Latest Reports

The Transfer of Public Patients into the Private Health Care System
Free Market Health Care - 07.23.09
On May 8, 2009, a gathering of people in Milwaukee talked about free market health care. As each discussion leader completed a talk, the audience asked piercing, well-informed questions. Clearly, this audience wanted to avoid making government the arbiter of personal health care in the United States. Then a man stood to express an opinion. We call him Bob. Bob genuinely believed it to be in the spirit of that day's discussion. His appearance was impeccable, and he wore expensive clothes. Obviously, he had enjoyed financial success (or at least, wanted everyone to believe so). "I am 70 years old now," Bob began. "My wife and I are on Medicare Advantage, and we don't pay anything for it. Well, except for a few low co-pays. Why can't our children have a plan like this?" Bob made no mention of the fact that his great-grandchildren were stuck with paying the cost of his entitlement to Medicare.

Ten Ways Consumer Driven Health Care Is A Proven Success
Greg Scandlen, The Heartland Institute - 07.23.09
A revolution is underway in American health care, but you won't read about it newspapers or see it on TV. The revolution involves a growing number of Americans who are reclaiming their right to buy health care goods and services that they decide are beneficial. They are shrugging off the heavy hand of regulation by Washington politicians, insurance companies, pharmaceutical firms, hospitals, medical organizations, federal agencies, and giant employers, all of whom are fighting over who gets what of the trillions of dollars Americans spend each year on health care.

Analysis of the July 15 draft of The American Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009
The Lewin Group - 07.22.09
The American Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 would require all Americans to have health insurance. To assure access to affordable coverage, the bill expands the Medicaid program to cover all adults with incomes below 133 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) ($29,300 for a family of four), and provides premium subsidies for people living between 133 percent and 400 percent of the FPL (i.e., $88,000 for a family of four). It also requires most employers to contribute to the cost of coverage for their workers.

The 'Public Plan' Would Be the Only Plan
Scott E. Harrington - 06.15.09
The Obama administration and the Democratic congressional leadership appear poised to create a "competing" government health insurer as part of its health-care reform. President Obama believes this would provide "a better range of choices, make the health care market more competitive, and keep the insurance companies honest," as he wrote to Sens. Edward Kennedy and Max Baucus on June 2. In reality, equal competition between a public plan and private plans would be impossible. The public plan would inexorably crowd out private plans, leading to a single-payer system.

A New Public Health Plan: How Congressional Details Will Impact Doctors and Patients
Greg D’Angelo - 06.12.09
President Obama and congressional leaders are proposing the creation of a new public health insurance plan to compete with private insurance plans. The President first proposed a public insurance option during the 2008 presidential campaign, but now the details and design of this new option--like most other aspects of the health reform legislation currently under development--have been left almost entirely to Congress. Many in Congress are looking to Medicare as a model for a new public health plan, yet they fail to realize the consequences for patients and providers alike, as millions of Americans would lose the private coverage that they have today.

The Beginning of the End of Private Health Insurance: How Obama's public health insurance option will quickly evolve into the only option
Ronald Bailey - 06.09.09
In his weekly radio address on Saturday, President Barack Obama declared that "it's time to deliver" on health care reform. In a letter to Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), President Obama wrote, "I strongly believe that Americans should have the choice of a public health insurance option operating alongside private plans. This will give them a better range of choices, make the health care market more competitive, and keep insurance companies honest." This week Sen. Kennedy released a draft of his proposed "American Health Choices Act" which includes one such optional public health insurance plan. The administration's goal is to report that bill out of the relevant Senate committees by the end of this month. Earlier this week, Republican lawmakers sent a letter of their own, strongly warning the president that "Washington-run programs undermine market-based competition through their ability to impose price controls and shift costs to other purchasers. Forcing free market plans to compete with these government-run programs would create an unlevel playing field and inevitably doom true competition."

