No easy answers to healthcare dilemma

On November 9 the Oxnard Chamber convened policy experts to have a frank discussion about the healthcare system in our state and our country. Featured at the Oxnard Business Outlook were Loren Kaye, President of the California Foundation for Commerce and Education; Darren Lee, President and CEO of St. John’s Hospitals; Kelly Bruno, President and CEO of than National Health Foundation; Dale Villani, Chief Executive Officer of Gold Coast Health Plan; and Dr. Adam Cavallero of UCLA Health.
 
While there was a lot of discussion about different healthcare delivery systems and preventative care programs, there is no magic answer to how we tear up the existing model nor what to replace it with.
 
As you may recall there is a piece of legislation (SB 562 The Healthy California Act) active in Sacramento that would provide healthcare for all. The price for this model is estimated to be more than $400 billion (Yes, with a “B”). For perspective, the State budget for all expenditures—not just health care, but also K-12 and higher education, social services, transportation, corrections and every other expense category—totals less than half of that amount. The bill was held in committee in 2017 because it did not contain a funding mechanism.
 
I like to look at what other states and countries are doing that provide a better return on the healthcare dollars invested. I recently ran across an article in Fox&Hounds Daily with some very interesting data I wanted to share:

• The United States currently spends nearly 18% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on healthcare but ranks 41st in life expectancy, 55th in infant mortality, and 49th in maternal mortality. By comparison, the vast majority of industrialized countries—including the United Kingdom, France, Canada, and Japan—spend between 9 and 12 percent of their respective GDPs on healthcare while achieving substantially better healthcare outcomes.
• But Singapore is crushing them all both in terms of quality and cost.  It can not only boast of being the only country in the top five in infant mortality, life expectancy, and maternal mortality—but also of spending just 4.7 percent per year of its GDP on healthcare.  Singapore delivers the world’s best healthcare outcomes for 70 percent less than what the United States is spending and about 50 to 60 percent less than what the single-payer countries are spending.
• The Singapore model is particularly intriguing because major parts of its system have been implemented here in the U.S. with great success, including by major private sector employers like Whole Foods Markets and by government-sector innovators such as the State of Indiana with its Healthy Indiana Plan.
• The Singapore model is based on three key principles: choice, responsibility, and security. Some of the Singapore model—for example requiring everyone to deposit 7% of their income in a Health Savings Account—would be difficult to implement in the U.S., but innovators like Whole Foods Markets have implemented effective substitutes here in the United States. 
   
  Since it doesn’t appear we can build a better system on our own, why in the world do we not look to others who are delivering quality healthcare at an affordable price?

---