Saturday, July 19, 2014
There is something of a flap going on in Massachusetts over
the desire of Partners Health Care System (formed by the merger of
Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women’s Hospital) to acquire
three more hospitals in the Boston area, two in the north shore and one south.
Partners has for some time dominated health care delivery in
eastern Massachusetts. Its reputation is
such that it would be nearly impossible to sell a health insurance policy in
the area that didn’t cover its services.
Taking advantage of that, Partners has been able to leverage health
insurance companies into paying it considerably higher rates than are paid to
other providers. That has caused some
grousing, but up until now not enough to spur much in the way of action.
Partners’ proposed acquisitions require regulatory approval
and a few weeks ago Martha Coakley, the state’s Attorney General, announced
that she had reached agreement with Partners on conditions that would allow
them to proceed, subject to approval by the Suffolk County Superior Court. That has produced a small storm of
protest. Competing hospitals have filed
objections. Two gubernatorial candidates
have come out against it. Now the
state’s Health Policy Commission, an advisory group, has expressed
reservations. The story has received
coverage in the local press.
In my mind, the Partners merger should never have been
allowed. Its almost sole purpose of
gaining negotiating power with payers was clear at the time to anyone who understood
health care institutions and has been confirmed by its actions ever since. But people have not wanted to believe
that. We have been very slow to accept
that health care providers are not simply organizations engaged in the healing
ministry, but also entities that engage in economic behavior. When they find themselves with economic
power, they exercise it.
Maybe we are becoming more realistic about the matter.
