What Kind of Health Care System Should the U.S. Adopt? Part II

The Institute for Freedom & Community at St. Olaf College seeks to promote free inquiry and meaningful debate of important political and social issues. By exploring diverse ideas about politics, markets, and society, The Institute aims to challenge presuppositions, question easy answers, and foster constructive dialogue among those with differing values and contending points of view. Established in 2015, The Institute offers a distinctive opportunity to cultivate civil discourse within a liberal arts setting. See more at institute.stolaf.edu

This is the final event of the IFC’s spring 2018 series: “Freedom, Community, and Health Care,” featuring a conversation between Amitabh Chandra and Tyler Cowen, moderated by St. Olaf College Associate Professor of Economics Ashley Hodgson.

Amitabh Chandra is the Malcolm Wiener Professor of Public Policy and Director of Health Policy Research at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He is a member of the Congressional Budget Office’s Panel of Health Advisors, and is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Tyler Cowen is an economist, blogger, best-selling author, and professor of economics at George Mason University and at the Center for the Study of Public Choice. He is also the director of the Mercatus Center, a research center dedicated to bridging the gap between academic research and public policy problems by training students, conducting research of consequence, and persuasively communicating economic ideas to solve society’s most pressing problems and advance knowledge about how markets work to improve people’s lives.

How Corporations Destroyed American Democracy – Chris Hedges.

How Corporations Destroyed American Democracy – Chris Hedges.
Filmed at Socialism 2010 in Chicago by Paul Hubbard

Healthcare Choice: I want to give them less and make them think it’s more

00:00
earlier in this hour we heard the
00:03
results of a detailed survey done with
00:06
working-class voters in Ohio
00:09
obviously a swing state obviously an
00:11
important state on the issues that
00:14
mattered to them and what we heard was
00:16
that about a third of them can’t be
00:18
moved because they’re just rock hard
00:19
right winter is racist whatever and we
00:24
heard that there are at least a third of
00:26
them who definitely can be moved
00:28
including some former Trump voters as
00:30
well as a working-class voters of other
00:33
kinds and we learned that these movable
00:35
voters are not only unafraid of big
00:39
ideas they love big ideas now they’re
00:42
not deep into the policy details but
00:44
they love the idea of a green new deal
00:45
they love the idea of Medicare for all
00:48
and so on so the question is how do we
00:51
reach these reachable voters and why
00:55
would be.we be afraid of the ideas they
00:58
embrace but we have an entire
01:01
politically political industry that
01:04
includes the Republican Party and large
01:06
chunks of the Democratic designed to
01:08
make them afraid of big ideas and that
01:11
is what we need to fight I’m gonna
01:13
suggest here’s one way to fight it by
01:17
telling them simple plain truths about
01:21
policies like Medicare for all and like
01:24
the green new deal and I want to talk a
01:25
little bit about Medicare for all for a
01:29
very specific reason I used to work and
01:31
some of you may know in the health
01:34
insurance field and related fields
01:38
and I used survives large corporations
01:40
worked for large corporations I’m not
01:43
proud of it but I guess the information
01:45
it’s useful now I’m not ashamed of it
01:47
either it’s just in what I what I was
01:49
aware of at the time and then an
anecdote came to mind recently which I
talked about at a Tedder of speech I
gave the other day and I want to share
it with you now because I was asked to
come in and advise in the 1990s one of
the most powerful CEOs in the country
ran an entire insurance Empire himself
and he
called in his advisors of which I was
considered one and he had all these
ideas for the employee health plan and
benefit plan cafeteria plans and flex
plans these were all buzzwords that were
around then and choices and options and
lists and and the group of people around
him many of whom were human resource
professionals didn’t even know what he
was driving at with all of this except
that he was using the terms so as the
then young and sort of brash person in
the room I said excuse me what exactly
are you trying to accomplish with the
employees here with all of this and he
said I want to give them less and make
them think it’s more
now that phrase is
always stuck with me and I wanted to
stick with you if you’re willing I want
to give them less and make them think
it’s more choice is a game that is often
used to give us less and make us think
it’s more
what should we have when it
comes to medical care we should have the
treatment we need when we need it by the
doctor we want at the facility that’s
best for us with the medication we need
we don’t need quote unquote choice of
insurance companies to see if they can
provide us any of those things and we
can’t use that information because we
most of the time don’t have any idea
what our upcoming health needs are gonna
be it’s a game they want to give you
less and make you think it’s more so if
nothing else fine part nothing else to
you from all of this
I want please when you hear a candidate
say as people to judge says I don’t
support Medicare for all I support
Medicare for all who want it I want you
to hear he wants to give me less and
make me think it’s more when a candidate
tells you that Medicare for all is too
expensive when despite saving lives it
would cost less I want you to hear they
want to give me less
make me think it’s more and when a
candidate is asked do you support
Medicare for all and they answer I
support a lot of plans I want you to
hear that candidate wants to give me
less and make me think it’s more now why
would we want that why would we not want
to have what we need and know in advance
what it is there is no reason in this
world not to support Medicare for all
and every reason to support it now there
is one ideological reason I have to be
perfectly honest which is that Medicare
for all gives Democratic control to a
large segment of the economy that has
been operating in secret largely for the
private enrichment of a few now if
ideologically you believe that’s the way
the world ought to work if you’re a
libertarian if you think the private
executives somewhere should have the
right to make life-and-death decisions
about you and your family yes by all
means you should support Medicare for
all everybody else I mean he should
oppose Medicare for all everybody else
of course should support it

The American Medical System Is One Giant Workaround

From Obamacare to nurses stockpiling medicine, health care has become a jury-rigged mess.

