This information should include what we know about the changes that have occurred in the health care environment, the types of plans employers and the public plans are offering, the effects of the changing delivery system, and the relationship of all of the above to quality of care. There is also a need for better information about what we know and don't know about health care outcomes, variations in health care delivery, and quality indicators. Whether or not people will use some, all, or none of this information, at least initially, does not diminish the importance of having the information available. Over time, the chances are that more of this type of information will become increasingly used and it obviously won't be used if it's not available. What may be most important, however, is to give employees a greater choice in health care plans.
Many employees have only one plan offered as an employer sponsored plan.
While that plan is likely to contain opt-out provisions, it will probably be far more reassuring to most employees to know they can choose to buy other plans with their pretax dollars if they don't want the plan offered by their employers. Structuring this increased choice in such a way that it doesn't push individuals into the expensive individual market or undo risk groupings will take some care. But difficult as this will be, it is far preferable to passing legislation that will substantially increase the cost of health care by forcing all plans to meet someone else's definition of the right health plan. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, since the likelihood of passing bad legislation is greater than passing good legislation, nothing much is likely to happen this year. Changing the tax laws to allow more choice would appeal to many Republicans and some Democrats, as would providing for some consumer protection but not the right to sue.