Fraud and Anonymity: The Perils of Medical Care Bureaucracy

By Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD

The high cost of medical care is on the lips of every politician and draining the pocketbooks of most Americans. After creating the Medicare/Medicaid monster, the government’s expanded intervention into the medical care marketplace with the inaptly named Affordable Care Act doubled the premiums and deductibles for both employer-sponsored and individual insurance. Piling on more laws, regulations, and agencies is not the answer.

Anonymity, complexity, and opacity invite shady behavior. Individuals, companies, and patients who defraud the massive federal “health system” would never dream of lifting money from their patients’ wallets or stealing from their doctors’ cash drawer.

The government’s track record does not bode well for imposing more bureaucracy to remedy a problem created by the layers of third-party payer bureaucracy. Waste, fraud, and abuse are so rampant that the government has a Medicare Strike Force to root out and recover lost federal funds. Medicare fraud—about $60 billion in 2016 alone—is about 10 percent of Medicare’s total payments. By contrast the typical private business loses 5 percent of its revenues to fraud. Unfortunately, since its inception in March 2007, the Medicare Strike Force has recouped less than $2 billion per year in misappropriated funds.

Medicare’s $16.7 billion per year hospice program is fertile ground for the unscrupulous. Hospices are paid a fixed daily sum for each patient enrolled “regardless of the services provided.” One amoral scheme recruits patients who unknowingly forgo curative treatment options by joining hospice. A recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) report revealed that in 2012 hospices billed Medicare more than $250 million for services to patients in long-term care or assisted-living residences who did not require hospice care, costing four times more than the appropriate level of care. Even worse, the OIG found that the quality of care suffered in 31 percent of programs. The bureaucratic morass allows the perpetrators to pocket the fixed fee and skimp on the services.

Further, the government cannot keep track of its program dollars. According to another OIG audit, in 2009, Medicare Prescription Drug program paid $33.6 million and hospice patients paid $3.8 million for medications that should have been included in the hospice daily fee. Even after discovering the snafu, the problem got exponentially worse. In 2016 the government paid $160.8 million for drugs that hospice organizations should have paid for from its fixed daily fee. Our tax dollars paid for the drugs twice.

Physicians know what patients want and are acting on it. Free from the restraints of government “healthcare” programs, the physician-led, price-transparent, direct-pay Surgery Center of Oklahoma performs some surgeries for less than the copays of some insurance policies. Direct Primary Care physicians provide 24/7 access and basic labs for as little as $50 per month with at-cost medications and low-priced x-rays.

The corporate private sector has learned a thing or two from innovative physicians. Care Accelerator is Sam’s Club’s version of “affordable [medical care] options with transparent pricing.” To offer relief from high out-of-pocket costs, $50 (individual) to $240 per year (families) buys access to lab screening for diabetes and heart disease, free generic drugs, telehealth, and up to a 30 percent discount on vision, dental, and other ancillary services. Additionally, Walmart is training its own employees for jobs in the health sector and ideally to staff Walmart’s own medical services. For their employees, Apple has “health care built around you” with its AC Wellness that offers office and home visits; Amazon launched its Amazon Care telemedicine services.

Given the outrageous price of drugs—largely due to the pharmacy benefit manager middlemen—Good Rx discount coupons are just what the doctor ordered. Good Rx is free to the consumer and makes money from advertisements on the website and referral fees. One typical victory is a Medicare patient whose neurologist prescribed a drug for his Parkinson’s disease symptoms. The government demanded testing that could not be done because of the patients debilitated condition. Despite a sympathetic ear and supporting research, the government arbiter could only parrot the party line: because the drug was not on the “list,” it was not covered by Medicare. In a fortunate twist of fate, with a Good Rx coupon the patient paid $34 per month cash instead of the drug’s $1,100 per month price with 20 percent patient co-pay that would have been charged through the Medicare Prescription Drug program.            

