Several recent articles should dispel any remaining notion that care provided under the so-called Affordable Care Act will in fact be affordable.
Just the opposite is true.

The Wall Street Journal reported that when physicians sell their practice to hospitals and become hospital employees, services they provide to patients become significantly more expensive. The reason for this, simply put, is that overhead is much higher, and third parties reimburse at a higher rate for exactly the same service.

Another way to say this is that hospitals are less efficient than a private office. And, as I have pointed out, physicians are considerably less productive when working for a salary, as opposed to fee-for-service. This was an entirely predictable outcome.

Yet, health planners behind the Affordable Care Act pinned their hopes for cost containment on exactly this consolidation occurring. The act promotes Accountable Care Organizations; groups of “providers” and administrators who will assume financial risk for caring for patients assigned to them, by accepting a lump-sum payment to cover all their medical needs.

Accountable Care Organizations are the latest version of managed care, and will have similar problems. They will have a strong financial incentive to cherry pick healthy patients; those with serious problems will end up in emergency rooms and hospitals, where care is much more costly.

This brings us to the most recent article from the New York Times, which shows that when hospital emergency rooms and physician practices adopt electronic health records, reimbursements for physician services go way up.

Wait a second. Isn’t the EHR the magic wand that is somehow going to result in huge efficiencies and cost savings? Well, not exactly. It seems doctors and hospitals are able to use the EHR to “enhance” documentation of patient encounters and services provided, which entitles them to “up-code” and receive higher reimbursement from third party payers.

This game dates back to 1990 when Medicare adopted the “resource-based relative value scale,” a complex Stalinist system devised by Harvard PhD William Hsiao. It was an attempt to codify physicians’ work product based on time, effort, degree of training, patient complexity and other factors.
The “relative value units” for any given intervention would then be multiplied by a fixed number to assign a dollar value for that work.

To obtain reimbursement from Medicare under the RBRVS, doctors had to learn to code their encounters appropriately. (Yes, we had to take time away from our practices to attend ridiculous coding seminars). To bill for a “Level 5 office visit,” for example, a detailed history, system review and physical exam had to be performed and documented.

Of course, this is not always needed, even in complex patients, and the time required for documentation detracts from the quality of the encounter. The RBRVS was an absurdity and hastened the medical profession’s march down the road to serfdom. Rather than oppose this intrusion, the American Medical Association colluded with the government to make it a reality.

With cuts and freezes, physician reimbursement under Medicare has shrunk to Medicaid levels and will decline further under the ACA. Payment in many instances barely covers the cost of providing care. Yet, doctors up-code at their peril. For years, the government has conducted random audits of private physicians, group practices and hospitals, looking for claims with inadequate documentation in the medical record. Huge monetary settlements have been extorted based in differing interpretations of arcane regulations. The EHR provides templates and boilerplate text to automate documentation and can be a bulwark against such audits.

In addition to effects on billing and payment, rigorous studies of actual implementation of health information technology show no cost savings or improvement in health outcomes, according to another WSJ article.

The Affordable Care Act is an experiment in top-down social engineering of an extraordinarily complex field encompassing one sixth of our economy. It is destined to fail and will be expensive beyond belief, in dollars, lost opportunity and in misery. If only the free market were given a chance to deliver quality care at reasonable cost. In the few areas of health care where it has been allowed to flourish, it has done just that.

Richard Amerling is a nephrologist practicing in New York City. He is an associate professor of clinical medicine at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, and the director of Outpatient Dialysis at the Beth Israel Medical Center. Amerling is the author of the Physicians’ Declaration of Independence.

Join the Conversation

53 Comments

  1. Here is what conservatives (that’s right CONSERVATIVES) the world over say about government mandated universal healthcare:
     
    Germany – run by conservatives – universal health care
     
    Britain – run by conservatives – universal health care
     
    http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/Health.aspx
     
      “We are committed to an NHS that is free at the point of use and available to everyone based on need, not the ability to pay.”
     
    France – up until recently, run by conservatives – universal health care
     
    Canada – run by conservatives – universal health care
     
    http://www.conservative.ca/media/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf
     
      “Stephen Harper’s Government is committed to a universal public
    health care system and the Canada Health Act,”
     
    All Conservative Parties in the developed world support universal healthcare for their citizens, except one, the American Republican Party.

