SK Hynix Shares Hit Record High as AI Memory Demand Fuels Semiconductor Rally 
Trump Weighs Blocking Exxon Investment as Venezuela Deemed “Uninvestable” 
Trump Considers Starlink to Restore Internet Access in Iran Amid Protests 
China’s AI Sector Pushes to Close U.S. Tech Gap Amid Chipmaking Challenges 
Vitol to Ship First U.S. Naphtha Cargo to Venezuela Under New Oil Supply Deal 
Chevron Seeks Expanded U.S. License to Boost Venezuelan Oil Exports Amid Sanctions Talks 
FCC Approves Expansion of SpaceX Starlink Network With 7,500 New Satellites 
Allegiant to Acquire Sun Country Airlines in $1.5 Billion Deal to Expand U.S. Leisure Travel Network 
GM Takes $6 Billion EV Write-Down as Electric Vehicle Demand Slows in the U.S. 
Rio Tinto–Glencore Talks Spark Pressure on BHP as Copper Fuels Mining Mega Deals 
EU Orders Elon Musk’s X to Preserve Grok AI Data Amid Probe Into Illegal Content 
FTC Blocks Edwards Lifesciences’ JenaValve Acquisition in Major Antitrust Ruling 
Walmart to Join Nasdaq-100 Index as It Replaces AstraZeneca Following Exchange Move 
Stellantis to End Plug-In Hybrid Sales in the U.S. as Demand Shifts Toward Traditional Hybrids 
Elon Musk Says X Will Open-Source Its Algorithm Amid EU Scrutiny 
Nvidia Appoints Former Google Executive Alison Wagonfeld as First Chief Marketing Officer 
TUCSON, Ariz., March 20, 2017 -- A number of states, including New York, Maryland, Texas, Colorado, New Jersey, Connecticut, and California, have passed laws to address the issue of surprise medical bills, and Congress is considering similar legislation. Purportedly intended to protect patients from excessive out-of-network charges, the main effect is to protect insurers’ efforts to dictate fees of physicians who decline to contract with them, writes New York neurologist Lawrence R. Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D., in the spring issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Since many people expect everything to be covered by insurance, virtually any medical bill might be a surprise. Also many patients believe, erroneously, that all physicians working at a hospital are employees of the hospital, and the hospital bills for and controls the fees charged by its physician employees, Dr. Huntoon explains.
Laws that virtually force all physicians to be the equivalent of in-network help hospitals achieve their objective of controlling physicians in the interest of enhancing their own bottom line, writes Dr. Huntoon. With the effectively coerced cooperation of physicians, hospitals will implement strict cost-containment protocols to patients’ detriment.
Surprise billing laws will allow insurers to reduce fees paid to all physicians and achieve windfall profits. The only leverage in-network physicians now have with giant insurers is that if they do not like the terms of the insurance contract or if they believe fees are set too low, they can refuse to sign contracts with the insurer and become an out-of-network physician, Dr. Huntoon explains.
Laws like the one in California allow insurers to dictate physician fees and protect insurers from having to meet their obligation to pay market fees to non-contracted physicians. However, the government is also likely to severely restrict insurance premiums. The result is likely to be like the American single-payer system for the elderly—Medicare—in which insurers just process claims for government, which dictates payment and, increasingly, the care that can be offered.
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons is published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943.
Contact: Lawrence R. Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D., [email protected], or Jane M. Orient, M.D., (520) 323-3110, [email protected]
