Matthew Holt
- : http://www.thehealthcareblog.com
- : I'm Matthew Holt, author of The Health Care Blog and columnist at politics site Spot-on. I've spent more than 15 years in health care as a researcher, generalist forecaster, and strategist. I've worked for renowned forecasting and survey research organizations. I've conducted in-depth studies about many aspects of health care for public release and private clients. I'm a well-regarded, amusing presenter, and I've delivered several keynote addresses. And I have the odd opinion too.
Social insurance is the key--but it can handle competition, just not the type you're used to!
So now my fun with the Canadian health care haters is done, my final posting here in this most excellent discussion is to clarify how one would get competition into a social insurance system that only had one risk pool. Maggie...more »
Posted on April 13, 2007 6:39 PM
Quick sorta off topic plug, and promise to be back
Given that apparently I've caused the most trouble here (and haven't really gotten my point across too well) I will respond later today about what a vision of a social insurance pool which uses competitive elements to improve health care...more »
Posted on April 13, 2007 11:12 AM
A distinction without a difference
It's fantastic that Jon's book is finally out, as it seems a long time ago that I saw a couple of early chapters--and since the Democrats win in November the mood is certainly much better for speaking about reform. But...more »
Posted on April 10, 2007 5:39 PM
Is AHIP Norwalk's next stop?
Following up on Jeff’s link about CMS honcho Leslie Norwalk’s invention of a survey that didn’t exist, it’s pretty damn obvious where her next job is. After all there’s one job above all in health care in DC which requires...more »
Posted on May 26, 2006 4:07 PM
Cato calls the Republicans on the Lies
I approve of government programs done well. Michael Cannon doesn’t approve of them done much at all. We both disapprove of them being done expensively and then having so-called Conservatives in power lie bold face about their costs and enrollment...more »
Posted on May 10, 2006 6:56 PM
Yet more Part D revisionist history
It’s incredible how a couple of bullshit surveys, dishonestly conducted have changed the rhetoric a little on Part D. Now there’s a very odd article about Part D in The LA Times, which has been speaking truth to one power...more »
Posted on May 7, 2006 5:52 PM
The Washington Post should know better, much better
OK, so I understand that resume checking a right-wing blogger is a bit beyond the WaPo, but at least they don’t get flummoxed as much as the NY Times headline writers (or journalists) but falling for the Administration's line that...more »
Posted on April 12, 2006 1:40 PM
Even HHS Secretary Leavitt's parents get it wrong
I’ve remarked on THCB how the man who I regard as the leading medical director working in health benefits in America told me privately that he was completely befuddled by the choices that he faced getting his mother into Part D. Now...more »
Posted on March 31, 2006 3:26 PM
Here's how the spin works--Get Newt's name on a lie
So this is a great example of how spin works. First you take a prominent conservative who claims that he knows something about health care (even if his public pronouncements on the topic, at $40K a time, are ludicrously ungrounded...more »
Posted on March 30, 2006 10:43 AM
Putting out fires...
The New York Times started a small brush-fire this weekend with an article saying that not everyone’s losing out because of Part D. They even found some people who were gaining from it. Now much of the article went into...more »
Posted on March 27, 2006 1:48 PM
-
Great (and not just cos I get quoted, although that does sway my opinion!)
BUT--if we need the boomers' demographics, is 2008 too soon? I think so, painful though that may be. But better to wait a bit and get it done, than take a false run in 2 years and have reform blown away for a another 15 years.
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Posted at April 11, 2007 6:05 PM in response to Why Real Reform is Necessary--and Politically Possible.
-
Actually we agree, Diane! What you're complaining about is bolting on private for-profit insurance to a public system (or vice versa) with no clear social insurance pool and no clear financing structure (e.g. progressive, tax based)
That's where I think Cal and Mass are heading (maybe) and it's similar to Medicaid expansion and SCHIP.
What I'm saying is that we need to put up a united front against that solution, and instead get the social insurance pool up front. Once that is done (as it basically is in every other country) how you organizing the payment system for providers is where we can have legitimate debates.
So lets agree to agree!!
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Posted at April 11, 2007 10:28 AM in response to Meaningful Reform Requires Thinking Outside the Box
-
John your point is of course right, but there's a bunch of confusion about excactly what the MLR was for Aetna. The WSJ says "Aetna's medical-cost ratio, which is the ratio of those costs to total premiums collected, worsened to 79.4% from 77.9% in the first quarter a year earlier."
The AMA says this
76.9% - Aetna
82.3% - Cigna
83.9% - Health Net
83.2% - Humana
78.6% - UnitedHealth Group
80.6% - WellPoint.Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Posted at April 28, 2006 5:45 PM in response to Help sick people, piss off Wall St.
-
We're having lots of fun with Hubbard over on THCB today. And it took ages for one of my lackeys to point out that this guys main claim to fame is that he was Dan Quayles Chief of Staff. So being unclear on the concept is second nature to him.
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Posted at April 3, 2006 1:02 PM in response to Another Bush Insurance Racket
-
Not profitable?? Not profitable?? Have you HEARD of United Health Care or Wellpoint or Caremark?
They are staggeringly profitable and their stock prices show it. Don;t be fooled by their gross margins as they count tons of pass through revenue in them.
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Posted at March 15, 2006 2:02 PM in response to Warnings From Warner
-
Ezra, you young punk slacker. You didnt put the name or the link to Anderson's article in your post. It's "Health Spending In The United States And The Rest Of The Industrialized World" by Gerard F. Anderson, Peter S. Hussey, Bianca K. Frogner and Hugh R. Waters.
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Posted at February 24, 2006 10:36 AM in response to Fun With Health Spending
-
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
Kate, where did you get the cost data? It's not in the WSJ?
Posted at February 24, 2006 8:27 AM in response to South Africa and the failed HSA experiment
-
Matthew Holt The Health Care Blog
John, I agree with you about the political problems of doing this, but on what planet did Medicare successfully contained its costs?
Posted at February 9, 2006 10:45 AM in response to Is cost cutting good politics?
-
Kate. I don't think so.
The $4.1 billion is the retail value of these drugs, which as we know is massively marked up from their manufacturing costs (and I mean massively!). It costs the companies virtually nothing to provide them for free. And some will keep doing so.
They were plenty happy with the bill as it was, as you say because it pre-empted a much nastier bill that allowed price negotiation by a monopsony -- as happens everywhere else in the world.
Posted at February 2, 2006 10:59 AM in response to Unintended Consequences
-
John, Nice catch but this isnt exaclty the first time that a majori newspaper has printed this loon's lying and/or altering the data to make his point. After all he's also the author of this little pearl which apparently equates the recent supreme Court ruling in Canada allowing private insurance as being the same as abolishing the entire canadian health system. Funny that even the new Conservative government there was at pains to stress that it was keeping the system in tact in its recent campaign. Funny too that an older, cheaper and bigger fully socialized medicine system in the UK has also had private insurance as a component forever.
Mind you the concept of being a "health policy expert at the Manhattan Institute" is something of a contradiction in terms.
Posted at January 26, 2006 3:48 PM in response to One Doctor's Bad Advice
