Hey! It's Only Money
In my previous post I gave you a link to recent 60 Minutes story of how Medicare has become the object of constant fraud and abuse costing the American taxpayer "an estimated" 60 Billion dollars per year. Estimated?!? We all know how accurate government estimates can be. I suspect that it's higher.
In his story Steve Kroft interviewed Kim Brand the current director of the Medicare's Office of Program Integrity. Ms. Brand was quite aware of the problem and pleaded futility in her response. She said that her office was currently trying to stem the tide of abuse by tightening enrollment standards for Medicare resellers. I should think so! But there have to be more options!
Ms. Brand argued inadequate funding, I'll paraphrase "..but the problem is so big and we are so underfunded". How can they afford to pay all these fraudulent claims without batting an eye? But when it comes to funding fraud prevention it seems that they just can't afford it.
This is the same problem that castrated the SEC and caused most of the abuse and fraud in the Markets. The refusal by government to enforce existing laws and to leave 'planet sized' holes in the system! This is the direct cause of the financial crisis that we are all suffering. And this same government now wants to take its considerable experience in the matter to Prime Time. Government controlled health care for all. Yeah I know it won't apply to us (the Middle Class)...yet. But we all will have to pay its costs anyway, as we do now.
Don't you think that when we are dealing with mandates that are funded by the hard work and sweat of every American that the government should take better care of the money? In the grand scheme of things $60 billions isn't all that much. It's only 6 percent of a trillion dollars and six percent isn't that much at all! Really! When people like Barney Frank and Barak Obama casually toss around 13 digit numbers with one word, 60 billions can become downright plebian.
But when you write it out, the real cost, with all the numbers included; then the outrage becomes real.
$60,000,000,000.00
Oh and a Trillion?
$1,000,000,000,000.00
No wonder they just say the word, Trillion, it makes the number much less frightening. It almost sounds nice and friendly! Trillion.... Trillion....Trillion.... Trillion!
I've got an idea! How about a we pass a law that requires politicians and government officials to pronounce every single zero when discussing any number over Ten. How long would it take before the budget is down to One, Zero, Zero Dollars?
meh
| Print article | This entry was posted by Jim on 10/28/09 at 09:57:23 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |
-
-
«60 minutes» bad banks «british petroleum» «chroma key lamp green screen ethics yada yada» «cover up» ddx616 debate «dylan ratigan» e-waste ebay «exotic hardwoods» facebook future «goverment supplied» «health care» «health care bill» «individual mandate» jimmersd «just plain wrong» krumbination legislation manufacturer «medicare fraud» msnbc mtv omfg «pay per view» paypal pl..eas..e! «rachel maddow» «really? not recommended» «resulting in environmental catastrophe» rules «shadow inventory» sumbeam ted theory «they can't even control this» «what actually happened»
Sub to me on
Except where otherwise noted, content on: "Jimmer's Colossal Waste of Time" is licensed under
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
(Translation: If you use it at least give me credit)
10/29/09 @ 12:43:01 am
have you considered the billions in profits the private insurance industry makes by cheating the government through double billing, denying care to those who already paid into the system and letting your loved one die?
I'm not saying don't clean the $60B mess up, but take this a step further...
Admin fees for Gov (VA) is 3% while it's 21% for private insurance.
Add that 21% onto everyone buying Private Health Care you'll end up with higher costs and a lot more uninsured, sick and dead people.
It's also a matter of public health, AIDS, TB, the flu and research.
Men are not angels and you have to properly fund the watchdogs or gamble with yours or a loved one's life.
What kind of society do you want to build towards?
Example on cutting government: Take your SEC example RE: the FBI - after 911 Bush pulled 25 agents off banking investigations and put them on tracking the terrorists, he never replaced those banking investigators.
If no one is watching the hen house what do you think the fox will do?
There's no way around these costs, people need to work and make a living wage, so the question is, who do you trust more?
1. a government where at least you have a say, a right to bitch, seek redress will provide care regardless of your income?
or
2. a deregulated insurance corporation where you have no say and the right to tell you to shop elsewhere when you need their services most?
When push comes to shove, when it's life or death, it is only money.
10/29/09 @ 11:48:27 am
No argument here about double billing and other abuses that are regularly perpetrated by the insurance companies. But I see this as an exhibit of more of the same. No enforcement of existing regulation, the failure of the 'powers that be' to oversee the public trust, as though they have a perpetual spring of funds to draw from.
The example of 3 % admin costs attributed to the VA and Medicare may be part of the problem. Consider that, part of that efficiency comes directly from large cuts in enforcement. They do not have enough funding to oversee their projects properly and consequently they are open to this kind of fraud. That number must be higher..not as high as the 21% number that has been attributed to private insurance. But I don't think the savings are near as large as you might think, maybe 8~10%.
One of the root problems that opens Medicare to this abuse is that there is a mandate that Medicare pay invoices 15~30 days after receipt. No time for review or investigation. This must be changed in any legislation that congress passes. One advantage that the free market does have is that they can make their own time table for payment. They are also much more aggressive at chasing down fraudulent claims. Some would say too aggressive. But their motive is profit, not just moving cases and paper. And profit is still not a dirty word no matter how much some might like for it to be.
Yes I do understand that cases and paper are people too. But when it comes to any structure that makes decisions about people we must agree that that bureaucracy will take a deliberately pragmatic stance.
Forgive the hyperbolae of my main post. I actually started out trying to say this but got side tracked with the smirking punch-line. :)
re: Bush's stumble. Yep..but when you look at the last 20 years of changes in securities and banking regulation, there is more than enough blame to go around. I am not opposed to government regulation and enforcement. There are things that government can actually do well if they are allowed to, otherwise it is all for naught.
10/30/09 @ 02:49:41 pm
I was just re-reading your post and it struck me that no matter who is in charge of healthcare in the future there will always be someone whose job it is to say "no".
I refer you to the minor industry that has grown up around the SSI disability denial and appeals process. One of the ways that government controls costs related to Social Security benefits is to deny the first claim. I think that Blue Cross also uses this same tactic...the more things change.