IBJOpinion

Fix what's broken first

December 12, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Letters To The Editor

As a physician, I owe it to my patients to help get health care reform right. From the front line, physicians can offer changes that could result in more cost-effective, efficient and accessible health care. That’s why I joined the Coalition to Protect Patients’ Rights, along with 10,000 other doctors. Coalition members have shared ideas with Congress, but many of our elected officials have turned a deaf ear.

Restricting physician ownership of hospitals and other facilities is just one example, as noted in your [Dec. 7] story. Physician ownership consistently provides care less expensively than “non-profit” or larger corporate entities. When physicians have ownership, they pay taxes and help support local communities, unlike “non-profits” which make substantial profits but pay no taxes.

Other examples:

• The federal government already has two major health care programs that are dysfunctional and rapidly running out of money. Fix Medicare and Medicaid before giving government control of even more health care decisions.

• Allow primary-care doctors to enter into private contracts outside of Medicare without having to drop out of the program altogether. This would incentivize doctors to go into primary care and do what they do best: manage the overall care of patients. They can’t get paid for that now.

• Streamline the bureaucracy that over-regulates and stifles care and innovation, including the morass in Medicare billing codes—rivaling cumbersome Internal Revenue Service tax codes. Doctors are beset by onerous regulations and conflicting edicts, and then subjected to criminal penalties and damages. Even Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act statutes apply because of “organized” groups that manage office practices and billing. With threats of government audits, physicians spend more time and money fulfilling coding requirements and less with patients.

Congress must reduce over-regulation by the Federal Drug Administration to reduce costs. A more realistic risk-benefit ratio for FDA regulation of prescription drugs and devices must be developed.

• Tort reform is essential. Malpractice costs are only the tip of the iceberg. Product liability dramatically increases the cost of drugs and devices here compared to the rest of the world. Fix the legal system so, like [in] other countries, reckless lawsuits are not allowed.

Clearly, more must be done to curb rising health care costs and provide affordable coverage for uninsured Americans. But Congress must take the time to preserve what works and fix only what’s gone wrong.

__________

Dr. Francis Price Jr.
Price Vision Group

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT