Peg reporting on Senate Health Care hearing, Tues. Feb.23,2010

Con Hogan testimony was a response to the draft outlines re: Health Care Reform bill and Global Budgets presented by Jim Hester,the Exec. Director of the Health Care Reform Committee.

Con began by saying he has been struggling for a week trying to grasp the ideas in the outline. Called them just a list and . He offered that what the committee needs is a set of design options that they can lay out side by side on the table and compare.

He said that there needs to be a broader plan and urged the committee to " not be trying to grab at pieces that won't fix the problem. He suggested that we work for a complete set of design options that for example could include the ACO (Accountable Care Organizations as one model. He asked "Why rush to an ACO model" that has yet to be tested.

He went on to give another example of grabbing on to pieces. We went ahead with Catamount, even though other states had tried it and failed.

Program focus is not going to work and has not contained costs.

Any steps such as the global budgeting of hospitals or the expansion of the Blueprint have to be temporary in nature until broader system is designed.

Con then said that S88 could serve to bring a set of design options. S88 has broad support in Senate. He suggested that "design" be put in the statement of purpose. S88 could be opened up a little bit.

He closed by urging the committee to take broad approach and that we find and use people out there who know.

Sara Kittell ... talked about the effort to pass Act 60 and said that they passed the design first and then in the summer the technical details got worked out.... She also said that she is "not willing to go back home without a committment to design.

And then Ed Flanagan asked Con... if he had a cure for incrementalism.

Let's hope the legislators are starting to get the message and the courage