    1. What you forget is that in those countries there is a very different party system.  They are not in the same two party politics as we are.  To say they are all conservative is only a half truth, each of the majority parties has different views, and though they may seem conservative some hold views that wouldn’t exactly fit that category.

      1. Please find and post  here a link to a political party somewhere in the world other than the GOP that is against universal healthcare.

        I don’t think you’ll find one.

        1. No where do I say that there are parties against universal healthcare.  All I was saying is that to use the term conservative as a catch all for other countries current political climate is not so cut and dry.  The conservative parties in other nations are not the conservative party of the US.  

  2. We’ve never had anything but a free market healthcare system so it’s had more than enough time to provide good service at a reasonable price and it hasn’t succeeded yet. We still live in a country where the cost of healthcare is out of reach for millions of it’s citizens and millions more will leave the rolls of the insured if we don’t do away with our profit driven healthcare system. If other countries can deliver better care at half the cost of ours for all their citizens then we should be looking to create a model like theirs . 

    1. Did I just hear ‘Public Option’ being called for ? It’s coming folk’s. ACA is the first step and all the crying and whining by the GOP can’t stop it. Even Mitt’s not that stupid. Ryan’s another story. What was the line in the movie “Legend in his own mind” wasn’t it ? Ryan’s definitely in the running for that one !

      1. Wisconsin has a pair of those legends , it took 30 million dollars in false advertising to keep  Ryans Twin  from being thrown out on his butt!

        Then they threw his laws out in court!

    2. Where do you live? We haven’t had free market healthcare in America for decades. Healthcare used to be affordable until government mandates and regulations (and lawyers) forced hospitals, insurers and doctors to increase costs to survive.

      The left leaning Kaiser Family Foundation just released it’s latest study of health insurance costs and they have increased by $3,000 for the average family since Obama pledged to reduce them by $2,500.

        1. Seriously? Google community rating, guaranteed issue, Medicare, Medicaid, Food & Drug Administration, government regulations in health care or state regulations in health care. Regulations usually have good intentions, but they do not always have a positive impact.

          For anyone to argue that health care exists in a “free market” system, is just ignorant.

      1. “We haven’t had free market healthcare in America for decades.”

        The reason for that is the market for health care is not the same as the market for other commodities. 

        When you need, say, a car, you set a budget, compare items that are within that budget and make a rational decision based on which item satisfies the most needs while staying within that budget. If the desired model is too expensive then a different model can meet the same needs.

        When you need, say, a heart bypass, the budget goes out the window. No price is too much to pay for the best heart surgeon available. Cheaper options are not considered. Even if the desired procedure is to expensive, there is no substitute (“I’m sorry you cannot afford that triple bypass, but we do offer a tonsil removal package that’s within your budget”).

        And the most important reason that the market for health care is not a free market – Ronald Reagan signed a law compelling ERs to treat patients regardless of their ability to pay.  In a free market, inability to pay means that the commodity means that the individual goes without the desired item. By eliminating the rationing function of price in the health care market, President Reagan clearly removed health care from the free market.

        1. I understand and agree with your post. However, this does not mean that we should not keep as many free market principles in health care as possible. People need to be responsible for and make decisions on some costs. Making it “free” is not going to make it less expensive. That brings us back to the government mandates issue. Insurance used to be affordable when it was actually “insurance”. It was intended to cover against major expenses, like heart surgery or cancer. It should be the same as house insurance or car insurance. You don’t buy home insurance to cover painting costs or plumbing repairs. You buy it to pay for your house if it burns down. Health insurance was not intended to cover flu shots or contraceptives or gym memberships – unless that was the insurance you wanted to purchase. People should pay for the ordinary expenses and insurance should cover the major stuff.

          1.  It’s called a high deductible. Real insurance for an unexpected event. Below the high deductible you budget, and pay, ordinary health care expenses. You can even put aside money in a tax avoidance HSA (health savings account) for routine care.

