With the pundits scaring the living crap out of Americans on both sides of the issue, it is understandable that we are confused, frustrated, concerned and scared of this new health care program being proposed by the Obama Administration.
Some thoughts. . . but first, I will set the stage by trying to localize/"Meadville-ize" this issue.
Channellock Inc. is a 123 year-old, privately held manufacturer of high quality pliers and hand tools.
We employ about 425 people. We have never missed a payroll. We have never missed a tax payment. We have had to create and present business plans to various financial banks for funding.
We represent a private sector business model that up until the Obama debt schemes, has done okay. . .for 123 years.
We have health care at Channellock. It covers all associates that want to participate. Average annual cost of the program is $12,700 per associate. The associate pays between 20 and 25 percent of this annual premium. They also may or may not pay a co-pay and a deductible depending on which of the six UPMC (current provider) insurance programs they choose (single, family, married with spouse, etc.).
Channellock and our associates are private sector, private health care system users. Channellock, Inc. is the provider or a "third party provider". . .the customer!
To my knowledge we LIKE our program.
We do not want anyone to mess with it.
We do not need, or want, a national plan or a public option.
Now, there are three areas that would help our program:
A Health Savings Account System funded with a tax credit. Simple. Health care must be used to qualify. This would help reduce the individual's health care cost. . .pretty simple to implement in the tax code.
Tort reform. Why is this issue not being discussed? It has HUGE cost reduction opportunities because it would significantly reduce the cost of malpractice liability insurance premiums for our good doctors. (The bad doctors should be flushed out of the system by Hospital Boards of Directors effectively monitoring quality of care and utilization review procedures already in place.) Because of the sometimes huge settlements gained by heavy lobbying malpractice attorneys, all doctors must carry malpractice liability insurance that commands very large premiums. In order to protect themselves, the doctors demand/prescribe extra diagnostic tests at greater expense to cover themselves, legally (rightfully so in our overly litigious communities). Changing this whole arena with tort reform legislation would significantly reduce the doctors' cost of doing business. It would logically follow that their costs to us are also reduced. . .pretty simple.
Tort reform. . .DO IT!