Congress claims it plans a full-frontal attack on the high cost of medical care (with the same results as the war on poverty and drugs?). Frankly, we are better off with Congress engrossed in its impeachment clown show and keeping its nose out of our medical business.


Bio: Dr. Singleton is a board-certified anesthesiologist. She is Immediate Past President of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). She graduated from Stanford and earned her MD at UCSF Medical School.  Dr. Singleton completed 2 years of Surgery residency at UCSF, then her Anesthesia residency at Harvard’s Beth Israel Hospital. While still working in the operating room, she attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law.  She interned at the National Health Law Project and practiced insurance and health law. She teaches classes in the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. 

Don’t Buy What They Are Selling

By Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD

Buying and selling is in the news lately with President “at some point you’ve made enough money,” “climate change is urgent and growing” Obama’s well-publicized imminent purchase of a 7,000 square foot, $14.85 million estate in Edgartown, Martha’s Vineyard, the playground of the rich and famous, guaranteed to survive the rising seas. Our current politicians are also on the hunt for buyers.  

Sales Pitch Number One: A medical care crisis is afoot and only the government can save you. Yes, there is a crisis of rising prices and premiums after the government started meddling in the medical care market. Once health insurance became popular, by 1963 906 insurance companies wrote health and accident insurance, with 42 offering exclusively health insurance. Now we have five companies that have cornered the health insurance market. Additionally, politically powerful hospitals continue to merge and gobble up physicians’ practices leading to up to 70 percent higher prices in geographic areas with minimal competition.

Premiums and out-of-pocket costs steeply rose after the passage of the Affordable Care Act and show no sign of going back down. In 2018, according to eHealth, the average cost of health insurance premiums was $440 for individuals and $1,168 for families – almost double the cost in 2014. The deductibles (the amount of money that you have to pay out-of-pocket before health insurance starts paying for your covered benefits) similarly rose to $4,328 for individuals and $8,352 for families.

Sales Pitch Number Two: The government-to-the rescue plan is fair and free. Now that we have had debates and the Iowa State Fair, we’ve heard enough to know that Medicare-for-All is neither free nor fair. There is a good political reason the House and Senate Medicare-for-All bills fail to provide a financing mechanism. We would have a collective national heart attack after seeing the price tag.

In 2016, the federal government spent more than $1.2 trillion on Medicare, Medicaid, and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Total national health expenditures by all government levels and private entities were $3.3 trillion. A 2018 Mercatus Center analysis concluded that Medicare-for-All conservatively would add $32.6 to $38.8 trillion to federal expenditures during its first 10 years. The government predicts that in 2026 the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust fund will be depleted and total national health expenditures will be $5.7 trillion. The federal government collected about $100 billion in Medicare premiums and a total of $3.32 trillion in taxes last year. Given the projected expenditures and no cost-sharing or premiums, new ways to perform mass wallet biopsies on the populace will emerge. The simplest tool, as Senator Sanders has suggested, is to raise payroll taxes on everyone.

Moreover, with the elimination of private insurance, when the money runs out and care is rationed, only the wealthy will be able to pay for care outside of the government system. Is that fair?

Upping the ante, Senator Sanders wants to pay off some Americans’ current medical debt by taxing Americans with no medical debt. Under his proposal, only people unable to pay their medical debt would be granted relief. Those keeping up with their payments would have to continue to pay. What does “unable” mean? If they are living below the poverty level, they have Medicaid. Is it the working poor? Or is it people who failed to prioritize their medical bills over Starbucks and take-out food? Hardly fair.

Sales Pitch Number Three: If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor, Politifact’s lie of the year. Essentially, the promise was that government would not interfere in the practice of medicine. But both state and federal government wants the final say-so in our medical care. For example, the California assembly passed a bill requiring the state Department of Public Health to review and potentially reject medical vaccine exemptions written by doctors who have granted five or more in a year. No exceptions for doctors specializing in neurological or immunological diseases. In order for Medicare to pay claims, physicians will be required to complete a computerized algorithm and certify that they have done so before ordering certain imaging like MRIs and CT scans. A computer will now determine whether the order is “appropriate.” Medical care by government robots will supplant individualized care – the heart of the patient-physician relationship. Who cares if the patient has a missed or delayed diagnosis?

