I Knew They Wouldn't Work from the Beginning

[furrbear]

Huffington Post's Compromise Co-Op Proposal Won't Lower Costs, Government Study Showed:

...The U.S. General Accounting Office produced a report on cooperatives in March 2000 that was mostly sour on the idea. Using five different co-ops as examples, the study concluded that on the key function -- lowering the cost of insurance -- these non-profit insurance pools came up well short.

"The cooperatives' potential to reduce overall premiums is limited because (1) they lack sufficient leverage as a result of their limited market share; (2) the cooperatives have not been able to produce administrative cost savings for insurers; or (3) their state laws and regulations already restrict to differing degrees the amount insurers can vary the premiums charged different groups purchasing the same health plan."

Part of the problem was availability. While cooperatives sought to provide more choice of insurance to participants, oftentimes they failed to get consumers a broader range of options. "Not all plans are available in all areas served by each cooperative, and individual employers using some cooperatives may limit the choice of plans their employees can select," the study concluded...

It appears the plan that the Blue Dog Democrats are pushing apparently isn't going to do much societal good if the societal good we're aiming for from this healthcare debate is to reign in costs. Reigning in cost is the way is supposedly the required outcome for long term, making sure healthcare doesn't take too big a bite out of our economy. Check out the report and see what you think.

Comments

[mellowtigger]

Thanks for the link. Yes, I'm getting more pessimistic that anything at all useful will get accomplished. In 2000, I suppose that report would've been released back when math and science determined results instead of white house policy. I suppose it'd be a trustworthy evaluation.