            A RAND survey shows that employers have 17% of their employers in high deductibles and expect that in 10 years at least 50% of all employees will be in high deductibles. This will produce a TRUE FREE MARKET.  In a free market consumers win.

    3. In Maine years ago it was a non-profit health care insurer. It was taking care of us quite well as I remember it. There is one again and will be available in the health care exchange. Let us take back our health care from the profiteers.

      1. How did that Dirigo thing work out.  Wasn’t that model we were going to use for America at one point.  You people are blind to the real pain ACA will cause but somehow ACA makes you libs feel good.  Feeling good is all that matters.
        “Let us take back our health care from the profiteers.”  Nobama gave the insurance cos the biggest gift of all.

        1. There you go again. No one has any way of knowing. But it is better than the doing nothing that was driving costs up, up, up. I for one want to wait and see what ACTUALLY happens. Then I will decide. But by then I expect there will be some tweaking going on. You do know how complex systems work, right? There is no direct link between cause and effect.  We will just have to wait and see how it all plays out. I am betting that this is a move in the right direction. It is already saving me money by holding down the cost of care for Medicare recipients. That should make even you happy. Cutting the cost of that program down will save us all.

      2. Lets see!  Doctors are profiteers! Hospitals are profiteers! The companies that supply the beds, guerneys, x-ray machines, medicine, – Whoa, everybody profits. We should do away with all of them? Back to the middle ages. Sounds good.

    4. No economist would agree with you. There is no free market in Health Care. Prices for health care are secret. You do not choose your treatment. The doctor does. You do not pay for your care. Either the gov’t, employer, or a health insurance company does. It is social engineering by the gov’t and insurance companies, and it has failed, miserably. Under Obamacare you’re health insurance premiums will go up 6.8% every year according to the economists at Medicare and Medicaid. Good luck to all you gov’t knows best followers.

  3. Are you prepared to pay the huge taxes the other countries’ citizens pay for that health care? Of course, if you’re part of the “47%”, you don’t care about taxes… But, if you are a taxpayer, you will!

    1. For years right-wingers have been complaining and claiming the United States has the highest taxes in the world that must be cut to make us competitive.
       
      Now you’re telling me we have the lowest taxes in the world because we don’t have universal healthcare.
       
      It seems to me that, with no actual facts to back up either argument, the right (including their presidential nominee) just keeps blowing smoke one way and then the other depending on what they want.  And what they want is always all about $$$, not about their country or their fellow citizens.

      I beleive the Congressional Budget Office that says Obamacare will save money. But regardless, my taxes have been doing nothing but go down for over a decade. (Taxes on my two homes – down. Taxes on my income – down. Taxes on my investments – down.) It’s time we grew up and began paying for what we are buying.

      1.  Nice spin, but so devoid of intellectual honesty it is pitiful.

        The high tax rates quoted are the corporate tax rates.  The lower tax rates quoted are personal income taxes.  You purposefully misconstrued everything trying to disparage the right.

        The CBO numbers regarding obamacare are bogus and everyone knows it.  Including the CBO who alluded to the questionable numbers and conditions they were given to produce the desired result.

        And your personal tax situation is laughable.  I want to know where you live that your property taxes on TWO homes have gone down.  I can think of several ways this could have happened but none have anything to do with Obama’s policies.  Several of those ways involve a lawyer and questionable tactics that the average homeowner cannot afford. 

        Your personal income taxes may have gone down.  But is that because you earned less money due to the abysmal Obama economy or because rates were reduced?  Are you referring to the reduction in payroll, AKA SSI, taxes that are helping push Social Security into early insolvency?  Smart move Obama, and it hasn’t helped the economy recover either. 

        Taxes on your investments.  Again, is that because you earned less money due to the abysmal Obama economy or because rates were reduced.  I have not seen any reductions in the tax rates on investments under Obama so I have to guess that your REALIZED income from those investments have been crap.  (Realized income equals taxable income and has nothing to do with paper value of investments such as stocks and bonds.)

        1. I’m flattered by your desire to know more about my personal finances.  Suffice it to say though, that my taxes in all categories listed are lower than they were ten years ago as I stated, even though my financial situation is much improved since 2002.
           