As the government tries to trap physicians and patients in its restrictive bubble, independent physicians are pursuing avenues for increased choice in medical care and insurance products. Above all, we will never put the needs of the state ahead of the needs of the patient.


Bio: Dr. Singleton is a board-certified anesthesiologist. She is a Past President of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). She graduated from Stanford and earned her MD at UCSF Medical School.  Dr. Singleton completed 2 years of Surgery residency at UCSF, then her Anesthesia residency at Harvard’s Beth Israel Hospital. While still working in the operating room, she attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law.  She interned at the National Health Law Project and practiced insurance and health law. She teaches classes in the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. 

Free Medical Care: a Deal with the Devil?

By Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD

Listening to the campaign promises spewed out by the bevy of folks running for president brings the old but enduring story of Faust to mind. Despite being successful, Faust wanted more knowledge and possessions. To that end, he made a deal with Mephistopheles (aka the Devil) who promised to give him everything he wanted in exchange for his soul.

Who isn’t tempted by a bargain or better yet, something for nothing? Free income, free college, and free medical care. What do we have to lose? Self-respect, the opportunity to succeed at a career suited to one’s talents, your privacy and control over your own body.

Intended to ameliorate poverty, universal basic income can be counterproductive. Some promise income for merely having a pulse and others envision the government equivalent of a mama bird regurgitating food into the open mouths of her chicks. Neither option gives a sense of pride and accomplishment or the foundation for character development.

The high cost of college is the justification for free tuition. One key reason for the continually escalating tuition is readily available student loans: no matter the cost, the student can continue to borrow. Endless direct-from-the-government money would likely cause further increases. Further, one-third of college students drop out. The majority of these students were poorly prepared for, and not fully committed or suited to college. It is a bad idea to remove an incentive for perseverance, allow uncommitted students to waste their time on the government dime, or worse be stigmatized as a failure. Finally, as Senator Amy Klobuchar bravely pointed out, the taxpayers cannot afford it.

With regard to medical care, all “medically necessary” health services, including dental, vision, hearing, mental health, long-term care, home and community-based services, physical therapy, prescription drugs with no premiums, deductibles or co-pays from cradle to grave sound pretty good. Sold! Frankly, given the direction so-called reproductive health is going, you may never make it to the cradle. And with the current laser-focus on hospice for all, you may get to your grave a little faster.

Will free medical care halt one of the biggest drivers of poor health and medical costs? According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 40 percent of people in the United States are obese. And 47 percent of our $3.5 trillion per year of healthcare spending goes to treat the effects of obesity, with another 8.7 percent attributable to cigarette smoking. People have known for years that eating too much makes you fat and smoking contributes to heart and lung disease. Free care would worsen the problem because patients will expect more pills and procedures to cure their lifestyle-created illnesses rather than taking care of themselves.

Not only is the promise of free stuff an attempt to buy votes, but the politicians themselves have sold their souls to special interests. And we never know whether they are working for the metaphorical Devil or for you, the voters.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, in 2018, both sides of the Congressional aisle received a total of $134,590,142 in contributions from the health sector (health professionals, device and pharmaceutical manufacturers, hospitals and nursing homes). The health sector was the top spender of lobbying money – some $562,968,799 spread among 2,810 hired guns. Pharmaceuticals/Health Products topped the list with $281,872,969.

On the bright side, when given the full picture, people are not that easily bought. A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study found that 70 percent of those polled approved of Medicare for All when told the plan would eliminate insurance premiums (which are sky-high thanks to ObamaCare). But up to 70 percent opposed Medicare for All when told it would lead to treatment delays, tax increases, or loss of their option for private insurance.

