Sunday, September 7, 2025

Reducing the cost of health care

A college classmate asked me for ideas about reducing the cost of health care.  Here's my response:

Thank you for asking me to suggest ways to reduce the cost of health care.  I certainly do NOT pretend to be an expert in this complicated topic.  Although I’m an actuary, I didn’t work on acute health care.  I studied the issue significantly in 2009 to help our country decide how to proceed.  Unfortunately, I learned that my politicians were not interested in my expertise.

To answer, I reviewed numerous sources, including an article of mine published in 2009.  I apologize that this is so lengthy, but there is no “magic bullet”.  Many changes could collectively have a significant impact.  I invite readers to add ideas and to promote some of these ideas if you like them.

In 2009, I described the advantages and disadvantages of three alternative philosophies.  The “Equality Philosophy” espouses the same health care for everybody.  The “Rising Tide Philosophy” espouses a safety net, allowing people to purchase more health care.  The “Libertarian Philosophy” espouses no threshold.  My article included 26 principles that should guide any of those philosophies.

Since 2009, our health care system has had many modifications.  I’ve given them little thought because I had no influence and felt I could have more impact by investing my time otherwise.  Nonetheless, I suspect you’ll conclude that at least some of my points are relevant.

I number paragraphs to help people focus a comment or question.  Several topics could appear in various sections below and the sections are not necessarily in priority order.  The sections are:

1.      Goals

2.      Pharmaceutical costs

3.      Tort Reform

4.      Price transparency and “skin in the game”

5.      Healthier food

6.      Regulatory Issues

7.      Environment

8.      End-of-life care

9.      Long-Term Care

10.   Other Medicaid issues

11.   Health Care fraud

12.   Mental health

13.   Overreliance on pharmaceuticals, psychologists and technology

14.   Drug policy

15.   Mental health

16.   Integrated health insurance

17.   Veterans’ care

18.   Education

19.   Foreign aid

20.   Gun control

                                             

1.      Our goals are unrealistic to some degree. 

a.      We citizens want everything without having to pay, so politicians make crazy promises.  With an aging population and a desire to tame or cure myriad diseases and with viruses replicating and changing, the cost of health care seemingly must rise. 

b.      We make invalid comparisons to foreign health care systems, ignoring our greater obesity, more sedentary behavior, more convenient and prompt health care for those who can afford it, much greater investment in end-of-life care, much more expensive tort system, etc.

c.      We seem unable to quantify the value of increased productivity as an economic offset.  Increased quality of life is a return on the investment, albeit not necessarily an economic return.

2.      Pharmaceutical costs.  It is important not to kill “the Golden Goose”.  If we stymie research, we won’t even know what we’re missing. 

a.      I believe pharmaceutical manufacturers priced drugs so USA sales would cover R&D costs.  When other countries put arbitrary limits on price, manufacturers could accommodate those governments if the price was more than their marginal cost of production.

President Trump issued an executive order to establish a “most favored nation” pricing policy.  That is, the USA would pay the lowest price at which that drug is offered to a group of developed countries.  By limiting the comparison to a group of developed countries, the executive order avoided the pitfall of stymieing donations of drugs to needy countries.  The MFN approach may help manufacturers negotiate more strongly with European countries, resulting in a price increase there and decrease in the USA.

(CNN asked a Democrat about this.  The lady said she was glad to see President Trump adopting one of President Biden’s programs.  The CNN host failed to comment.  President Biden claimed he was allowing the government to “negotiate” with pharmaceutical companies, but his program involved the government setting a price.  The manufacturer could contest the price, but the government had total control on the final price, and if the manufacturer was not willing to sell at that price, it would be fined!)

b.      Prescription Benefit Managers are middlemen in filling prescriptions.  The theory is that, as large buyers, they can negotiate discounts from manufacturers and pass those discounts on to clients.  However, some of their practices may need to be outlawed.  For example, I understand that they created intermediaries (under common ownership) which retain some of the discounts, leaving the PBM with less “discount” to pass on to the client.

c.      Private industry can help: Mark Cuban’s CostPlus Drugs and other disrupters (GoodRx) help drive down the cost of pharmaceuticals.  CostCo is driving down the cost of hearing aids.

d.      The Rx Advocates educates people about available manufacturer drug discount programs.

e.      GLPs are an interesting case.  They are causing health costs to soar but may eventually reduce health costs significantly.  In 2009, I commented “obesity costs us $117 billion/year in health care costs, not counting the additional costs of workplace absenteeism, etc.”

