One of the response lines for why everyone should be mandated to have coverage is that if people have a regular GP, they’ll go to the doctor instead of the emergency room. They also add that this will cut costs and reduce waiting times.
Gov. Patrick’s assertion that emergency department visits in Massachusetts decreased after enactment of universal coverage is incorrect. A study just published in the Annals of Emergency Medicine shows a 9% increase in emergency room visits since the commonwealth’s universal health-care plan was signed into law in 2006. We are all for cutting health-care costs, but not in emergency medical services, as they account for only 3% of all health-care spending and are already struggling under an increasing burden of uncompensated care.
While the American College of Emergency Physicians supports universal health-care coverage, please do not perpetuate the myth that universal coverage will decrease emergency department visits. The evidence clearly says otherwise.
So, to summarize:
Strike 1: Universal coverage does not lower ER visits
Strike 2: Universal coverage does not cut costs
Strike 3: Universal coverage does not reduce wait times
Can we call the proponents of universal coverage and mandated coverage “OUT” now, please?
Found via The Independant Institute’s The Beacon Blog