Introduction: The recent catastrophic cyberattack on UnitedHealth Group’s subsidiary, Change Healthcare, has exposed the vulnerabilities and systemic issues plaguing the American healthcare system. This event not only threatened to destabilize healthcare provision but also highlighted the dire consequences of allowing healthcare entities to grow excessively large and interconnected. It’s becoming clear that just as the banking sector once necessitated stringent regulations through the Glass-Steagall Act, the healthcare sector now faces a similar crossroads.
The Case for Structural Reform in Healthcare: The cyberattack’s fallout, which saw 60 percent of the nation’s hospitals losing over $1 million a day, underscores the peril of excessive consolidation in healthcare. UnitedHealth Group (UHG), a behemoth in the healthcare industry, exemplifies the “too big to fail” model with dire implications for healthcare delivery. Their structure, which combines insurance services with direct healthcare provision and control over numerous healthcare-related services, mirrors the pre-Glass-Steagall era of banking where excessive intermingling of services led to conflicts of interest and systemic risks.
Vertical Integration: The Core Issue: UHG’s operations are a textbook example of vertical integration gone awry. By owning entities across the healthcare spectrum—from pharmacies and benefit managers to physician practices and IT services—UHG has created an ecosystem where it can prioritize profit over patient care. This model not only stifles competition but also strategically places the company at multiple conflicting points of care and reimbursement, influencing both the provision and pricing of healthcare without sufficient checks and balances.
The Call for a Healthcare Glass-Steagall Act: Drawing parallels with the financial sector’s historical reforms, there’s a growing consensus that healthcare, too, requires a definitive separation of powers. A modern Glass-Steagall Act for healthcare would prohibit healthcare insurers from owning providers and pharmacies, among other entities. This separation would aim to:
- Eliminate conflicts of interest that arise when payers also control provider services.
- Enhance competition by preventing large entities from dominating multiple tiers of the healthcare system.
- Reduce the risk of data breaches by decentralizing points of vulnerability, such as with Change Healthcare.
- Ensure that patient care is prioritized over corporate profits by dismantling conglomerates that can manipulate market dynamics to their advantage.
Recent Congressional Response: The urgency of these reforms is reflected in the sentiments expressed by lawmakers during recent congressional hearings. Representatives from both parties have criticized the current structure, with calls for revisiting how integration within the healthcare sector is managed and regulated. Such bipartisan concern underscores the recognition that healthcare’s structural issues transcend political divides and directly impact every American.
Looking Forward: While the Biden administration’s DOJ and FTC have made strides in addressing some of these monopolistic tendencies, the scope of current antitrust enforcement is akin to a “whack-a-mole” game—reactive rather than preventive. Comprehensive legislative reform is necessary to fundamentally realign the healthcare sector’s priorities towards patient-centric care.
Conclusion: The Change Healthcare cyberattack is not just a wake-up call—it’s a siren alerting lawmakers and the public to the unsustainable path of current healthcare practices. Instituting a Glass-Steagall Act for healthcare could be a pivotal step towards safeguarding the system against the vulnerabilities of excessive corporate consolidation. By enacting such legislation, Congress would not only protect patients but also ensure a fairer, more resilient healthcare system for future generations.
For more follow us on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, & LinkedIn.
