注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

保罗·克鲁格曼 中文博客

授权网易博客进行中文翻译并推广

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我

美国经济学家

2008年诺贝尔经济学奖得主。 美國經濟學家及紐約時報的專欄作家,普林斯頓大學經濟系教授,是新凱恩斯主義经济学派代表。1953年出生美國紐約,约翰·F·肯尼迪高中毕业。1974年就讀耶鲁大學,1977年在麻省理工學院取得博士學位,受到经济学家诺德豪斯的注意。畢業後先後於耶鲁大学、麻省理工及史丹福大學任教。2000年起,成為普林斯頓大學經濟系教授。

文章分类
网易考拉推荐

克鲁格曼:美国医改关键是保险公司的诚信(2 )  

2009-06-11 07:26:47|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |
Consider the seemingly trivial matter of making it easier for doctors to deal with multiple insurance companies.

再来考虑一些表面上细微的事情,这将使得改革者,更加容易地处理纷繁复杂的保险公司的问题。

Back in 1993, the political strategist (and former Times columnist) William Kristol, in a now-famous memo, urged Republican members of Congress to oppose any significant health care reform. But even he acknowledged that some things needed fixing, calling for, among other things, “a simplified, uniform insurance form.”

 时间倒退回1993年,政治策略家(同时是时代周刊的前任专栏作家)威廉·克里斯托尔在一份如今已广为人知的备忘录中敦促国会的共和党议员反对任何重大的医疗改革计划。但是即使他都承认有些事情必须被修正,此外,他也呼吁一个简化的、统一的医疗改革。 

Fast forward to the present. A few days ago, major players in the health industry laid out what they intend to do to slow the growth in health care costs. Topping the list of AHIP’s proposals was “administrative simplification.” Providers, the lobby conceded, face “administrative challenges” because of the fact that each insurer has its own distinct telephone numbers, fax numbers, codes, claim forms and administrative procedures. “Standardizing administrative transactions,” AHIP asserted, “will be a watershed event.”

立马又回到眼前,就在几天以前,几家主要的保险公司,展示了他们打算减少医保成本的计划。排在AHIP计划清单榜首的就是“行政简化”——这家游说团体终于让步了。计划的提出者现在面临着管理的挑战,因为各家保险公司所用的是不同的电话号、传真号、邮编、催询单以及行政程序。AHIP断言:“使管理交易标准化,将会是保险业的一次分水岭的事件。”

Think about it. The insurance industry’s idea of a cutting-edge, cost-saving reform is to do what William Kristol — William Kristol! — thought it should have done 15 years ago.

好好想想吧,这次保险业前沿的、成本节省的改革正是15年前威廉·克里斯托尔所认为应该做的。 

How could the industry spend 15 years failing to make even the most obvious reforms? The answer is simple: Americans seeking health coverage had nowhere else to go. And the purpose of the public option is to make sure that the industry doesn’t waste another 15 years — by giving Americans an alternative if private insurers fall down on the job.

 那保险业怎么会花费了15年,都未能实现这些显而易见的改革计划?原因很简单:寻求医保覆盖的美国人在过去别无它法。而公共选择权的目的就是为了确保保险业不会再浪费另一个15年——如果私营保险失败了,它还可以给美国人民提供其他的选择。

Be warned, however. The insurance industry will do everything it can to avoid being held accountable.

小心了,可是保险公司会竭尽所能地为自己的行为逃避责任。 

At first the insurance lobby’s foot soldiers in Congress tried to shout down the public option with the old slogans: private enterprise good, government bad.

首先,保险公司在国会的马前卒会尽力阻止公众的选择权,用老一套进行游说口号的宣称:市场私营是好的,政府不应干预。

At this point, however, they’re trying to kill the public option in more subtle ways. The most recent ruse is the proposal for a “trigger” — the public option will only become available if private insurers fail to meet certain performance criteria. The idea, of course, is to choose those criteria to ensure that the trigger is never pulled.

 在这一点上,他们尝试用更加狡猾的方式扼杀公众的选择权。他们最近的的策略就是提议建立一个“触发机制”——只有在私营保险未能达到绩效标准的时候,公众的选择权才是有效的。按照这种思路,他们当然就会选择那些以确保这个“触发机制”永远不会执行的标准。

And here’s the thing. Without an effective public option, the Obama health care reform will be simply a national version of the health care reform in Massachusetts: a system that is a lot better than nothing but has done little to address the fundamental problem of a fragmented system, and as a result has done little to control rising health care costs.

 问题关键所在是,如果缺乏有效的公共选择权,奥巴马的医改计划,将仅是简单地把马萨诸塞州的医改版本给全国化了:这种体系只是聊胜于无,基本上没怎么解决一个碎片化的系统.的根本问题,因此也没有解决不断上涨的医保成本的问题。

Right now the health insurers are promising to deliver major cost savings. But history shows that such promises can’t be trusted. As President Obama said in his letter, we need a serious, real public option to keep the insurance companies honest.

目前的医保公司正承诺提交主要成本的节省计划。可是历史表明这种承诺不足为信。正如奥巴马总统在信中所言,我们需要一个严格的真正的公共选择权,来确保保险公司诚实守信。

 

  评论这张
 
阅读(178)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017