Perhaps those polled read that private insurance is allowed in all but two countries with universal coverage, and patients in all countries have some out-of-pocket expenses. Perhaps they realized that when the citizen money tree has been picked clean, promised services must be reduced. Perhaps they realized that free stuff can be used as a cudgel to keep the recipients in line and trap them in a system with no escape. Perhaps they were of a certain age where they were warned that the tasty-looking Halloween candy might be laced with razor blades. Or more likely, those infamous words, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor” were flashing before their eyes or echoing in their ears.            

Free stuff is an age-old snare, a temptation that can steal one’s critical thinking abilities. Despite the old saw that there is a sucker born every minute, there are always those who will not be fooled. Which will you be?


Dr. Singleton is a board-certified anesthesiologist. She is President of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS). She graduated from Stanford and earned her MD at UCSF Medical School.  Dr. Singleton completed 2 years of Surgery residency at UCSF, then her Anesthesia residency at Harvard’s Beth Israel Hospital. While still working in the operating room, she attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law.  She interned at the National Health Law Project and practiced insurance and health law. She teaches classes in the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. 

Judge Kavanaugh’s Character Assassins Could Be Controlling Your Medical Care

by Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD

Our legislators have been at their worst over the Supreme Court confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. What a shameful display: condescending, arrogant show-boating senators questioning him in a manner reminiscent of the Grand Inquisitor. The only things missing from this B-grade movie were the rubber hoses and interrogation lights. Some of us remember that you could count on one hand the “nay” votes for the confirmations of ACLU attorney Ruth Bader Ginsberg and known conservative Antonin Scalia.

This last-ditch effort to derail Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation is more than mere political theater; the interrogators are immoral and beyond hypocritical. The “Lion of the Senate,” Ted Kennedy, killed a woman and former Senate majority leader Robert Byrd was an Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan, and we all know about President Clinton. But that’s okay; their lapses in judgment were somehow worth our compassion and forgiveness.

Imagine if these political hacks were in charge of your medical care. Medicare-for-All as planned is the exclusive purveyor of medical “benefits.” If you want a medical service they do not want you to have, you are on your own.

The government is already shaping the way we use medical services. The Palliative Care and Hospice Education Training Act (PCHETA), S. 693 and the companion bill H.R. 1676 passed by the House and is now before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. This bill dedicates $100 million in additional taxpayer dollars to persuade patients to forgo treatment that might prolong life in exchange for a steady stream of increasing doses of narcotics. Perhaps knowing that many physicians still adhere to the Oath of Hippocrates, the legislators included multiple non-physicians and non-medical personnel as recipients of these funds.

Including outsiders in decision-making must be undertaken with caution. Hospice/palliative care has become the new growth industry in our “health system.” Compared to home health care, hospice had significant growth in 2017 – increasing 6.5 percent in one year. Further, according to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission the “Increase in hospice is driven by for-profit providers” which made up two-thirds of the 4,400 hospices in 2016.

Why direct $100 million for a new medical specialty in relieving pain and suffering, a skill all physicians should embrace as part of a comprehensive treatment plan? The focus on palliative care may be one more bipartisan incremental under-the-radar step along the road to government control of our medical care. Subtly devaluing life softens us up and primes the pump for rationing – without having to pass a sweeping single payer bill that is bound to draw attention and criticism.

Ironically, within days of passing the Palliative Care bill, the Senate passed a huge package of some 70 bills designed to reduce opiate abuse. Unafraid to practice medicine without a license, the Senate legislated prescribing mandates and penalties for failure to comply. And the government is developing a “system of care” where all people will receive “appropriate” and “evidence-based” care for pain.

So now physicians may be under pressure to relinquish their patient to a palliative care specialist and prescribe medications according to government dictates. This is wrong. Our patients must never have any doubts that every treatment their physician administers is in their best interests.