3.      Tort reform would save money by reducing the number of lawsuits, reducing aggregate settlements, lowering medical liability insurance premiums, and especially by reducing defensive medicine. 

a.      One study indicates 2.6% potential reduction in costs, but it might be higher. 

b.      An example of fraudulent tort suits: “He Fought the Tort Bar -- and Won”, published in the WSJ, May 4, 2009.

c.      Punitive damages assessed against health providers should be used to offset the cost of health care rather than to enrich plaintiffs. 

d.      Plaintiffs should be responsible for the cost of a lawsuit they lose, if the judge or jury determines that the lawsuit was frivolous.

e.      My example of defensive medicine: Having demonstrated a minor heart arrhythmia, I wore an external heart monitor for a while.  The results were favorable, but my doctors ordered a 45-minute exercise EKG stress test, which I passed with flying colors.  My cardiac electrophysiologist educated me about my very infrequent arrhythmias, assuring me repeatedly that I was fine and needed no more attention.  When I asked a couple of simple questions as to which chambers had misfired, he excused himself to talk with a senior doctor.  When he returned, I suddenly needed surgery to try induce arrhythmia.  If they were successful, they would implant a pacemaker.  If not, they would implant a heart monitor.  I demurred, saying it didn’t seem necessary based on what he had told me, but he stuck to his new story.  I then consulted my other cardiologist; she suggested it was a good idea.  I’ve had the heart monitor nearly 3 years; it has never gone off. 

4.      Price transparency and “skin in the game”:

a.      Price transparency helps but if health consumers don’t have “skin in the game”, they have little incentive to control cost by shopping around, negotiating a discount, or finding alternate solutions.  

b.      I’m a fan of Health Savings Accounts with high deductibles for people who can afford them.

c.      Skin in the game/incentives would make people more likely to adopt lifestyle changes such as exercise, reduced substance abuse, and better diet and to preventive health options.

d.      Originally, the Affordable Care Act had an artificially low ratio of insurance premium cost for smokers vs. non-smokers.  That ratio was subsequently raised so may be high enough now, but it is worth reviewing that ratio and other potential factors to reflect in pricing.

e.      Transparency includes admitting the huge size of our “off-ledger” liabilities.  Only some of those liabilities are related to health care, but our health care is likely to suffer greatly when our economy collapses due to its debt burden.  If we believe in “preventive care”, we should address our huge on-ledger and off-ledger debt now.

5.      Healthier food: We should encourage consumption of healthier food.  Here are some ways to do so:

a.      SNAP cannot be used to purchase alcohol, tobacco, or foods that are hot at the time of sale.  During his last term as Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg sought permission to exclude sugary drinks from food stamp purchases, but the USDA denied his request.  Recently, the Trump administration approved such limits in AR, ID and UT.  This could be helpful.  Bloomberg also tried to outlaw 32-oz servings of such drinks, arguing that people could get two 16-oz servings and/or refills.  Such ideas would probably improve health.

b.      I recently hosted an event for The Land Institute and American Farmland Trust.  Several other food-related non-profits attended, some of which are noted below.

                                          i.     The Land Institute creates deeply-rooted perennial grain crops to replace our current annual crops, with tremendous potential to sequester carbon, retain topsoil, decrease fossil fuel usage, and reduce or eliminate chemical inputs and toxic run-offs, thereby helping to stabilize climate, stop aquifer depletion, and regenerate diverse ecosystems, including pollinator populations.  See the root comparison below and learn more about their work in this 3-minute video or from KCUR.  This can also make food healthier and eventually less expensive.    

