Contributor
Sec. Mike Leavitt
Related Link: http://secretarysblog.hhs.gov/my_weblog/
Biography provided by participant
Michael O. Leavitt was sworn in as the 20th Secretary of Health and Human Services on January 26, 2005. Now he leads Leavitt Partners, a lobbying firm that consult firms in the private sector. It specializes in helping companies and states implement the 2010 health reform law. During his first year at HHS, Leavitt led efforts to successfully enroll tens of millions of seniors and disabled persons in the new Medicare prescription drug benefit; mobilized the nation's pandemic preparedness; accelerated the development of health information technology standards and oversaw the medical response to Hurricane Katrina. He presided over changes in Medicaid statues to give states flexibility to provide targeted insurance coverage to more people, and worked with Congress to pass the reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. During his second year, Leavitt spearheaded the Nation's Health Diplomacy initiative aimed at improving the health of Central Americans and bringing the countries of North and Central America closer together. He also organized a nationwide campaign to transform the Nation's health care sector into a value-driven health care system. He is intensely focused on making health care more transparent in quality and price, and reducing the time and expense of bringing safe and effective drugs to market. Prior to his current service, Leavitt was head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and served three terms as Governor of Utah. During his eleven years as Governor, Utah was recognized six times as one of America's best managed states. He was chosen by his peers as Chairman of the National Governors Association, Western Governors Association and Republican Governors. Prior to his public service, Secretary Leavitt served as president and chief executive officer of a regional insurance firm, establishing it as one of the top insurance brokers in America. He is married to Jacalyn S. Leavitt; they are the parents of five children.
Recent Responses
April 5, 2010 02:35 PM
Mark Me Down As Skeptical
Oh, that it were true that all of Medicare’s problems were solved by recent health reform legislation. However, no clear thinking person with the least bit knowledge about the depth of Medicare’s problems will have any optimism such a statement is true.
Cuts in payments to medical providers: mark me down as skeptical on this one. As Secretary of Health and Human Services I carried budgets containing a fraction of the reductions required under the new law. I was scolded by members of the appropriations committees for considering such uncaring and illogical cuts. It is interesting that finally the members of the committee have now started using the words “reduction in the growth rate.” When they were against such action (before they were for them), the word was CUT. Am I the only one that finds it ironic that Congress chose to strip the SGR fix out of the final bill because it was too controversial? Paying for expansion of government spending today by pretending somebody will reduce spending in the future has become a time honored tradition in Wash
Continue ReadingOctober 26, 2009 08:15 AM
Updated at 10:10 a.m. on Oct. 26. Advocates for a public health-care plan continue to look for a way to give political cover to moderates while advancing their goal of implementing a government-run health-care system. Their latest proposal is to create a federally controlled public plan that states can opt out of if they so choose. The public plan is pitched as if it would simply encourage competition and provide another choice for consumers. But a government-run plan is not just another plan, offering just another choice. It is designed to undercut private insurance. A government-run plan is dangerous for three reasons: One, it would be cheaper for employers to stop offering private insurance and funnel their employees into the government-run plan. Employers, not employees, would get to make that choice. Two, the government-run plan would use the coercive force of government to dictate the prices that could be charged by others — by doctors, nurses, and hospitals — in a way that private entities cannot. Three, the government-run plan would be subsidiz
Continue Reading