• Center on Health Equity & Access
  • Clinical
  • Health Care Cost
  • Health Care Delivery
  • Insurance
  • Policy
  • Technology
  • Value-Based Care

Ed Haislmaier: Medicare Is "Stuck in a Time Warp"

Video

Government programs, especially Medicare, are stuck in the past and are not designed to accommodate advancements in modern technology, said Ed F. Haislmaier, the Preston A. Wells Jr senior research fellow at the Institute for Family Community, and Opportunity at The Heritage Foundation.

Government programs, especially Medicare, are stuck in the past and are not designed to accommodate advancements in modern technology, said Ed F. Haislmaier, the Preston A. Wells Jr senior research fellow at the Institute for Family Community, and Opportunity at The Heritage Foundation.

Transcript

What is the problem Medicare faces with having Parts A, B, and D? How and why should they be combined?

If you look at Medicare—Medicare is an example that I point to at every government program either here or abroad—the design to the program in healthcare reflects the way the world looked when the program was created. The British National Health Center reflects 1940s medicine and the Medicare program in this country reflects a 1960s picture of medicine and that was very hospital centric. So, it is focused on hospital deductibles and, interestingly enough, the deductible was the cost of a day in the hospital. Nobody bills by days in the hospital anymore that’s no longer done. It’s not like a room rate for a hotel, but that was the way it worked in 1960. They had a flat 20% co-pay for all the physician’s services.

And Medicare didn’t include drugs in 1960 because there weren’t a lot of drugs and they weren’t that expensive. They were mainly some antibiotics and things like that. So, there wasn’t felt to be a need to include drugs. Drugs were like vision care or hearing aids. They were something extra, which Medicare also didn’t cover. So, that is a very 1960s premise. The state of medical technology in the 1960s, I mean this is before drug therapies, before heart transplants, all sorts of things. What happened is that gets frozen in time, because it was written into a government program. So, that’s the problem with designing a government-run program is these things get sort of stuck in a time warp.

The better approach is to focus not on the design of the program, but focus on the people you’re trying to help. And say, "How do we get resources to the people we are trying to help?" If you focus on a government program design then here you are 40 years later trying to update a clearly antiquated structure.

Related Videos
Kimberly Westrich, MA, chief strategy officer at the National Pharmaceutical Council
Sam Peasah, PhD, MBA, RPh, director for the Center of High-Value Health Care at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
Jawad Haider Butt, MD, PhD
Laura Bobolts, PharmD, BCOP, senior vice president of clinical strategy and growth at OncoHealth
Barry Byrne, MD, PhD, Powell Gene Therapy Center at the University of Florida
JC Scott, CEO and president, PCMA
Caspian Oliai, MD, MS, a medical oncologist and hematologist and medical director of the UCLA Bone Marrow Transplantation Stem Cell Processing Center
Neha Kashalikar, PharmD, director of strategic pharmacy consulting, MassHealth
Adam Colburn, JD, vice president for congressional affairs, AMCP
Katrina Ortblad, ScD, MPH, Fred Hutch Cancer Center
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences
AJMC®
All rights reserved.