Why 'Medicare-for-all' is not the answer
The Affordable Care Act survived the Supreme Court and a presidential election, so why does it face such an uncertain future? One reason is that it was essentially silent on how to control costs. This has led many pundits — including the likes of Paul Krugman and Robert Reich — to argue that the best approach would be to extend Medicare to everyone. A January National Research Council report on the relative disadvantage of America in global health outcomes, especially compared to countries with national health insurance, added further fuel to the fire. But is a larger government role in health insurance the best approach?
- 5 Hot Healthcare Ideas from SXSW
- Why Is Healthcare Price Transparency So Hard?
- EHR Spending Continues, But Jury Still Out on ROI
- Hospital CEO Turnover Hits Record High
- 4 Marketing Tactics for Hospitals on Instagram
- Hospital Groups Strike Back at Hospital Rating Systems
- Adverse Events from Insulin Prescribing 'An Epidemic'
- Care Coordination a Cost-Cutting Quality Driver
- Lahey Health Reexamines the Appropriate Care Model
- Payers Detail Strategies That Drive Consumer Satisfaction