We must not allow the whims of politicians to direct our medical care. Physicians must refuse to be tools of the government. Patients must decide whether they want their tax dollars spent on developing cures and life-saving treatment – or programs that steer them toward the least costly alternatives.

Can we trust our medical care to legislators who are willing to sacrifice their integrity on the altar of partisan politics — legislators who are willing to destroy a man’s life in their naked quest for power? Can we trust that doctors who oppose their agenda will not be treated like Judge Kavanaugh by medical boards, hospitals, and courts?


Dr. Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD is a board-certified anesthesiologist and member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).

Dr. Marilyn Singleton ran for Congress in California’s 13th District in 2012, fighting to give its 700,000 citizens the right to control their own lives.

While still working in the operating room, Dr. Marilyn Singleton attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law. She also interned at the National Health Law Program and has practiced both insurance and health law.

Dr. Marilyn Singleton has taught specialized classes dealing with issues such as the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. She also speaks out about her concerns with Obamacare, the apology law and death panels.

Congressional candidate Dr. Marilyn Singleton presented her views on challenging the political elite to physicians at the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons annual meeting in 2012.

Follow Dr. Marilyn Singleton on Twitter @MSingletonMDJD

More info about Dr. Marilyn Singleton

The Courage to Trust Medical Care to Patients and Physicians

by Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD

The days of trusting your legislators to have your best interests at heart are in the rear view mirror. Apparently, their main interest is parroting the buzzwords of the moment to get elected and then being too busy banking lobbying money to listen to the voters. Our legislators have become spectators who wait for the perfect moment to pounce on their political “enemy” and then go on cable news shows to boast about it.

The “us against them” attitude, punctuated by hyperbolic, apocalyptic rhetoric closes the door to finding solutions. Our interests would be better served by having town hall meetings where voters could state their concerns, air their differences, and learn what legislators are doing about their issues. Caution: meetings at 9 a.m. on Wednesday when paid activists are guaranteed to outflank the working general public are prohibited.

There are strong differences of opinion on how to attain a healthy citizenry. Educating potential patients about what drives up medical care expenditures can start the conversation. Well-informed patients would demand solutions based not on corporate interests or government or political agendas, but on a fair, competitive market that maximizes choices and achieves lower costs.

Eight years of the Affordable Care Act have borne out Congressional Budget Office predictions that abandoning basic principles of insurance—which compensates only for events beyond the insured’s control and is priced according to the degree of risk—would lead to higher and higher premiums, fewer participating insurers, and unsustainable government expenditures to subsidize insurance premiums. The data in three recent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid reports on ACA exchanges show “individual market erosion and increasing taxpayer liability.” The average monthly premium for coverage purchased through the exchanges rose 27 percent in 2018, and federal premium subsidies increased 39 percent from 2017 to 2018.

A less frequently discussed cost driver is the disturbing trend of private doctors’ offices being scooped up by hospitals, health insurance companies, and venture capital groups. Prices tend to rise when health systems merge, because of decreased competition. And not only do hospitals and health systems generally charge more than private physicians’ offices, the government compounds this problem by paying more to hospitals than independent offices for the same service. A review of 2015 Medicare payments showed that Medicare paid $1.6 billion more for basic visits at hospital outpatient clinics than for visits to private offices. Patients are the biggest losers: they paid $400 million more out of pocket and had their tax dollars wasted. The study also found hospital-employed physicians’ practice patterns in cardiology, orthopedic, and gastroenterology services led to a 27 percent increase in Medicare costs. This translated to a 21 percent increase in out-of-pocket costs for patients.

Similarly, a U.C. Berkeley School of Public Health study of consolidation of California’s hospital, physician, and insurance markets from 2010 to 2016 concluded “highly concentrated markets are associated with higher prices for a number of hospital and physician services and Affordable Care Act (ACA) premiums.” In consolidated markets (defined by the Federal Trade Commission’s Horizontal Merger Guidelines), prices for inpatient procedures were 79 percent higher and outpatient physician prices ranged from 35 percent to 63 percent higher (depending on the physician specialty) than less concentrated markets.

