Skip to main content

Hey, Christiana Care and BayHealth! Here's Delaware in about two years ...

... when Highmark follows through with its current strategy of imposing a health insurance/health care monopoly.

This is what has happened to University of Pennsylvania Medical Centers after Highmark not only drove most competing urgent care clinics out of business, but then purchased its own hospital chain ...



That's right--documents filed with the state indicate that in order to make its own hospital chain viable, Highmark has to use its clout as the state's largest insurance company to drive 41,000 patients away from UPMC hospitals.

The situation is grave enough now in PA that even conservative Governor Tom Corbett has entered the fray:
Corbett further said he has directed the state's insurance and health departments to create a task force to monitor the Highmark and UPMC ads and "maintain the state's role in protecting consumers."
A task force to monitor Highmark's activities and protect consumers?

Here in Delaware we can't even get the Insurance Commissioner to respond to complaints that have already been filed by a local activist, a state senator, and an urgent care owner.

So my advice for the administrators running Christiana Care and BayHealth is to watch this video again, and realize it is only about two years until Highmark comes after you ...

Comments

Sid B. said…
This is what you get when government injects itself into the details of economic life. Adam Smith fairly foamed at the mouth about it. He called a Mercantilist system - a business/government mutual aid society. When government reaches its goal of complete control it's called Facism.
August 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...
22 comments
Read more

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...
31 comments
Read more