Two-Tiered Medical Care?

healthcare-e1358282559714The result [of ObamaCare], some argue, is a two-tiered system of health care: Many of the people who buy health plans on the exchanges have fewer hospitals and doctors to choose from than those with coverage through their employers.

A number of the nation’s top hospitals — including the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles, and children’s hospitals in Seattle, Houston and St. Louis — are cut out of most plans sold on the exchange…

In New Hampshire, consumers who purchase insurance through the exchange have only one choice of carrier — Anthem BlueCross BlueShield— because no other insurer applied to join the exchange. The company’s network includes access to only 16 of the state’s 26 acute-care hospitals. (Washington Post)

Comments (10)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. JD says:

    Of course. In a system where costs don’t match reality, the price is still always paid.

    • Sabal says:

      The market mechanism is immutable, just because they think that they can circumvent the laws of nature doesn’t mean that they can. This is all akin to jumping off a cliff with paper wings.

  2. Dewaine says:

    I can see the future.

    People will be mad about this and, yet again, blame the rich. Thus, opening another front for single payer.

    • Sabal says:

      I think the purpose of the left is always to cause mayhem so they can try to “fix it” with more government.

  3. Royal Doctors says:

    very difficult market mechanism… insurance companies in europe still do not understand the cost containment they have to do in the hospitals but do just contract the most cheap ones…. when the patient would like to the expensive hospitals he should pay a higher monthly fee to the insurance company and there is a risk of not covering all the hospital fees ( which is a disaster in those expensive hospital when you are not fully covered !! ) joris vanvinckenroye- CEO Royal Doctors

  4. PJ says:

    Knowing people whose lives have been saved by those very hospitals, it’s devastating to see what is happening to limit options for patients.

    • JD says:

      I’m not worried about people getting quality care from less-prestigious institutions, although we have created incentives to exclude people from the best?

  5. Perry says:

    Cost-saving, not life-saving, that’s what all this is about.

  6. Bob Hertz says:

    This is old news but worth repeating.

    The prestige hospitals in general drive a hard bargain with insurance companies. They are less likely to accept discounts.

    It is understandable why insurers want to avoid them.
    The ACA is just making this happen faster.

    Also — insurance companies can no longer outright deny anyone with a disabled child or a cancer history.

    But they can discourage such people from applying by narrow networks.

    To put it bluntly, anyone who even cares what hospitals or oncologists are in a plan is potentially a money losing customer. Either they have a family history of disease or they have a disease themselves.

    Narrow networks are in one sense free enterprise at work. Good old traditional,socialistic Medicare has very few narrow networks.