Economic Development Committee: A powerful “influence” in health policymaking

Washington DC has become almost synonymous with “dysfunction,” as political polarization, angry rhetoric, and petty squabbles have seriously disrupted governance. A conference I attended earlier this summer was a reminder of what can be accomplished in an environment of rational thought and civil debate. The Committee on Economic Development’s (CED) biennial Trustee Policy Summit brought together White House officials, economists, prominent journalists, current and former members of Congress, and CED leaders to share their unique perspectives and innovative solutions to some of the most critical issues facing the nation.

CED is the Public Policy Center of the Conference Board, a nonpartisan, nonprofit, corporate-led policy center and “think tank” focused on sustainable economic development and providing equal opportunity for all Americans. Founded in 1942, the organization’s most memorable policy achievements include the Marshall Plan (an economic development and peacekeeping program after World War II) and the Bretton Woods Agreements (global monetary policy efforts that led to the creation of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund).

Today, CED leaders (CEOs, board members, and key executives from major U.S. companies across all business sectors) have a significant impact on public policy in numerous areas through multiple platforms. The organization regularly shares policies derived from rigorous research, briefs lawmakers, and raises awareness of issues through extensive national outreach, including “live” events, webcasts/podcasts, and publicly available reports and newsletters.

The conference I attended covered a wide range of topics, from the current state of the US economy and the fiscal crisis to the impact of policies on key domestic issues. Healthcare was a major topic throughout the conference, given the ongoing impacts of the recent fight against COVID-19. In general, the main challenges in the healthcare sector relate to stress on workers and the system itself. Below are some points that resonated with me:

Emphasis on the US healthcare model. The current health care model remains under great stress. With ongoing tensions over how health care should be managed and financed, there are serious concerns that progress made over the past few decades will be lost. Some innovative solutions have been discussed; for example, Virginia recently enacted a law allowing organizations such as professional associations to offer health insurance plans. I am with those who believe that greater transparency in the health care system is absolutely necessary, and that the first step is quality data.

Long-term health care worker shortages. The health workforce has not fully recovered from the severe losses associated with the recent pandemic: the projected nursing shortage is staggeringly large (500,000 by 2030) and health worker “burnout” is particularly pronounced in urban and rural areas.

Addressing these workforce shortages requires innovative solutions, but a top priority is building a pipeline of health workers that is large enough, diverse enough, and representative of the communities they serve. From a policy perspective, factors such as quality of work, wages paid, education priorities, and additional training slots to increase the number of workers in key health professions should be considered.

Expanding telehealth services may be key to making health care more widely and easily available to patients, especially in underserved areas, without increasing costs. We saw how effective this approach can be when telehealth services were expanded to address the surge in demand for mental health services during the pandemic. By making care more accessible before chronic medical and mental health conditions develop, telehealth may also help reduce overall health care costs over the long term.

Other important healthcare challenges requiring attention include:

• Reducing Medicare and Medicaid Fraud and AbuseMore attention and resources are needed from federal and state governments. One bill in Congress proposes allocating federal funds to states to conduct additional audits. Reforms to the Federal Patient Drug Program are also being discussed to prevent abuse of certain provisions that could lead to fraud and increased costs.
• Pandemic preparednessCDC should apply valuable lessons learned from COVID-19 to avian influenza and other potential pandemics to contain the spread of the virus before it becomes widespread. Pandemic preparedness policies, including strengthening the medical supply chain, investing in research, and making needed reforms at CDC, must remain a priority.

As a member of the CED Standing Committee on Health Policy, I find the value of such a neutral, nonpartisan organization invaluable during these very uncertain times. For those who know me well, it will come as no surprise that networking is also something “high value” for me.

At one particularly memorable dinner on Capitol Hill, I had the honor of sitting next to Mary Jo Cagle, M.D., president of North Carolina-based Cone Health, Inc. Two days later, Cone Health became the second member of Rezant Health, a new nonprofit charitable organization of Kaiser Foundation Hospitals that aims to “bring together like-minded organizations to increase access to value-based care and insurance and raise the bar on approaches that deliver the best health outcomes.”

Being a part of this committee (and knowing people like Cagle) has made the CED Summit a very important summer event for me, and I am already looking forward to the fall conference!