The nurses were hiding drugs above a ceiling tile in the hospital — not because they were secreting away narcotics, but because the hospital pharmacy was slow, and they didn’t want patients to have to wait. I first heard about it from Karen Feinstein, the president and chief executive of the Jewish Healthcare Foundation, who reported it at a board meeting several years ago. I wasn’t surprised: Hiding common medications is a workaround, an example of circumventing onerous rules to make sure patients get even basic care.

Workarounds are legion in the American health care system, to the extent that ECRI (formerly the Emergency Care Research Institute) listed them fourth among its list of top 10 patient safety concerns for health care organizations in 2018. Workarounds, the group writes, are an adaptive response — or perhaps one should say maladaptive response — to “a real or perceived barrier or system flaw.”

Staff use workarounds because they save valuable time. According to Anita Tucker, a business professor at Boston University, system breakdowns, or what she calls “operational failures,” and the workarounds they stimulate, can “consume up to 10 percent of a nurse’s day.” Most hospital nurses are stretched to their limits during their 12-hour shifts. No nurse has 90 minutes to lose to a slow pharmacy or an inefficient hospital bureaucracy.

I saw the common sense that can underlie workarounds when my hospital floor instituted bar code scanning for medication administration. Using a hand-held scanner to register bar codes on medications and patients’ hospital bracelets sounds smart. But then some medications routinely came without bar codes, or had the wrong bar codes, and we nurses weren’t given an easy way to report those errors. Patients’ wrist bands could be difficult to scan and the process disturbed them, especially if they were asleep. The lists of medications on the computer screen were also surprisingly hard to read, which slowed everything down.

But the biggest problem was that the scanning software did not work with our electronic medical records — so all drugs had to be checked off in both systems. This is a huge problem when dealing with patients like those receiving bone-marrow transplants, who might get 20 drugs every morning — some of which are delivered through IVs and come with nonstandard doses. What was already a lengthy process suddenly took twice as long.

Some nurses responded to the arrival of the bar code system with workarounds, including refusing to use the scanner, or taping copies of patient bar codes to their med carts. I tried to adhere to the rules, but if I was especially busy or couldn’t get a medication to scan, I would chuck the whole process.

However, because bar code scanning has been shown to reduce errors in medication administration, the hospital officials wanted it to be done consistently. They produced a public list of all the nurses on the floor. Each nurse was labeled green, yellow or red, depending on the percentage of medications he or she administered using bar codes. Family members, doctors — anyone could see how a nurse was graded.

Over time the list worked, but the sting of it also endured. We were being punished for taking time for patients, even if it meant bending the rules. No one among the managerial class seemed to understand that nurses care a lot about patient safety. The unheard concern was that a green light for bar code scanning meant a patient could fall into the red zone for something else.

Workarounds in health care always involve trade-offs like this, and often they are trade-offs of values. Increasingly, the entire health care system is built on workarounds — many of which we don’t always recognize as such.

Consider the use of medical scribes, who complete doctors’ electronic paperwork in real time during patient visits. The American College of Medical Scribe Specialists reported that 20,000 scribes were working in 2014, and expects that number to climb to 100,000 in 2020.

I have heard doctors say they need a scribe to keep up with electronic medical records, the mounting demand of which is driving a burnout epidemic among physicians. Scribes allow doctors to talk with and examine patients without having a computer come between them, but at base they are a workaround for the well-known design flaws of electronic medical records.

As a nurse, when I first learned about scribes, I was outraged. On the job, nurses hear repeatedly how health care companies can’t afford to have more nurses or aides to work with patients on hospital floors — and yet, money is available to pay people to manage medical records. Doctors who use scribes tend to see their productivity and work satisfaction increase, but the trade-off is still there: Scribes demonstrate the extent to which paperwork has become more important than patients in American health care.

The Affordable Care Act, which I support because it has made health care available to millions of previously uninsured Americans, is also an enormous workaround. The act expanded Medicaid, protected patients with pre-existing conditions and offered subsidies to make private insurance more affordable. Obamacare, though, was never intended to make sure that all Americans had affordable care; it works around our failure to provide health care to all our citizens. In its own way, the Affordable Care Act is as jury-rigged as using ceiling tiles to stash medications.

The United States spends more per person on health care than any other industrialized country, yet our health outcomes, including overall life expectancy, are worse. And interventions like bar code scanning are a drop in the bucket when it comes to preventable medical mistakes, which are now the third-leading cause of death in the country. Our health care nonsystem is literally killing us.

As the workarounds accumulate, they reveal how fully dysfunctional American health care is. Scribes are workarounds for electronic medical records, and bar code scanning is a workaround for our failure to put patient safety anywhere near the top of the health care priority list. It’s a values trade-off that the nurses on my floor instinctively understood.