Dana Blankenhorn

Rethinking Healthcare

Vertical integration the answer to health care costs

By Dana Blankenhorn | Dec 2, 2009 |

What do the Veterans Administration and WalMart have in common?

Both are vertically integrated. They control their supply chains. They also deliver great value to their customers.

Thanks to vertical integration, WalMart can use the data it collects at a cash register in Atlanta to control its relationship with Chinese suppliers, just it could with their Mexican and American predecessors.

The VA can get the best deal possible on drugs, on wheelchairs, and on supplies because it, too, is vertically integrated. This integration helped motivate the creation of the VA’s VistA system which, while decades old, still delivers value newer computer systems can’t.

So what is it the American health care system does not have, that every other system around the world has?

Vertical integration.

Much of the present debate in the Senate, the concern over a “government takeover” of health care, is based on a fear of vertical integration. Insurers don’t think they will be able to compete with a “public option” where government can buy in bulk, gaining the benefits of integration.

The answer is to let insurers integrate vertically.

Some already do, in limited ways Intermountain Healthcare in Utah owns hospitals, clinics, even hospices. Kaiser Permanente offers integrated services as an HMO. CIGNA is among the insurers offering its own Internet pharmacy.

But these are relatively modest steps. They are hampered by the fact that insurance companies are regulated by states, not the federal government. Imagine if WalMart had to get separate licenses, and run separate operations, in all 50 states? Think its smiley faces would still be rolling back prices?

Health care reformers who know what works, like Dr. Ralph Snyderman, say that coaching and medical home plans — where patients and the medical system engage in a full relationship — are key to controlling costs and improving outcomes.

So both sides of the balance sheet — the supply side and the demand side — are in fact arguing for integration. You control costs by buying in bulk. You control costs by engaging in a deep, single-source relationship with each patient.

My best friend, Tommy Bass, is a veteran. He knows the VA has many faults. But he also knows it’s a good deal. So do Medicare clients. So do Medicaid clients.

We can make those deals better, and expand their reach to everyone, by allowing vertical integration. Buying in bulk and controlling the relationship. It has to be carefully regulated, and it falls outside the current health reform debate, but vertical integration in health care is an idea whose time has come.

So long as patients have choices I see no problem with it. If I don’t like WalMart I can try Target. If you don’t like CIGNA you should be able to try Kaiser.

 
Reply to Story

SmartPlanet TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via RSS

  •  
    1

    jedidethfreak

    12/03/09 | Report as spam

    Untrue...

    ...Vertical integration, when applied to something like health care,
    would be akin to a monopoly, thereby illegal in the United States. I
    know this because vertical integration has been declared a monopoly by
    the US Supreme court for systems that operate like American health
    care, because the drug companies own majority shares of most (if not
    all) health care organizations, thereby owning most clinics and
    services. This is exactly how the film industry used to be, when film
    companies owned the theaters you watched movies at, thereby making it
    so you could only see their movies. This was deemed a monopoly by the
    Supreme Court, thereby ruling it illegal. The reason Walmart and the
    VA can be vertically integrated is that they don't create the products
    they sell.

  •  
    2

    DanaBlankenhorn

    12/03/09 | Report as spam

    Multiple integrators

    I think there was error in the decision about vertical integration of the movie studios. They were not a monopoly.

    We have seen in the VA example that vertical integration can serve to lower costs. If we want competition between the public and the private sectors, should not the private sector have the same tools available to it?

    And if you think I'm calling for uncontrolled, unregulated oligopoly you're mistaken. We need proper regulation of markets to prevent abuse. And in the health care space we need a public option so that the vertically-integrated health conglomerates can't take advantage of their position.

  •  
    3

    adornoe@...

    12/03/09 | Report as spam

    The VA and Wal-Mart?

    Why use them as examples or for comparison?

    Wal-Mart is a huge multi-national corporation and it does things that in the free-market system are within legal means. What the government can do the free-market competitors cannot.

    The VA, is not a free-market system. It is a government run program and it doesn't have to compete in the everyday world of business. The VA medical system is socialized medicine. There is no competition and it can do whatever the government gives them the capacity to do. Most of the medical care that veterans get from the VA medical system is essentially "free" of charge to those veterans. It does run efficiently and it does provide good medical care for its patients. But, the services are not paid for with fees collected from the veterans. The people of the U.S., through federal taxes, are the true funding source for the VA. As such, the VA is not a good example to use in any comparison against a true free-market business, and it should never be used as a model for any possible future "government" funded health care. Government will never be an honest competitor in the free-market system when it will also be setting up the rules and it will never technically run out of funding. Funding for government services is essentially "bottomless", whereas in the free-market system, if you can't compete and you can't make a profit, you go out of business. The VA and government health-care don't ever go out of business, even when they're badly run and out of money. Case in point: Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security; all are running in the red and will be bankrupt in a few years, but they won't be allowed to fail because government will just use more money from its bottomless coffers to rescue them and keep them going.

The following tags are supported in Smartplanet comments:
<b></b> <i></i> <u></u> <pre></pre>

Leave a Reply

  1. Name: You are currently: a Guest |
advertisement

Quick Poll

advertisement

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a technology reporter since 1982, a business reporter since 1978, and a writer for as long as he can remember. His Schwab IRA has a few tech stocks in it, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials bought over 10 years ago. But the vast majority of his tiny fortune (emphasis on the word tiny) is invested in mutual funds. He presently writes for no one else but ZDNet, SmartPlanet and himself. But if you've got an opportunity let him know. If he takes the gig he"ll first add it to this disclosure page.
Rethinking Healthcare examines innovation in the health care industry covering topics such as electronic and personal health records, treatment, privacy, regulation and using information technology to manage and monitor chronic conditions.