How State Control Can Send Health Care Off Course: The Canadian Example
Valentin Petkantchin - 06.01.09
Forced to deal with the exploding costs of France's compulsory health insurance system, successive governments have attempted repeatedly - especially since 1996 - to impose control over health care spending. The new "hospital, patients, health and territories" legislative bill is a further step in this direction, extending considerably the control exerted by the government over the entire system, especially over the work of independent medical practitioners. The French health care system is moving gradually to resemble those under full state control, such as Canada's. The Canadian system clearly shows the longer-term risks of such a policy. If the goal is to control health care spending, putting government in charge is not the way to go: in Canada, spending levels have barely been influenced even though most of the health care system (covering care judged to be "medically necessary"2) has been placed almost totally under the control of public authorities. This means that patients - deprived of the opportunity to find quicker and higher-quality care than what the public system provides - have to put up with ever longer waiting lists

Why a New Public Plan Will Not Improve American Health Care
Walton J. Francis - 05.05.09
A sticking point in crafting major national health care reform legislation, according to media accounts, is whether or not Congress should create a new "pub­lic" plan as an alternative to private insurance plans. The role of a public plan has become something of a litmus test in the debate over reform. The Washington Post correctly says the "fixation on a public plan is bizarre and counterproductive."[1] During the presidential campaign, candidate Barack Obama prominently championed competition among private health plans as well as a new public plan to compete against them. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) has also endorsed the idea. Ranking Republican committee member Sena­tor Chuck Grassley (R-IA) strongly opposes it. Sena­tor Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and newly installed House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) are long-time advocates of installing a government-run plan as the primary, per­haps only, national health insurance system.

Why a New Public Plan Will Not Improve American Health Care
Walton J. Francis - 05.05.09
A sticking point in crafting major national health care reform legislation, according to media accounts, is whether or not Congress should create a new "pub­lic" plan as an alternative to private insurance plans. The role of a public plan has become something of a litmus test in the debate over reform. The Washington Post correctly says the "fixation on a public plan is bizarre and counterproductive."[1] During the presidential campaign, candidate Barack Obama prominently championed competition among private health plans as well as a new public plan to compete against them. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) has also endorsed the idea. Ranking Republican committee member Sena­tor Chuck Grassley (R-IA) strongly opposes it. Sena­tor Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and newly installed House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) are long-time advocates of installing a government-run plan as the primary, per­haps only, national health insurance system.

Euro-Canada Health Consumer Index 2009
Daniel Eriksson M.Sc. and Arne Björnberg Ph.D. - 05.01.09
The Health Consumer Powerhouse (HCP) is a centre for visionary thinking and action- promoting consumer-related healthcare in Europe. HCP declares that "Tomorrow's health consumer will not accept any traditional borders." In order to become a powerful actor, and to build the necessary reform pressure from below, the consumer needs access to knowledge in order to compare health policies, consumer services and quality outcomes. In the 2009 Euro- Canada Index, Canada's Frontier Centre for Public Policy (FCPP), together with HCP, continues its commitment to evaluate health policy across Canada. All the European countries included in the Index share Canada's commitment to accessible and effective healthcare. By comparing the performance of Canada's healthcare system with the extremely varied systems in Europe, we can gain much insight into how Canada is succeeding and how it can improve.

Single Payer: Why Government-Run Health Care Will Harm Both Patients and Doctors
Robert A. Book - 04.03.09
Many independent experts expect a "crowd out" of existing private options and a rapid evolution toward a single payer system of national health insurance.

Leviathan's Drug Problem: Federal Monopoly of Pharmaceutical Regulation and its Deadly Cost
John R. Graham - 03.27.09
In recent years, the contamination of American staples such as spinach, tomatoes, and peanut butter has made news headlines nationwide and has now captured the attention of President Obama.

Los Angeles' Martin Luther King, Jr. - Harbor Hospital Shows the Cost of Government Monopoly Health Care
John R. Graham - 03.18.09
Earlier this month, state and local officials announced an agreement to re-open the Martin Luther King, Jr.-Harbor Hospital in the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles in 2012. For four decades, Los Angeles' most vulnerable, low-income patients suffered terribly because of the county's management of this failed hospital, which finally closed all in-patient services in August, 2007.

Testimony to the U.S. Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Health
Sally C. Pipes - 03.17.09
PRI's President and CEO was invited to give testimony regarding "Making Health Care Work for American Families: Ensuring Affordable Coverage" to the U.S. Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Health.

Union Bosses, Corporate Lobbyists, and Maybe Even A Secretary of Health
John R. Graham - 03.17.09
Within three weeks of his inauguration, President Obama made a "down payment" on health reform that would put any used-car buyer to shame. Last month, we noted that President Obama had increased the fragmentation, bureaucracy, and cost of health care in at least three ways.

Health Reform in California: Three Simple Steps
John R. Graham - 02.25.09
John R. Graham, the Director of Health Care Studies, was invited to testify before the California State Senate Standing Health Committee in Sacramento on the "Outlook for Health Reform."

