In the Journal of Nov. 28, economist Robert Samuelson claims that health care costs are “out of control.” Quite the opposite: They are totally in control – by the government.
That is a problem.

Health care refers to goods and services delivered by hospitals and providers to be consumed by patients. Costs to providers and institutions are driven more by government regulation and bureaucracy than by labor costs or MRI machines. Meanwhile, payments to providers and institutions – what Samuelson calls “costs” – are controlled by government.

The intersection between government policy and food has been a hot topic these days. At the same time, President Obama and Republicans in Washington are engaged in a struggle over how to resolve trillion-dollar annual deficits. The two are connected.

If you listen to the radio, you may have heard our ads urging Gov. Martinez to veto SB 208. The ads are posted below:

The furor about Death Panels has recently resurfaced. Unfortunately, public attention is focused in the wrong direction. Death Panels ARE part of the Healthcare “Reform’ Act, just not where the newspaper pundits tell us to beware.

HR 3590, perversely titled the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act (PPAHCA), will provide funding for end-of-life planning and hospice care. That is certainly a good thing and is not a Death panel. Doctors have always been able to talk with terminal patients about easing our final days. Paying them seems only fair, is money well spent, and is NOT a license to kill us. End-of-life care does not constitute a Death Panel but the Cost Effectiveness Commission* does.

*I created the name “Cost Effectiveness Commission” because I simply could not use the name the government gave it. Their name – Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) – is as gratuitous and disingenuous as its parent PPAHCA. The PCORI is budget-centered and population-focused but what it does not do is make the individual patient’s welfare of primary importance.

Our next governor has a huge plate of problems to deal with on Day One of her administration starting next month, and I would have preferred to lessen her decision load, but unfortunately, I'm afraid I'm going to pile on one more — ObamaCare.

Twenty states have joined in an amended federal lawsuit against the Reid/Pelosi/Obama nationalized health care plan.

Granted, my doctor is kind of a career curmudgeon, so it didn't surprise me a bit last week when I was in his office for a routine checkup, he started in on the legislation.

Congressional Republicans are now running for office on a platform of repealing the recent federal takeover of the US health care system. Unfortunately, while repeal would undo a great deal of harm, positive reforms are needed in the health care sector. Rio Grande Foundation board member and physician Deane Waldman wonders what will happen and outlines some positive reforms in a new article "If Obamacare Is Repealed, What Then?"

There has recently been a great deal of consternation and concern over the rate increase enacted by Blue Cross Blue Shield New Mexico (BCBS). The company, a “mutual” firm which is legally obligated to re-invest any profits back into the company, had originally requested a 24.6 percent rate increase. Then, just as the Public Regulation Commission (PRC) was holding public hearings on the issue, an agreement was reached that allowed Blue Cross to raise rates by 21 percent this year. Approval of the rate hike, absent public input, generated a public outcry.

On August 31, 2009, the Rio Grande Foundation hosted a health care debate between Cato Institute health care policy expert Michael Cannon and New Mexico-based American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees representative, Carter Bundy.