick. Many of the doctors there were the top graduates from Harvard Medical School and the nurses are the top graduates from the top nursing schools.

So, I would be surprised if Heritage Foundationcare/Billarycare/Romneycare had much to do with the quality of health care in Massachusetts.

But, even assuming it does: The US as a whole has the highest medical costs per capita in the world. We should also have the best outcomes in the world. We don't. The majority of individual bankruptcies in the US have been caused by medical costs. A majority of the bankruptcies caused by medical costs involved bankrupts who had medical insurance. The last thing we need is wasteful spending. And Massachusetts has been spending even more on health care than the nation as a whole.

And, while Romney has been "blessed" with having Romneycare named after him, remember three things:

The Massachusetts legislature under Romney was over 90% Democratic, much more than enough to override all his many vetoes;

Democrat Kennedy, supposedly the top champion of affordable care in the US, returned to his home state to jawbone the legislature and Romney until they agreed on Romneycare; and

We've had a Democratic Governor and a Democratic legislature since 2006 and the Governor has regularly bragged on Romneycare.

[Enthusiast]

1. We need more scrutiny.

That waste could be eliminated.

[No Elephants]

2. Spending other people's money is usually much easier than spending money

you or your loved ones had to earn by the sweat of your brow.