Obama's Unhealthy Start: SCHIP Explosion, Medicaid Bailout, COBRA's Bite
Adam Frey, John R. Graham - 02.24.09
Things are changing fast in American health care. Within three weeks of his inauguration, President Obama has seized control of Americans' health care choices in many areas. Let's focus on three.

If Eight Is Enough, Why Isn't $60 Billion?
John R. Graham - 02.19.09
Nada Suleman and her eight babies are much in the news, with good reason. There are lessons here for everyone, and they extend beyond the fertility debate.

Health-Status Insurance: How Markets Can Provide Health Security
By John H. Cochrane - 02.18.09
If you develop a long-term condition, then lose your job or are divorced, you can lose your health insurance. Free markets can solve this problem, and provide life-long, portable health security, while enhancing consumer choice and competition.

A Better Way to Generate and Use Comparative-Effectiveness Research
Michael F. Cannon - 02.06.09
President Barack Obama, former U.S. Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, and others propose a new government agency that would evaluate the relative effectiveness of medical treatments. The need for "comparative-effectiveness research" is great. Evidence suggests Americans spend $700 billion annually on medical care that provides no value. Yet patients, providers, and purchasers typically lack the necessary information to distinguish between high- and low-value services.

The Wrong Health Care Fixes
By Michael D. Tanner, CATO Institute - 01.22.09
President Obama has made it clear that he intends to follow through on his campaign promise to reform the US health-care system. But, as so often, the devil is in the details - and in health care, the details are particularly devilish.

The Fallacy of Health Care Reform as Economic Stimulus
By Robert Book, WebMemo #223, The Heritage Foundation - 01.16.09
After spending decades trying to reduce health care costs, some commentators and policymakers now argue that health care costs should be increased to stimulate the economy...

Critical Error: Tom Daschle's Blurred Health Care Vision
John R. Graham - 01.13.09
Tom Daschle's new book, Critical: What Can We Do About the Health-Care Crisis, confirms that advocates for a complete government takeover of American health care have learned an important lesson: Don't try it in one big bite. Here Daschle and co-author Jeanne Lambrew have direct experience.

Dear President-Elect: Please Put Patients First
By Grace-Marie Turner and Amy Menefee, The Galen Institute - 12.31.08
An open letter to President-elect Obama and Secretary-designate Daschle in response to requests for comments on health reform...

How a Public Health Plan Will Erode Private Care
By Robert E. Moffit, Ph.D., Backgrounder #2224, The Heritage Foundation - 12.22.08
President-elect Obama's rationale for a new public health plan is that it would give Americans who are not enrolled in employment-based health insurance coverage, or those with insecure coverage, the opportunity to obtain stable, affordable health insurance with a guaranteed set of government-standardized benefits. But while this might look like a prescription for consumer choice and competition, the reality is very different.

Does Barack Obama Support Socialized Medicine?
Michael F. Cannon - 10.07.08
Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (IL) has proposed an ambitious plan to restructure America's health care sector. Rather than engage in a detailed critique of Obama's health care plan, many critics prefer to label it "socialized medicine." Is that a fair description of the Obama plan and similar plans? Over the past year, prominent media outlets and respectable think tanks have investigated that question and come to a unanimous answer: no.

Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada 2008
Nadeem Esmail and Maureen Hazel with Michael A. Walker - 10.01.08
This study is the Institute's eighteenth attempt to document the extent to which queues for visits to specialists and for diagnostic and surgical procedures are being used to control health care expenses. When we began producing waiting list measures in 1988, there was anecdotal evidence that hospital waiting times were becoming significant. However, there were no systematic measurements of the extent of waiting.

The Market for Medical Care: Why You Don't Know the Price; Why You Don't Know about Quality; And What Can Be Done about It.
Devon M. Herrick and John C. Goodman - 03.12.07
In most markets, prices and quality indicators are transparent - clear and readily available to consumers. Health care is different: Prices are difficult to obtain and often meaningless when they are disclosed. Many patients never learn the cost of their care.

NICE is NASTY
Stephen Pollard - 03.15.06
There is a golden rule in public policy: the name of a body is, almost always, the exact opposite of its real effect on the world. The UK's National Institute for Clinical Excellence, known as NICE, is a typical example of this phenomenon. Hailed by the Labour government, which set it up in April 1999, as a means of promoting excellence across the National Health Service, its real effect--one might say its real purpose--has been rather different: to restrict the variety of treatments available to patients. Not so much NICE, in other words, as NASTY: Not Available, So Treat Yourself.