On July 22, 2021

Administration is the major driver of health care costs

Dear Editor,

In Michael Long’s letter “OneCare is not the problem with Vermont’s health care” published in the July 7 edition, he asserts that “fee-for-service … is the reason health care in the U.S. is the most expensive, but not the most effective.”

That’s a questionable claim at best. Canada, for example, largely continues to rely on fee-for-service within its single-payer health care system, yet has considerably less expensive health care.

The incredibly high cost of “administering” our commercial health insurance system is certainly the major contributing factor. Consider that:

U.S. insurers and providers spent $812 billion on administration, amounting to $2,497 per capita versus $551 per capita in Canada, according to the Annals of Internal Medicine. Medscape’s 2020 survey of physicians’ reports that “paperwork and administration” took up 15.9 hours per week for family medicine doctors, while both cardiologists and neurologists spent 16.9 hours per week.

The role of administrative costs has been known for a very long time. Way back in 1991, the General Accounting Office reported to the House Committee on Government Operations that if we implemented a Canadian-style system here, “the savings in administrative costs alone would be more than enough to finance insurance coverage for the millions of Americans who are currently uninsured … [with] enough left over to permit a reduction, or possibly even the elimination, of copayments and deductibles.”

Whatever you think of the all-payer experiment that Vermont is implementing via OneCare, it won’t lower those costs. In fact, the amount of money needed to operate OneCare is itself an additional administrative cost.

Lee Russ, Bennington

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

The public reality of private schools

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, In their June 13 commentary, “The Achilles’ heel of Vermont education reform,” the Friends of Vermont Public Education state that, “Since the early 1990s, we have been operating two parallel educational systems — public and private.” The organization calls upon the Vermont Legislature to create “one unified educational system,” arguing that, “The current…

Alternative steps for true education reform

June 25, 2025
By Jim Lengel Editor’s note: Jim Lengel, of Duxbury and Lake Elmore, started teaching in Vermont in 1972, worked for the state board of education for 15 years, and retired back in Vermont after helping schools all over the world improve the quality of teaching and learning. Our executive and legislative branches have failed during…

Protect SNAP—because no Vermonter should go hungry

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, As a longtime anti-hunger advocate, a former SNAP recipient, and a proud Vermonter, I am deeply alarmed by proposals moving through Congress that would gut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known here in Vermont as 3SquaresVT. If passed, these cuts would devastate thousands of families across the Green Mountain State that rely…

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly of H.454

June 25, 2025
By Sen. Ruth Hardy Editor’s note: Ruth Hardy, of East Middlebury, represents Addison County in the Vermont Senate. She wrote the following reflection (originally posted at ruthforvermont.com) on voting “no” on H.454, the eduction transformation reform bill that passed last week.  On Monday, June 16, the Legislature passed H.454, the education transformation bill that was…