Big medicine and third-party financing are taking the cost curve in the wrong direction. This speaks to the urgency of encouraging cash friendly practices that bypass insurance and direct primary care (DPC) practices. With DPC, all primary care services and access to low-priced commonly used medications are included in an affordable upfront price. Importantly, DPC’s time-intensive and individualized management of chronic diseases decreases hospital admissions, paring down Medicare’s $17 billion spent on avoidable readmissions.

Why corporations want to marginalize private practice seems clear; the government’s motive is open to debate. Surveys consistently find that patients overwhelmingly want “personalized provider interactions.” Thus, herding patients into government-directed programs is not the solution. One core problem with government systems is their reliance on the goodwill of politicians. As President Ford said, “a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take everything you have.”

It’s time for Congress to scrutinize anti-competitive health system mergers. It’s time to bring to the floor over a dozen bills to expand and improve Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to give patients more control over all facets of their medical care.

Congress, the clock is ticking on this legislative session. Stand up for patients. Or did the dog eat your courage?


Dr. Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD is a board-certified anesthesiologist and member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).

Dr. Marilyn Singleton ran for Congress in California’s 13th District in 2012, fighting to give its 700,000 citizens the right to control their own lives.

While still working in the operating room, Dr. Marilyn Singleton attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law. She also interned at the National Health Law Program and has practiced both insurance and health law.

Dr. Marilyn Singleton has taught specialized classes dealing with issues such as the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. She also speaks out about her concerns with Obamacare, the apology law and death panels.

Congressional candidate Dr. Marilyn Singleton presented her views on challenging the political elite to physicians at the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons annual meeting in 2012.

Follow Dr. Marilyn Singleton on Twitter @MSingletonMDJD

More info about Dr. Marilyn Singleton

Medical Care in 2018: Ring Out the Broken Promises and Bring In Solutions

By Marilyn M. Singleton, M.D., J.D.

The U.S. “health care system” continues to be a costly behemoth. Health care costs were the number one financial concern for 17 percent of families in 2017—the same level as it was in 2007 pre-Affordable Care Act era. And only 18 percent of those polled said the Affordable Care Act helped their family.

The ACA did not work as promised.

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep it.” Unfortunately, health insurance companies canceled plans for 4.7 million people. Many insureds chose to have inexpensive, limited plans to cover major expenses. These plans however were not ACA-compliant as they did not contain the mandated 10 “essential health benefits” with no copays or deductibles. While many of these required “benefits” are medically useful, many (e.g., pediatric vision and oral care, maternity care, breast cancer genetic screening, mammograms, and female contraception) are superfluous for childless unmarried men.

“I’ll also bring Democrats and Republicans together to provide every single American with affordable, available health care that reduces health care costs by $2,500 per family.” Kumbaya? The ACA was passed in the dark of night with only Democrat votes. Affordable? Overall costs to the consumer have risen dramatically.

In 2008, the cost of the average employer-sponsored family plan was $12,680, with an employee share of $3,354. The 2016 cost topped out at $18,142 with a $5,277 employee cost. In the individual market, the biggest losers are those who earn a little too much to qualify for federal premium subsidies, particularly the self-employed in their 50s and 60s. For a bronze-level plan with a health savings account, a three-person family can pay $15,000 a year in premiums and paid out-of-pocket for the first $6,550 of medical expenses for each family member.

Moreover, many insurers have requested—and will likely receive—double-digit premium increases for 2018. Nationally, the increases between 2017 and 2018 for unsubsidized premiums for the lowest-cost bronze plan averaged 17 percent, the lowest-cost silver plan averaged 32 percent, and the lowest-cost gold plan averaged18 percent.