           
          And I appreciate your conceding that after ‘Bush tax cuts’, recent Maine income tax cuts, stimulus tax cuts, payroll tax reductions, income taxes are now too low.
           
          It is disturbing though that you think the Republican majority employed Congressional Budget Office puts out “bogus” budget projections.
           
          A review of recent of capital gains tax history here will give you a better understanding before your next comment embarrasses you again:
           
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax_in_the_United_States
           
           
          I think you will gain more reader respect for your statements if you back them up with actual facts in future.

          1. I am not sure who does your taxes but I would like a phone number to set up my tax appointment. I have found that any tax write-offs have diminished greatly at my income level. Even the AMT tax has hit the middle class keeping taxes higher. By the way-you sound like you do your taxes much like Mitt Romney does by minimizing tax exposure, i.e. legally.

          2. By the way, you sound like you don’t know what you’tr talking about.

            Facts, facts, facts? Where are your facts?

          3.  Thank you for the link about capital gains tax history that proves that those rates have not gone down under Obama.  Just as I stated.   The reductions were all under Bush.  and just look at what is destined to happen in 2013 under Obama policies.

            Yes, income taxes are too low.  On the 47% not paying any that is.

            And your original rant was about Federal Income Taxes.  And now you try and confuse things by bringing up Maine state income taxes and payroll taxes.

            How about backing up your story about your real estate taxes with “facts”? 

          4. What part of
            1) “my taxes have been doing nothing but go down for over a decade”, led you to believe I was talking just about the 3 1/2 year Obama administration?
             
            What part of
            2)”Taxes on my two homes – down”, led you to believe I was only talking about federal taxes?
             
             
            I suppose, unlike Mr. Romney, I could post a scan of my real estate tax bills over the last decade to show that they have gone down.  But I have a suspicion even that wouldn’t satisfy you. 
             
             
            My point is, taxes have gone down on the false “supply side”, “trickle-down” (or whatever other name right-wingers come up with for it)  promise that “job creators” will then do us all a huge favor and “grow the economy” and increase tax revenues.
             
            The falsehood of that myth is about to catch up with Republicans and they’ll have to “rebrand” themselves again for the next election.

  4. Hmmmm….. another rich doctor asking us to just hang in there with the free market health care mess- I can see it’s worked wonders these past 40 years to control costs! The Doc is probably worried his salary might go down from $400,000 to $350,000………….ouch!

    1. He doesn’t want actual free market health care.  In a truly free market anyone could call themselves a doctor.  He would never be able to crack 100k a year.  People would go to the lowest bidder for their services and we would have even worse health outcomes than we do now.  No, what he wants is an exclusionary market but one that he likes.  Not one where health care dollars are tied up in things like actually taking care of patients instead of running countless costly tests and trying to extract as much money out of a patients health insurance before he gets cut off.  He is another self absorbed person trying to make as much money as possible at the expense of us all.

  5. Nothing can be worse than what we have had before Obama Care. This new program can and more than likely will be improved.
    I attended an Americans for Prosperity event in Portland recently and heard the same argument against Obama Care. AfP is a front group for the Koch brothers and corporate giants. They only care about corporate profits.

    1. Something wrong with a company making a profit?  Should we become more like communist North Korea where profits are bad?

  6. Isn’t the point of connected, organized and consistent documentation to provide a single source medical record for individuals thereby eliminating administrative redundancy? Digital connectivity in general means that the world is standardizing complex systems for enhanced efficiency and communication. (See ISO, for example). Why should medicine be any different? In fact they should probably be leading the charge. This article sounds like the temporary discomfort (“this will only hurt a little bit”) of a Doctor forced into transition. The ACA won’t take full effect until 2014, so give it a chance and call me in the morning. 

