Did Cerner Buy A Health Care Technology Fund With Campaign Contributions?
There's a must read article in this week's Pitch. Here's the flavor:
Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt and Cerner Corporation CEO Neal Patterson think alike.
During his State of the State address on January 12, Blunt pushed for
spending $25 million on a Healthcare Technology Fund. Such a program,
Blunt said, would enlist information technology to improve the delivery
of health care and reduce costs.A citizen didn't have to look far to see who might benefit from the
proposal. On February 2, Patterson touted the advantages of
computerized health records in a Kansas City Star
editorial. Based in North Kansas City, Cerner is a $1.2 billion
supplier of health-care information technology. Just what the governor
ordered.Blunt and Patterson made similar-sounding arguments. A Blunt statement
released shortly after the State of the State address mentioned a
recent RAND Corporation study that said the United States could save
billions by digitizing medical records. Patterson's editorial also
cited the RAND study.Campaign-finance records suggest that Blunt and Patterson were not
working independently. In late October, a Cerner lobbyist treated Blunt
health-care policy adviser Jodi Stefanick to a meal. A few weeks later,
Patterson's wife, Jeanne, found herself in a giving mood. She donated
$20,000 to a political party committee that supports Matt Blunt.
Cerner is represented by Jewell Patek, who you'll be hearing a lot more about soon.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Short Sighted
What are your suggests for transforming healthcare? If you are going to point out the obvious, maybe you should also offer real answers to the questions of reduced healthcare funding, the waste and hours it takes to be seen when visiting emergency and urgent care facilities.
Cutting down a company that employs a large number of Missouri people. A company that continues to grow and helps keep Kansas City's local economy stable. If they have great ideas and those ideas sell what is the issue?
In the future why not try to suggest alternatives instead of pointing out what is already public information.
Health care....
First of all, because of Matt Blunt, and contrary to his campaign promises, there are about 100,000 who would prefer to have access to health care at all, even if their medical records never get digitized.
Secondly, if Cerner is such a great company, then why do they need a $25 million subsidy from the government, and why were they unable to sell the idea on the merits, rather than having to buy the proposal with campaign contributions?