Saum Sutaria, M.D.

they have created coverage and access for working class, generally voting American citizens. And that means it's a powerful group that has access to this insurance coverage. And so them losing it or losing their subsidies becomes a real issue for everybody who's in the environment that has to make decisions on this.

they have created coverage and access for working class, generally voting American citizens. And that means it's a powerful group that has access to this insurance coverage. And so them losing it or losing their subsidies becomes a real issue for everybody who's in the environment that has to make decisions on this.

So what that leaves you with for uninsured, obviously undocumented people that don't have US citizenship or some legal ability to work here. And two, is there obviously people who choose, they just decide, hey, I'm young and healthy. I don't want to buy on this thing.

So what that leaves you with for uninsured, obviously undocumented people that don't have US citizenship or some legal ability to work here. And two, is there obviously people who choose, they just decide, hey, I'm young and healthy. I don't want to buy on this thing.

I don't know. It's not a large number, but it probably would be somewhere in the millions.

I don't know. It's not a large number, but it probably would be somewhere in the millions.

First of all, it's a political name. It's a bill that went through Congress and it's a political name. I'm just such a literal person. I think it's a more respectful way to talk about it than the way people talk about it as Obamacare. I think it's a more respectable way to talk about it as the Affordable Care Act. I would just call it the Access Care Act is all I'm saying.

First of all, it's a political name. It's a bill that went through Congress and it's a political name. I'm just such a literal person. I think it's a more respectful way to talk about it than the way people talk about it as Obamacare. I think it's a more respectable way to talk about it as the Affordable Care Act. I would just call it the Access Care Act is all I'm saying.

Yeah, the Coverage Care Act. I think there were a lot of big ideas thrown about, mostly by academics and others, that some of the policies within the Affordable Care Act would include affordability and lower cost. I mean, I just don't think it ended up happening that way for a few reasons. And then people will point at each other about, well, the legal challenges affected this.

Yeah, the Coverage Care Act. I think there were a lot of big ideas thrown about, mostly by academics and others, that some of the policies within the Affordable Care Act would include affordability and lower cost. I mean, I just don't think it ended up happening that way for a few reasons. And then people will point at each other about, well, the legal challenges affected this.

The reality is that it has... Increased expenditures. Because we know coverage at a group level that removes you from the direct exposure to the cost of care creates demand and higher expenditures. We saw that with Medicare. Comes back to the American thing. And most of these exchange products have generally good physician and other choice associated with them. Some are narrow networks.

The reality is that it has... Increased expenditures. Because we know coverage at a group level that removes you from the direct exposure to the cost of care creates demand and higher expenditures. We saw that with Medicare. Comes back to the American thing. And most of these exchange products have generally good physician and other choice associated with them. Some are narrow networks.

Many of them have a lot of choice. So again, you prioritize choice and access. The costs could be higher than one may have guessed. On the other hand, they have been, again, as I said, incredibly powerful tools to provide coverage because that was the purported goal of the act for those that didn't have it when combined with Medicaid expansion.

Many of them have a lot of choice. So again, you prioritize choice and access. The costs could be higher than one may have guessed. On the other hand, they have been, again, as I said, incredibly powerful tools to provide coverage because that was the purported goal of the act for those that didn't have it when combined with Medicaid expansion.

Not all states have expanded Medicaid, by the way, either. I mean, that was a state-based thing. But in aggregate, more people have been covered after the Affordable Care Act, and therefore expenditures also went up, which is what you would expect at a simple level. We also talked about the fact that some of the value-based care constructs that they had haven't been successful.

Not all states have expanded Medicaid, by the way, either. I mean, that was a state-based thing. But in aggregate, more people have been covered after the Affordable Care Act, and therefore expenditures also went up, which is what you would expect at a simple level. We also talked about the fact that some of the value-based care constructs that they had haven't been successful.

I mean, CMS has spent more money in their Medicare innovation arm, CMMMI, in creating the constructs of innovation than they actually saved in the programs they launched. So it hasn't really worked yet. Again, American ingenuity, right? You keep trying and failing, trying and failing, and maybe one day you'll get it right. Just hasn't worked yet.

I mean, CMS has spent more money in their Medicare innovation arm, CMMMI, in creating the constructs of innovation than they actually saved in the programs they launched. So it hasn't really worked yet. Again, American ingenuity, right? You keep trying and failing, trying and failing, and maybe one day you'll get it right. Just hasn't worked yet.

Well, I think the first question would be, do you want the federal government covering everybody when the whole purpose of the employer sponsored system is to have choice and to have access to different networks that you can pick from? I don't know that a one size fits all model would work.

Well, I think the first question would be, do you want the federal government covering everybody when the whole purpose of the employer sponsored system is to have choice and to have access to different networks that you can pick from? I don't know that a one size fits all model would work.