The Saratogian
Saratoga Springs, NY
http://www.saratogian.com/articles/2009/08/02/news/doc4a75002fb9b69011981068.txt
SARATOGA SPRINGS — While final legislation is still somewhere out on the horizon, interest in the Congressional debate of a public option for health care is certainly growing among area residents.
This interest, which has seen residents fall on both sides of the issue, was demonstrated last week by twin rallies on Broadway.
One, held Wednesday outside of U.S. Rep. Scott Murphy’s district office by the Citizen Action Network of New York, aimed to show support for legislation currently in the House of Representatives.
The group supports an income tax surcharge on wealthy Americans, and came to Broadway to demonstrate their “strong support.”
A stone’s throw away, outside the post office, another group demonstrated their opposing view, holding signs that argue there is no need for a public option.
As the House of Representatives wrestles with the decision of whether to break for their August recess, the post office protesters may not hold enough sway to push their view, as Saratoga Springs’ congressional representatives are firmly in favor of the public option.
The bill, HR 3200, is currently being debated in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, where Democrats and Republicans reached a consensus on major provision Friday, possibly preparing the bill for a vote before the end of the congressional session.
Earlier in the day Friday, Democrats succeeded in preventing Republicans from stripping the public health care option out of the bill.
On a tele-town hall with constituents on Wednesday, Murphy reiterated his support for the legislation.
“I think it’s critical,” said Murphy. “I think it’s critical to make (health care) affordable for people to get care, even if they lose their job, start a new job, or want to start their own business.”
While Murphy said he is in favor of a public option of health care, he also said that private-sector health care companies are an important part of providing the market with competition that is designed to drive down the cost of health care.
Along with Murphy, both Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer support a public option.
“We want to allow people to keep their plan if they like it, but also to provide some competition,” Murphy said Wednesday. “No one should be forced to stop using a system that they’re happy with.”
While Murphy said the federal legislation’s biggest goal was to provide competition in places where there is not currently any, some in New York feel there is already adequate competition.
Leslie Moran, senior vice president for the New York Health Plan Association, a trade group that represents 20 private health insurance companies, said her group had not yet taken a position on the bill.
“Competition is not a bad thing, but there are many areas in New York where there is already very healthy competition; certainly, right here in the greater capital region is one of those areas,” she said.
Although she did not say that the group was opposed to a public option, she was careful to stress that private insurance had a place in the market.
“You need a lot of tax dollars to pay for public coverage, and you could just wind up taxing those who already get private insurance,” she said.
Dr. Howard Yeaton, a general surgeon with a private practice in the city, said that working with a public insurance provider would not constitute much of a change for most providers, who are used to dealing with Medicaid and Medicare.
His concern is that debate in congress has overlooked what he says in the most important problem facing the health care industry.
“The public option is a complicated bill,” he said. “The big glaring issue is that they have taken Tort reform off the table. That’s our biggest complaint.”
Tort reform is the system by which plaintiffs are compensated after a successful prosecution in personal injury and liability cases.
Reform to the laws would cap the damages that can be awarded to a plaintiff, which could have the effect of reducing the cost of liability insurance, and might eliminate the need for so-called “defensive medicine” — sometimes exhaustive batteries conducted even for obvious maladies designed to reduce liability.
Bradley Sexauer, vice president for strategy and market development at the Saratoga Hospital, also recognized the importance of Tort reform.
“Obviously, Tort reform on the national level would be a great thing,” he said. “Malpractice insurance is increasingly expensive and health care costs are driven up by defensive medicine with concern about suits and that kind of thing.”
But, he said, a lack of debate on the issue should not color what is otherwise a positive discussion on reforming the healthcare system.
“Something that brings more people under the tent and gives them health care coverage is certainly a good thing,” he said. “But, we hope that whatever is put in place allows private health insurance companies to stay in business and allows people to keep their private insurance, if they so choose.”
Sexauer added that he hoped healthcare reform would address the Medicare wage index, which determines how much hospitals are paid for treating Medicare patients, and that new laws would allow hospitals to negotiate how much they are paid through a new system.
“If payment rates are based on Medicare rates it will be a losing proposition for hospitals,” he said.