  7. The only way the private sector can be induced to deliver high quality affordable care is the way it is done in several other countries, where profits are capped and standards are mandated. No one should expect the private sector to place the public’s welfare before its own financial interests.  Moreover, industry observers have witnessed some egregious financial shenanigans in the health insurance sector over the years. Private sector solutions in public services can certainly work, so long as the players are made to realize they won’t be joining the 1% at the expense of Americans in need of healthcare.  Since healthcare needs make for a highly predictable market it should be perfectly positioned to attract investors looking for steady but modest returns over the long term. All it needs is a sensible Congress to end its ideological warfare and come up with necessary and sensible improvements to the ACA. One thing is certain: no national healthcare policy can work without mandated health insurance. Shifting one’s personal healthcare costs on to the backs of others isn’t freedom of choice; it’s a rejection of personal responsibility.

    1. The private sector is the only thing keeping healthcare costs down. The private sector wants to make a profit, but they also must compete to make any money – that means being subject to the laws of supply and demand. If you take away those laws and the freedom of the consumer to choose, you end up with exponentially growing costs, fraud and worsening care. It’s not like we don’t have specific examples of this system. Just look at what has happened since the creation of Medicare. Health insurance used to be the same cost as a telephone bill, the family doctor was a friend who made house calls and frivolous lawsuits were non-existent.

      As for mandates, Obamacare doesn’t even have a real mandate. It has created a tax against those people who make a certain amount of money and don’t buy insurance. There is no requirement for the 47% to buy health insurance if they cannot afford it. (Just imagine if they applied the same logic to car insurance.) Regardless, the “mandate” is not even the worst part, the “qualified premium” forcing us to buy insurance that is government qualified instead of allowing us the freedom to choose our own coverages is much more oppressive to the non-47%.

        1. If you weren’t so confused, you would notice that you just helped make my point.

          Regardless, if you think more government control and less competition helps to keep costs down, why not try it for groceries, housing, electronics, etc.? Bread lines worked for Stalin, right?

      1. Oh please. There is no competition. Just like at the gas pump, the bank, you name it. It is all controlled so you and I lose and they win. 

  8. The more government has gotten involved with health care the more expensive our insurance has gotten and the less it covers.  Obama care was written by the insurance industry and Big Pharm.   The cost is getting higher and higher every year in anticipation for 2014.

    Could someone pro Obamacare please explain to me why it’s called the ACA?  

    1. No according to the Kaiser Foundation, http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/11/pf/insurance/health-insurance-premiums/index.html , premium costs have risen at more than half the rate of the previous year. So the spiraling rise has stopped. I for one want to see what happens in 2014 before passing judgment. All of these scare tactics we are assaulted with have one motive behind them. Protect those who benefit. It is the folks mentioned in this article that have the most to lose or gain. They are the ones we should be concerned about. Not those who seek to gain off of our misfortune. 

      1. Why do I a working class person have to pay $68 a week for insurance and I have a $5000 deductible.  I have to be pretty sick before I go to the doctor, however if I was on Mainecare I wouldn’t pay anything and I could go to the doctor whenever I want to.   

        This was the first time in 34 years of working that I have had to pay such high premiums plus such a high deductible.  Health care use to be affordable now it’s not unless you are poor.  

        I would like to see us go back to just having a major medical plan and pay for the doctors visits out of pocket.   I’m getting poor paying for the healthcare of the poor.

        Our healthcare system is run by the greedy geezers (AARP), Big Pharm and the insurance industry.

  9. Thank you, Dr. Amerling for sharing your expertise.  The NObamaNONhealthcare Act is going to bankrupt America and her people–the employers, the taxpayers, and the consumers.

    1. Did you miss the FACT that the running wild health care system was already bankrupting America? You missed those headlines about costs spiraling out of control? What do you have to gain? Lots of stock in those for-profit companies? 

  10. Only in Washington can they take a good concept and turn it into a nightmare. Let’s send them all back for more abuse. Thank you sir, may I have another.

  11. And what does this doctor have to lose when ACA goes into effect? Yes, he is very credentialed but once again he is making predictions that may never see the light of day.  It is only the wealthy that cry about making health care more accessible. Those that can afford the high cost procedures that many of us forego. Dick Cheney did not bypass his transplant…. because the taxpayer paid for it. No the AMA did not like all of what ACA did but they did negotiate and were ultimately satisfied with the compromise. Most of the ‘opinions’ out there do not support this physician. Check fact checkers before you believe any hype of any kind. This man has a political agenda, not a health care agenda. 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *