Thursday, June 12, 2014

Look at this comment in a story by WBUR's Martha Bebinger by a spokesperson for the Massachusetts Attorney General--as concern arises about her announced sell-out, er deal, with Partners Healthcare System:

Coakley’s spokesman says she is “committed to being transparent and allowing for feedback should a final agreement [with Partners] be reached.”

This is the same AG who plastered the airwaves a few weeks ago with this message:

In a resolution that would fundamentally alter the negotiating power of Partners HealthCare for 10 years and control health costs across its entire network, Attorney General Martha Coakley today announced a groundbreaking agreement with Partners that would allow the organization to acquire South Shore Hospital and Hallmark Healthcare.

While the press release acknowledged that the deal was subject to finalization, we all know that these kind of announcements are not meant as trial balloons.  Particularly during a gubernatorial campaign, you don't announce something like this unless you are sure the deal is done.

But perhaps the AG is having some second thoughts now: "Should a final agreement [with Partners] be reached." Bebinger notes:

In an unusual, perhaps unprecedented move, leaders from across the health care industry are calling for closer scrutiny of a deal that would cap prices for Partners HealthCare in the short term but would let the state’s largest hospital network add four more hospitals.

The pressure is mounting on Coakley just a few days before the state’s Democratic nominating convention where Coakley, a candidate for governor, is expected to gain enough delegate votes to get on the primary ballot.

This issue is big enough, in terms of the impact on the state economy for decades to come, to cost the AG the election.*  And she now knows it. My prediction: Watch for her to weasel out of this deal (or perhaps delay "finalization" until much later in the election cycle.)

---

* Disclosure:  I have donated money to two other candidates in this race, one of whom has now come out in opposition to the deal.

Related Posts:

  • Time to fire somebodyRegular readers know that I tend to operate in a no-blame mode, i.e., be hard on the problem and soft on the people.  But when someone has violated the public trust in an institution to support the commercial goals of a … Read More
  • A white coat is a sacred trustAs we consider the growing discussion involving the capture of the University of Illinois' reputation to market the wares of a particular medical device manufacturer, we should pause and reflect how, in doing so, the manufact… Read More
  • Too much or just right?I need your help in evaluating this story.  Is this what I should hope for when I advocate for patient-driven care, or is this an example of over-use in a hospital?  I'm really not sure, and I'd welcome your thought… Read More
  • Give this book to your college senior in January . . .. . . so s/he won't move back home in June!I am pleased to announce the publication of our new book, "How to Negotiate Your First Job."  My wife, Farzana Mohamed, and I wrote it to help college graduates plan for their… Read More
  • Hang 'em out to dry! Wait, "them" is us!I can already predict the result.  The New York Times publishes a story about the rise in specialists' incomes, much of which is based on procedures they carry out.  Outrage follows, and health care public policy ex… Read More

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Popular Posts