Allow balance billing.

How does one remove the “price controls” of the govt, which pays 50% of all health care?

Au contraire, mon frère.

First, if you deregulate the insurance industry, the third-party carriers would begin competing for customers. This would drive insurance costs down and provide many more plan choices.

Second, if you deregulate health care delivery (i.e. remove the price controls), providers would also compete for patients. This would cause downward pressure on all service.

To say that some sectors of health care (or any other industry) are not subject to market forces is like saying “gravity doesn’t work in Ohio.” It’s absurd.

As the system is currently designed with third party payers (gov or private) there will NEVER be a “free market” in healthcare. I don’t care if you do away with all the regulations. As long as there is a third party payer, prices will always be geared toward what the third party can pay and not what the consumer can afford. You know that and I know that.

John Stossel is comparing elective surgery to major med? Talk about give me a break. He is just another lost soul that has no clue how healthcare is paid for.

I’m referring to federal and state regulations that distort the insurance and health care markets. With regard to the former, that would involve (among other things) govt mandates requiring coverage for specific ailments. In the case of the latter, it manifests itself in price controls and such things as EMTALA.

I have not had any direct or indirect interaction with my state board, other than the bill for my license, in over 10 years. How are they promoting quality?

Let’s not confuse things here. These medical providers are still subject to local and federal regulations; ie having a license to practice and among other things. The “free market” you speak of is not created due to lack of government meddling (and by “meddling” I really don’t know exactly what you are referring too), it’s created because eye surgery and cosmetic surgery are void of third party payers

In the UK we have this body, set up precsiely because existing regulation - a relatively hands off approach from government - was not strong enough, following a clear problem with heart surgeon performance in one city.

‘The Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence (CHRE) is a UK health regulatory body set up under the ‘National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act’ of 2002. It is an independent non-departmental public body, funded by the Department of Health and answerable to Parliament.
The Council was set up to co-ordinate standards and good practice amongst the bodies responsible for regulating the healthcare professions in the UK, in the wake of the Kennedy Report into paediatric cardiac surgical services at the Bristol Royal Infirmary. It commenced its work in April 2003.’

And in the US you have state boards, eg in Mass:

Welcome to the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Board of Registration in Medicine
Online Services
Mission Statement

The Board of Registration in Medicine was established in 1894. The Board consists of seven members, five physicians and two public members, who are appointed by the Governor for staggered three-year terms.

The overriding mission of the Board is to serve the public by striving to ensure that only qualified physicians are licensed to practice in the Commonwealth, to ensure that those physicians and health care institutions in which they practice provide to their patients a high standard of care, and to support an environment that maximizes the high quality of health care in Massachusetts.

The Board investigates complaints, holds hearings and determines sanctions. These functions are critical to protecting the public by ensuring that only competent physicians and acupuncturists are practicing in Massachusetts.’

What governmental body regulates doctors currently (in any manner that affects quality)? The overwhelming majority of doctors in the US work outside of teaching institutions, and without governmental oversight. I am not aware of any study that suggests that those of us outside of teaching institutions suffer in terms of quality of care, or meeting standards of care, or higher rates of malpractice claims or awards, or poorer outcomes.

Would you trust a bunch of doctors to regulate themselves?

‘But to Stossel’s point, he’s absolutely right on small stuff.’

You may think you can transfer routine ops such as hip replacements and laser eye surgery to factory farms. You can, but outside of regulated and teaching environments standards can slip and the chances of doctors carrying out the same op badly many times rises. And of course as a patient you would not be able to find out in your country.