• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Minnesota wanted to curb health spending. Mayo Clinic had other ideas.

Greenbeard

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
20,306
Reaction score
21,766
Location
Cambridge, MA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Politico recently reported on how lots of states hoping to rein in health care costs have collided with opposition from hospitals, which in many places are the largest local employers. (The examples here are mostly from blue states, but the recent flexing by GOP legislative leaders in Indiana about high hospital prices has also largely come to naught.) The more money they suck up, the more economically and politically powerful they become.

Minnesota wanted to curb health spending. Mayo Clinic had other ideas.
Mayo Clinic issued an ultimatum to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Democratic lawmakers earlier this month: Kill a proposed health affordability bill, or say goodbye to $4 billion in new hospital investments.

Minnesota lawmakers responded quickly — by watering down an ambitious proposal in the final days of the legislative session, which ended last week.

The threat from the world-renowned health system is the latest salvo against attempts to rein in rapidly growing health spending — and demonstrates how those efforts sometimes flounder against industry heavyweights.
Hospitals have similarly, if more quietly, pushed back on proposals in other states. In Connecticut and Oregon, they have opposed giving the state more power to limit the growth in health care costs. And in Massachusetts, hospitals are pushing the state to “reimagine” their spending targets, including accounting for unpredictable hospital costs like travel nurses and rapid inflation.

“People are so afraid to touch this because [hospitals] are the economic engines,” said Massachusetts state Sen. Cindy Friedman, a Democrat who chairs the legislature’s Joint Committee on Health Care Financing. “It’s a business, and people are making huge amounts of money. … That’s what you’re up against.”
 
Reining in health care costs and increasing government involvement in healthcare pricing is a controversial discussion.

As an example, a number of important cancer drugs are becoming unavailable due to the parts of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act/Medicare's prescription drug pricing negotiations, impacting cancer drug availability. Doctors are now in the position of having to choose less effective drugs with more side effects (not the best drug for the specific cancer) as a result. Cancer drugs which come in pill and tablet form are discouraged under the legislation and, oftentimes, these are the both the most effective and most manageable (for the patient) for their specific cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, the "after" research on these drugs is shortened so significantly that additional and important uses for the same drug can no longer be researched.

Citizens of other countries come to the U.S. for specialized medical treatments because those treatments are unavailable under their socialized medical structures. Soon, the U.S. will be another country with socialized medicine and less than the best treatment options. We're well on our way.
 
Reining in health care costs and increasing government involvement in healthcare pricing is a controversial discussion.

As an example, a number of important cancer drugs are becoming unavailable due to the parts of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act/Medicare's prescription drug pricing negotiations, impacting cancer drug availability. Doctors are now in the position of having to choose less effective drugs with more side effects (not the best drug for the specific cancer) as a result. Cancer drugs which come in pill and tablet form are discouraged under the legislation and, oftentimes, these are the both the most effective and most manageable (for the patient) for their specific cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, the "after" research on these drugs is shortened so significantly that additional and important uses for the same drug can no longer be researched.

Citizens of other countries come to the U.S. for specialized medical treatments because those treatments are unavailable under their socialized medical structures. Soon, the U.S. will be another country with socialized medicine and less than the best treatment options. We're well on our way.

Do you have proof of these people all going to the US for treatment?
I don't know anyone who has and I know people with some pretty severe conditions that are being treated by the NHS.
 
Reining in health care costs and increasing government involvement in healthcare pricing is a controversial discussion.

As an example, a number of important cancer drugs are becoming unavailable due to the parts of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act/Medicare's prescription drug pricing negotiations, impacting cancer drug availability. Doctors are now in the position of having to choose less effective drugs with more side effects (not the best drug for the specific cancer) as a result. Cancer drugs which come in pill and tablet form are discouraged under the legislation and, oftentimes, these are the both the most effective and most manageable (for the patient) for their specific cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, the "after" research on these drugs is shortened so significantly that additional and important uses for the same drug can no longer be researched.

Citizens of other countries come to the U.S. for specialized medical treatments because those treatments are unavailable under their socialized medical structures. Soon, the U.S. will be another country with socialized medicine and less than the best treatment options. We're well on our way.
The only time you ever show your work is when you're posting a poll that you like. Otherwise, we get this ^^
 
Do you have proof of these people all going to the US for treatment?
I don't know anyone who has and I know people with some pretty severe conditions that are being treated by the NHS.
Here is just one small piece of evidence: Link
 
The chart shows more people leaving the US for medical treatment than arriving.
You sealioned, and you got your information. Do you deny the information or are you just dragging out a boring conversation?
 
Do you have proof of these people all going to the US for treatment?
I don't know anyone who has and I know people with some pretty severe conditions that are being treated by the NHS.
Canadians routinely cross the US border for various kinds of care not available or subject to long lines in Canada
 
Canadians routinely cross the US border for various kinds of care not available or subject to long lines in Canada
Does Rand Paul know this?


What about Sarah Palin and her family?

 
Does Rand Paul know this?


What about Sarah Palin and her family?

This doesn’t refute anything I’ve written

And in any event an American going to Canada pays cash for all their care anyway
 
Reining in health care costs and increasing government involvement in healthcare pricing is a controversial discussion.

As an example, a number of important cancer drugs are becoming unavailable due to the parts of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act/Medicare's prescription drug pricing negotiations, impacting cancer drug availability. Doctors are now in the position of having to choose less effective drugs with more side effects (not the best drug for the specific cancer) as a result. Cancer drugs which come in pill and tablet form are discouraged under the legislation and, oftentimes, these are the both the most effective and most manageable (for the patient) for their specific cancer diagnosis. Furthermore, the "after" research on these drugs is shortened so significantly that additional and important uses for the same drug can no longer be researched.

Citizens of other countries come to the U.S. for specialized medical treatments because those treatments are unavailable under their socialized medical structures. Soon, the U.S. will be another country with socialized medicine and less than the best treatment options. We're well on our way.
The US spends twice as much on healthcare as the OECD average, yet achieves only average healthcare outcomes. With it's ongoing fiscal deficits, the US, like every other country already does, needs to learn to prioritize it's 'bang for buck' in healthcare spending and try to get some extra returns from the incredibly expensive service that exists today. Bottom line is that every extra $ spent on healthcare is a $ not available for other social needs. The US has the largest economy and largest population of any truly developed nation, so it will always be a destination for specialist services that can't exist in smaller or poorer populations. That's not just a function of having a crazy expensive healthcare system.
 
This doesn’t refute anything I’ve written

And in any event an American going to Canada pays cash for all their care anyway
So they have a parallel system: a public system for a basic safety net, and a private system- the best of both worlds it seems to me. No different that out public/private school system.
 
As an example, a number of important cancer drugs are becoming unavailable due to the parts of Biden's Inflation Reduction Act/Medicare's prescription drug pricing negotiations, impacting cancer drug availability.

They haven't even identified the first drugs that will be subject to Medicare price negotiation in 2026 yet (that list comes out in September).
 
Back
Top Bottom