                                         ii.     I started supporting American Farmland Trust 40 years ago when they started helping farmers put easements on their property forbidding development for 99 years.  As a result, their property taxes were based on farm value rather than the development value of encroaching suburbs.  AFT works on an array of issues that improve the quality, and reduce the cost, of food while protecting the environment.

c.      The Giving Grove sponsors local fruit/nut orchards/bushes in areas of food insecurity.  I thought it was a great idea, but not sustainable.  However, I supported the Giving Grove, and they proved me wrong, now having expanded to 20 cities across the country!

d.      Tiered aquaponics allows high levels of production of healthy food with minimal inputs on vacant inner-city plots.  I supported Nile Valley Aquaponics in KC but I think it is out of business.  This idea is a HOME RUN, in my opinion! Do any of you know someone who would run with this idea?

e.      We have lots of ponds in housing developments.  I’ve tried to find a non-profit which would seed ponds with fish, then harvest them.  One non-profit was interested but wanted me to do all the work creating the project.  I have too many things on my plate.  Do any of you know a non-profit interested in this idea?

f.       We also have a lot of Canada geese that get thinned.  I’d like to support a non-profit which would thin the flocks and provide the geese to the nutritionally-challenged.  Some people criticize this idea because they say goose is not a healthy meal.  WebMD disagrees.  Furthermore, I think it is a moot point if people are going hungry.

g.      We should use “ugly” harvested fruit and also food wastes.   Urban Produce Push rescues fresh, nutrient-dense produce and delivers it directly to food pantries and people in food-insecure communities.  Panera’s Day-End Dough-Nation program is another great model.  Find and support such programs in your neighborhood.

h.      Food deserts are a huge problem.  Stores can’ t afford to stay open, partly because of theft and destruction.  We should be able to address those problems.

i.       RFK, Jr. banned the use of red dye #3.  I’m not knowledgeable about this issue.  I believe environmental issues (including diet) contribute to some health issues such as ADHD, autism, cancers, and dementia.  On the other hand, I’m skeptical of studies criticizing various compounds because enormous consumption would cause a problem.

6.      Regulatory issues may be sprinkled throughout this paper.  Some that don’t fit elsewhere:

a.      RFK, Jr.’s attacks on vaccines and fluoridation seem ill-advised.

b.      “Any willing provider” laws undermine plan administrators’ ability to negotiate lower costs.  While plans must have an adequate footprint of services, AWP is going too far.

c.      The FDA safety process has a fine line to toe, between safety and obstruction.  People with incurable diseases should be allowed to test new, unproven techniques.

d.      Immigration policy is important because immigrants provide supply that lowers the cost of health care.

e.      Many people are unaware that Independent Review panels can resolve some disputes between insurers and claimants for acute health claims and long-term care health claims.  I’m not sure this point belongs in this paper, but readers might be interested.

f.       It is my impression that nurses go into nursing to help patients but end up being unable to spend much time with patients.  We need to enable health care professionals to do their job without undue stress.

g.      I don’t know how much progress we’ve made toward compensating for quality of care vs. quantity of care.

7.      Environment: Improving the environment will also improve health.  Some of the above-mentioned food projects address this issue, but obviously there are a lot more environmental issues that can impact health.  I don’t think we fully understand the environmental impacts on health.  Climate is relevant to health, so climate change is clearly relevant.

8.      End-of-Life care: There is disagreement as to how extreme USA costs are for end-of-life care, but it is expensive.  Here are some sources: Patterns of Healthcare Spending in the Last Year of Life - PMC;    End-Of-Life Medical Spending In Last Twelve Months Of Life Is Lower Than Previously Reported | Health Affairs; End of Life Care Cost: The Financial Side of End of Life Care.  The second source says “End-of-life care accounts for approximately 30 percent of national Medicare spending and, as such, continues to have the attention of healthcare policymakers, payers, and providers.1,2 While decedents represent only a small fraction of all Medicare beneficiaries, Medicare spends on average $40 to $50 thousand per decedent in the last year of life compared to only $7 thousand per year for survivors.1,3,4

Risking being very politically incorrect and perhaps strategically unwise to mention this in the context of reduced health care costs, I am a strong supporter of Compassion & Choices, the main advocate of Medical Aid in Dying, which I consider to be a civil rights issue.  An unintended consequence is health care savings.

