Los Angeles Times

A public option is not enough

-

Re “California should lead the nation with a public option,” Opinion, Sept. 18

Missing from UC Berkeley professors Richard

Scheffler and Stephen Shortell’s op-ed article on a California public health option are the details as to who, in such a system, would make the final call on decisions for treatment prescribed by doctors.

At present, all too often the valid prescribin­g authority of “in-network” doctors is usurped by an almost impenetrab­le wall of administra­tive bureaucrac­y staffed by individual­s who lack the relevant medical training.

From my own personal experience, I can cite examples of coverage and cost decisions being made by a high-level person whose doctorate was not in medicine but in philosophy, and a cardiac issue that was denied not by a cardiac specialist, but by an on-staff urologist.

I’m all for booting the healthcare-for-profit companies out of California, but only if they are replaced with a system that benefits the patient not just financiall­y, but has at its core patients’ best interests, no matter the cost.

Bill Waxman Simi Valley

A medical system that provides incentives to keep participan­ts healthy and is based on capitation already exists. It is called Medicare Advantage.

Already, more than half of all eligible Medicare beneficiar­ies participat­e in such a plan, voluntaril­y. Why not give this a try?

Turning a California public option over to the insurance industry, just like Medicare does, would allow the industry to negotiate with health providers and participan­ts, which is exactly what they are doing today.

It is worth considerin­g. Kevin Minihan

Los Angeles

What California does not need is yet another layer of bureaucrat­ic complicati­on to the already complex and expensive health insurance system we have now. There are countless different insurance plans that doctors, labs, hospitals and clinics have to sort through to be paid for the care they provide.

The so-called public option that Scheffler and Shortell suggest would charge premiums that they say “would be adjusted for each patient’s age, gender, health status and related characteri­stics likely to influence need for care.”

Who is going to do all that adjusting? Administra­tive costs already account for about 20% of our insurance premiums as it is.

The only solution to the healthcare mess is a singlepaye­r system, a public health insurance plan that covers everyone from womb to tomb. It would be public insurance, private care — in other words, Medicare for all.

Don Schroeder North Hollywood

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States