My comments on the governors recent action rescinding the Certificate of Need Commissions standards for Proton Beam Therapy Centers
I rise to comment on the governor's recent action rescinding the Certificate of Need Commission's standards for Proton Beam Therapy Centers.
Last week I had the occasion to attend a presentation given in my district by a CEO of a subsidiary of our statewide non profit health insurer. The presentation was entitled "The Future of Health Care." The speaker provided a review of many of the challenges facing our health care system. You would be familiar with the topics she discussed. She reviewed how increases in health care costs stem from rising utilization and this in turn comes from demographic factors, an aging population, our cultural appetite for medical cures, and expanding technology. All features most of us are familiar with.
She then went on to review the health proposals of the presidential candidates.
During a question and answer period, she was later asked what her company could do to control the growth of medical technology. She answered that both she and her company were supporters of Michigan's certificate of need process and that this was the best mechanism for moderating the growth of new medical technologies. She then recounted how the CON commission had recently met a serious setback regarding a new expensive technology, proton beam therapy. Proton Beam Therapy provides a modest benefit in treating a small number of cancers. Its application is fairly limited.
There are currently five operational proton beam treatment centers in the United States. Our CON commission had received separate applications to build three new centers in Michigan. The centers cost roughly $150 million each to build. Over several months, the commission studied this new technology and estimated Michigan's future proton beam treatment needs, and determined that only one center would be necessary.
The commission created approval guidelines that would allow a single new center to be built only as part of a consortium of hospitals in order to guarantee an adequate referral base. By building a single center, the cost to Michigan residents and health purchasers would be $150 million as opposed to $450 million.
The speaker reported that when the commission issues new rules the government has 30 days to rescind them, and that on the 30th day, for the first time ever, state government issued an order rescinding the CON's rules.
I rise today to correct the record. It was not the government, but the governor who issued the order rescinding the CON commissions work. Despite a faltering economy, with rising unemployment and business costs, in part due to ever growing health care expenses; despite a state budget with inadequate allocations to higher education and infrastructure maintenance due to rising Medicaid costs, the governor has chosen to take an action that will only add to this cost spiral.
The CON Commission appointed by the governor was actually doing its job well. For the first time, it was truly focusing on emerging, unproven, expensive technology and had come up with a sound set of rules.
By undermining the Commission's work the governor has only added to the problem of unrestrained health care costs that are at the core of our economic woes. It was not the government, but the governor, who has made this mistake.
Mr. President, I would respectfully ask that my remarks be printed in the journal.