9.      Long-Term Care (LTC) costs:

a.      Medicaid is intended to pay medical costs for those who can’t afford to pay for their care.  If you receive Medicaid LTC in a facility, we protect your house, so you can return home if you recover.  When you die, we recover what we paid for your care from your assets so we can afford to provide services to others.  However, we do not collect against your house if your spouse, minor child or blind or disabled child still lives in it, nor if a child who was your caregiver for two years lives in the house or a sibling who was your caregiver for a year lives in the house.  That’s all fine, but beyond that, we ignore $730,000 of home value (2025 value; it is indexed.  In some states $1,097,000).  For two decades, I’ve written papers explaining why the $730,000 protection should be removed.  Democrats should love this reform because it protects Medicaid for the needy.  Republicans should love it because it upholds personal responsibility.  We’d save the government a lot of money and processing costs; quality of care would improve because providers would be paid private-pay rates rather than the discounted fees paid by Medicaid; state and Federal governments would earn more tax revenue from the increased income of care providers and from insurers and insurance brokers selling LTC insurance; and the types of care provided under Medicaid could be expanded.

b.      See Posit Science under mental health.

10.   Other Medicaid costs

a.      President Obama expanded Medicare promising that the federal government would pay 90% of the cost, clearly a problematic design.  I live in a state that hasn’t expanded Medicaid.  The #1 argument we hear for expanding Medicaid is that it is “free money”.  Obviously, it is not free as it should be funded by taxes we pay to the federal government.  Worse, the federal government doesn’t have the money.  Regardless of a person’s position on expansion, we should admit that it increases our destructive debt burden.  (Productivity offsets should be considered.)

b.      States assess “provider taxes”.  Providers (hospitals) profit from being taxed!  The state spends that tax on health care, triggering a federal match of 100% to 900% depending on the state and whether the money is spent on normal Medicaid or Medicaid expansion.  That money funnels back to the providers.  In 1991, when George H.W. Bush signed bipartisan legislation to limit this scheme, even  Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer voted for it.  Currently, a 6% or lower provider tax is automatically presumed to be fine; above that is subject to review.  The “Big, Beautiful Bill” reduces the 6% “safe harbor” to 5.5% and down to 3.5% in 2032.

11.   There is a lot of health care fraud by providers, patients and insurers. 

a.      For example, in my LTC insurance work, I run into people who have a long history of disability but want insurers to accept them as healthy risks for LTC insurance.  They explain that they really weren’t disabled all that time; their doctors were cooperating to help them maintain undeserved benefits. 

b.      Of course, there are disagreements as to how much fraud there is and, in some cases, it may cost more to catch the fraud than to ignore it.  However, that is a slippery slope, because ignoring fraud encourages fraud. 

c.      Insurers get criticized a lot, but, in my experience as an insurance executive, I was pressured by the insurer’s attorneys to pay inappropriate claims because payment was less expensive than the cost of litigation.  This is a ”tragedy of the commons”.   If each case is settled to avoid litigation, we encourage fraud. 

d.      Minor, but personal example: I locked my keys in my company car and did not want to bother my wife to bring my spare key.  An attendant at our parking garage offered to jimmy the passenger door to unlock the car.  I accepted, but the passenger car door could no longer be unlocked from the inside.  I asked the entity managing our company cars whether I had to go to a dealer or might find another mechanic who could fix the door less expensively.  The repeated response was that I should simply file a claim!  Despite my strong pushback, they continued to insist that I file a claim.  I reported them to our management.  They denied their behavior, so I hope I altered their behavior prospectively.

e.      Another example: I never got a bill from a dentist to cover my co-pay.  After repeated efforts, I learned that he was overbilling so that I wouldn’t have to pay my co-pay.  I never saw that dentist again.

f.       In general, I think we have slipped in raising our children to be virtuous.  For example, announcers compliment “cheating” in sports as being a “smart” play.  We need an inspirational leader to encourage us all to make sacrifices for the common good.

12.  Mental Health

a.      I’ve maintained for many decades that the pace of change in our society is so fast that even bright people have trouble keeping up with it.  Thus, there are increasing mental health problems.  I think most people suffer mental health illness during their lives.

b.      A friend of mine suggests the following direct-to-consumer behavioral health offerings

                                          i.     Benepower | TriggerHub

                                         ii.     Helping Humans - YourCoach Health

c.      I’ve been following Posit Science for over 20 years.  Their amazing brain fitness programs delay dementia, improve balance and hearing, widen useful field of vision (peripheral vision), improve mood, etc.  We should promote usage.  It is available as an extremely inexpensive employee benefit which I’m trying to promote (so far unsuccessfully).