We’ll start by increasing competition in the insurance industry.” That was a colossal failure. Overall, the number of insurers in the individual market has decreased since 2014. In 2017 UnitedHealth Group eliminated ACA Exchange plans in 31 of 34 states and Aetna remains in only four states. Humana and Aetna plan to exit all ACA Exchanges in 2018.

Agreed, some Americans gained health coverage. Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) accounted for 14.5 million of the 20 million of newly covered. The 2014 cost per non-disabled adult and child enrollee was $3,955 and $2,602, respectively. Some 27.5 million people remain uninsured with cost cited as the main problem.

Further, being “covered” was meant to keep emergency departments (EDs) from being used as an alternative to primary care. But according to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the number of emergency department visits covered by Medicaid increased by 66.4 percent between 2006 and 2014, outpacing population growth by a factor of two, making Medicaid the leading payer for ED visits.

These data tell us we must have a serious conversation, not intellectually lazy political slogans, like “Repeal and Replace!” Instead of ruminating about how to modify the government’s involvement in medical care, Congress and policymakers should ask how can we take better care of more patients and be open to all suggestions.

One successful model is direct primary care (DPC) mainly seen in solo and small medical practices. Here, patients pay a monthly fee (generally ranging $75 to $150) directly to the physician’s office for 24/7 access, and in many cases, basic labs and medications, and steep discounts on radiology and pathology services. Also growing are direct pay specialty and surgical practices where the fees for the operating room, surgeon, and anesthesiologist are included in one low price. And yes, many of these practices (even in California) offer sliding scales and charity care without running afoul of rigid federal regulations.

With DPC, patients spend more quality time with their doctors and physicians can shed the administrative burdens of government programs and insurance companies and treat patients according to their best judgment. A testament to the success of this model is the University of Michigan offering such a program this spring. Hopefully, the big boys won’t ruin a good thing.

ObamaCare’s individual mandate is dead. It’s time to use our healthcare dollars wisely and pay for the medical care, not the middlemen.


Dr. Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD is a board-certified anesthesiologist and member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).

Dr. Marilyn Singleton ran for Congress in California’s 13th District in 2012, fighting to give its 700,000 citizens the right to control their own lives.

While still working in the operating room, Dr. Marilyn Singleton attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law. She also interned at the National Health Law Program and has practiced both insurance and health law.

Dr. Marilyn Singleton has taught specialized classes dealing with issues such as the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. She also speaks out about her concerns with Obamacare, the apology law and death panels.

Congressional candidate Dr. Marilyn Singleton presented her views on challenging the political elite to physicians at the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons annual meeting in 2012.

Follow Dr. Marilyn Singleton on Twitter @MSingletonMDJD

More info about Dr. Marilyn Singleton

Money, Media, and Medical Care

By Marilyn M. Singleton, M.D., J.D.

More than 50 years ago Professor Marshall McLuhan posited that the medium is the message. Now it seems that money is the medium of the message.

This month Medical Marketing and Media magazine published its 2017 Health Influencer 50, a “list of professionals across the health care spectrum.” The magazine writes that these “influencers” made their impact by innovative thinking and “patient-centric” strategies. As expected, the ever-present Google, Facebook, Twitter, and several medical marketers were amply represented. Disturbingly, five of the top eleven influencers were pharmaceutical companies. The only physician on the list (#12) was Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D.

Only three of the named organizations were actually involved in the delivery of medical care: Dignity Health, the fifth largest health system in the nation; Ascension, the largest nonprofit health system in the U.S.; and the Cleveland Clinic.

One troublesome “patient-centric” strategy is the ubiquitous brazen direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical ad. One crafty example is an “informational” or public service-type announcement persuading the viewer to get vaccinated against pneumococcal pneumonia. Ummm. Was the ad sponsored by a health plan? Medicare? The American Academy of Family Physicians? No. The sponsor (credited in very small print) was Pfizer, the vaccine’s manufacturer.