d.      Digital health: Screen Sanity, an organization founded and run by my daughter, is a leader in addressing the mental health problems related to use of electronics.  Their services are also available as a very inexpensive employee benefit.

e.      Post-partum blues can be reduced significantly by educating prospective parents about the “fourth trimester”.  If first-time parents understood that their new-born would not be able to reward their attention for three months, those parents would be healthier after delivery.  Happiest Baby, which developed that concept, also has other ideas, including a medically-certified bassinet that keeps babies asleep through swaddling, playing music, and rocking, so parents enjoy better sleep and health.  I also promote Happiest Baby as an inexpensive employee benefit.

f.       A great way to improve mood and health is to help others.  We could try to inspire couch potatoes by scrolling messages under TV screens leading them to find ways they can help.

g.      When I was younger, I didn’t respect psychologists and psychiatrists, thinking people should simply apply self-discipline.  I have learned to have much more respect for such professionals, and I also think mental health care has improved a lot. 

My son did a lot better on a particular medication for his ADHD.  My daughter went through a mental health problem in high school when, in short order, my mother died, and a fellow student died in a car crash.  I was oblivious to the problem, but her friends and Young Life helped her pull out of it.

I think we have to be more attentive to others’ needs.

h.      At risk of inflaming some readers, I think we contribute to mental health issues and other health costs by grooming children to become transgender.  Puberty is a difficult stage in life in which most of us question our ability to be successful.  Persuading children that their uncertainty is because they aren’t really their gender seems unwise.  We twist language in many ways, in this case by saying gender is “assigned” at birth and treatment to change gender is “gender-affirming” care.  It seems obvious that it is “gender-disaffirming” care.

13.  Overreliance on pharmaceuticals, psychologists and technology. 

a.      Despite my above comments about mental health, I still think we have a cultural attitude that we want doctors, psychologists and medications to fix things for us.

b.      We also want convenience.  If we were willing to travel farther or to wait longer to access technology, we would not have so much technology and frequent upgrades every hospital.  Does the value of convenience offset the cost?  (My wife and I benefit greatly in this regard.  The health care we have within 5 minutes is incredible, but I could sacrifice that for the common good.)

c.      However, I believe electronic medical records will save cost (and improve health) in the long run and help analyze optimal treatment.

14.   Drug Policy: I don’t know the answer, but George Shultz and Paul Volcker wrote an article (WSJ, June 11, 2011) in which they suggested: “One possibility is to decriminalize the individual use of drugs while maintaining laws against supplying them, thus allowing law-enforcement efforts to focus on the drug peddlers. Some of the money that is saved can be spent on treatment centers, which drug users are more likely to seek out if doing so does not expose them to the risk of arrest.”

15.   Telehealth is a very promising way to reduce the cost of healthcare.  Telehealth regulation is a challenging area.  Some suggestions are listed in the Mental Health section.

16.  Integrated health insurance.  Acute health insurers would have more incentive to reduce long-term health risks if their policies covered long-term care.

17.   We under-spend on Veterans’ Care.  We should take better care of our soldiers, including cosmetic surgery.   

18.   Education:

a.      I’m not familiar with the health teaching in our schools.  It is my impression that we are doing a lot better than in the past, but maybe we can do better.

b.      Our public education system is failing us, relegating too many citizens to lives of poverty which include greater health challenges.  I’ve written about a lot of things we can do to improve education, among them public school choice and public charter schools.  (I don’t support total school choice, but the entrenched public school monopoly risks pushing a lot of people to favor school choice.  One way or another, we can’t continue locking people into under-performing inner-city schools!)  You can read about my ideas on education here: A Thausand Ideas: My Beliefs about Education.

19.   Foreign Aid: Some foreign aid contributes to our health by reducing the risk of pandemics and imported infections and by keeping peace.  (I consider micro-loans to be our best foreign policy.)

20.   Gun Control:  I would be remiss not to mention this topic.  I support some types of gun control but am haunted by the experience of the Dutch.  In the 1930s, Queen Wilhelmina convinced them that gun registry would make them safer.  When the Nazis rolled in, they found the list and went door-to-door demanding that specific weapons be surrendered.  As a result, the Dutch resistance had no guns.  (Source: “Was God on Vacation?”, an amazing autobiography by Jack van der Geest). 

No comments:

Post a Comment