Apparently, the influence of many of these entities extends to Congress. The 2017 lobbying expenses of Medical Marketing Magazine’s number one “influencer,” GlaxoSmithKline, totaled $3,070,000. The other influencers’ lobbying costs: Gilead Sciences (#2), $2,650,000; Allergan (#4), $2,380,000; Johnson & Johnson (#8), $3,160,000; Pfizer (#10), $8,510,000; and Bayer (#11), $7,050,000. Overall, the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry hired more than 800 lobbyists to the tune of $132,405,742.

The mega-health insurer Blue Cross/Blue Shield’s vice president of Strategic Communications made the list at number 39. If the criterion were lobbying, the Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BCBS) had a leg up with $14,173,960 in lobbying costs—more than triple that of the next health insurer that employs lobbyists.

Or perhaps BCBS was rewarded for navigating its way out of the financial depths of the Affordable Care Act’s essential benefit mandates. Of the 35 BCBS companies, 23 reported a collective $1.9 billion decline in earnings for the first nine months of 2015 and 16 reported net losses because the ACA’s “free” services resulted in claims paid exceeding premiums collected. But by 2017 BCBS along with the rest of the health insurance industry managed to regain its profits by increasing rates, restricting provider networks, and changing benefits packages.

At first glance, physicians appear to be playing hardball with the big boys. In 2017, the American Medical Association (AMA) spent $16,970,000 for lobbying. But the AMA might be called the American physicians’ version of AstroTurf. Only 15-18 percent of physicians are paying members and just 11 percent of physicians said AMA’s stance and actions reflect their beliefs regarding physician practice autonomy, tort reform, and intrusive government regulations. Moreover, the AMA benefits from the dominance of insurance market as it exclusively publishes the official CPT® billing codes necessary to file insurance claims.

The problems with the marketing penetration of drug companies and insurers go beyond simple unseemliness. At the patient care level, when insurance companies demand authorizations prior to agreeing to pay for treatment, they are dictating what care we receive. What good is health insurance if the treatments your physician recommends are not covered?

The current opioid problem is a distressing example. The New York Timesreported that few opioids require preauthorization and are readily covered by insurance plans. When it comes to less addictive but more expensive pharmaceutical alternatives or addiction treatment, the coverage is not guaranteed.

Don’t blame the insurers and drug companies. After all, although they are providing useful products and services, it is their job to make money. It is our congresspersons who are not doing their job.

Sadly, influence peddling has become the norm. But your health is too precious to be bought and sold. Your physician should be the top “influencer” for you. Our physicians, not peddlers, should be the source of the pros and cons of medications and recommendations of specific treatments for their patients.

If you are tired of our do-nothing Congress and big business running up the score, play some defense. Demand transparent prices. Cash prices can be several times lower than prices charged to patients with an insurance card. Demand expanded health savings accounts and universal availability of major medical insurance. Find a direct-pay medical practice (e.g., selfpaypatient.com) and discover how eliminating the middlemen results in reasonable prices.

You have the influence. Use it.


Dr. Marilyn M. Singleton, MD, JD is a board-certified anesthesiologist and member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).

Dr. Marilyn Singleton ran for Congress in California’s 13th District in 2012, fighting to give its 700,000 citizens the right to control their own lives.

While still working in the operating room, Dr. Marilyn Singleton attended UC Berkeley Law School, focusing on constitutional law and administrative law. She also interned at the National Health Law Program and has practiced both insurance and health law.

Dr. Marilyn Singleton has taught specialized classes dealing with issues such as the recognition of elder abuse and constitutional law for non-lawyers. She also speaks out about her concerns with Obamacare, the apology law and death panels.

Congressional candidate Dr. Marilyn Singleton presented her views on challenging the political elite to physicians at the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons annual meeting in 2012.

Follow Dr. Marilyn Singleton on Twitter @MSingletonMDJD

More info about Dr. Marilyn Singleton