Posts Tagged ‘American Medical Association’
Monday, June 28th, 2010
President Barack Obama has called on Congress to enact a patch on Medicare payments to physicians and declared his commitment to achieving a long-term solution. “For years, I have said that a system where doctors are left to wonder if they’ll get fairly reimbursed makes absolutely no sense,” the President said. “And I’m committed to permanently reforming this Medicare formula in a way that balances fiscal responsibility with the responsibility we have to doctors and seniors.” The President’s statement came after legislation that would give physicians 18 months of pay raises stalled in the Senate. Instead, a 21 percent pay cut will go into effect unless the Senate acts to prevent that.
According to an American Medical Association survey, approximately 20 percent of physicians have said they are limiting the number of Medicare patients they treat because of the reimbursement levels. In his speech, President Obama took to task Congressional Republicans who have stalled the legislation. A significant number of Republicans - and some Democrats - are unhappy with the price tag on the “physician fix”, which would cost approximately $22 billion over 18 months. A 10-year fix would cost in the neighborhood of $200 billion.
The American Osteopathic Association, American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians are on record as supporting the amendment, even though it doesn’t completely restructure the way physicians are reimbursed by Medicare.
Tags: American Academy of Family Physicians, American College of Physicians, American Medical Association, American Osteopathic Association, Congress, Democrats, Medicare, Medicare patch, Physician fix, President Barack Obama, Republicans, Senate, senior citizens
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Tuesday, April 20th, 2010
When President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare into law on July 30, 1965, he faced a year of nearly crippling attacks from groups like the American Medical Association (AMA) and conservatives who feared an onslaught of “socialized medicine” and threatened to boycott the new program. Although memories of the Medicare battle have faded over 45 years, similar battles could be fought over the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This is the opinion of Dr. Atul Gawande, general and endocrine surgeon at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Associate Professor of Surgery at Harvard Medical School.
Writing in The New Yorker, Gawande notes that because most of the healthcare reform act’s provisions phase in at a slower pace than did Medicare, it is even more open to attack. “The context, of course, is different. The AMA endorsed the legislations; hospital associations were supportive. Once the public option was dropped, most insurers favored the bill. The medical world will wage no civil resistance. This time, the threat comes from party politics. Conservatives are casting the November midterm elections as a vote on repealing the health-reform law. If they regain power, they are unlikely to repeal the whole thing. Instead, they will try to strip out the critical but less straightforwardly appealing elements of reform - the requirement that larger employers provide health benefits and that uncovered individuals buy at least a basic policy; the subsidies to make sure that they can afford those policies; the significant new taxes on household incomes over $250,000 - and thereby gut coverage for the uninsured.”
Gawande notes that reform is hardly a government takeover of healthcare, as many opponents contend. Rather, its success relies on communities and clinicians. “We are the ones to determine whether costs are controlled and healthcare improves - which is to say, whether reform survives and resistance is defeated,” according to Gawande. “The voting is over, and the country has many other issues that clamor for attention. But, as L.B.J. would have recognized, the battle for healthcare reform has only begun.”
Tags: American Medical Association, Atul Gawande, conservatives, Harvard Medical School, Medicare, President Barack Obama, public option, socialized medicine, The New Yorker
Posted in Healthcare | No Comments »
Tuesday, January 26th, 2010
A Glendale, AZ, family clinic operated by the non-profit Mayo Clinic is no longer accepting Medicare patients, saying government payments are too low. The more than 3,000 Medicare-eligible patients who use the facility will be forced to pay cash or find a physician at another location. The decision, which doesn’t impact other Mayo facilities in Arizona, Minnesota and Florida, is a two-year pilot project, according to spokesman Michael Yardley.
Mayo’s move may lead additional family physicians to drop Medicare patients, according to Lori Heim, president of the National Association of Family Physicians. “Many physicians have said, ‘I simply cannot afford to keep taking care of Medicare patients,’” Heim said. “If you truly know your business costs and you are losing money, it doesn’t make sense to do more of it.”
Mayo’s Yardley defended his organization, noting that “We firmly believe that Medicare needs to be reformed. It has been true for many years that Medicare payments no longer reflect the increasing cost of providing services for patients.” Nationally, physicians were reimbursed approximately 20 percent less for treating Medicare patients vs. privately insured patients in 2007. That payment gap has not changed over the last 10 years, says a report from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, a group that advises Congress on Medicare. At the end of 2008, approximately 45 million Americans were covered by Medicare, according to statistics from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Although 92 percent of family physicians participate in Medicare, just 73 percent are accepting new patients under the program.
Medicare patients who opt to stay with their physician at Mayo’s Glendale clinic will pay $1,500 annually for a physical and three additional visits. Additionally, they will pay a $250 annual administrative fee.
Tags: American Academy of Family Physicians, American Medical Association, Arizona, health insurance programs, Mayo Clinic, Medicare, non-profit, Scottsdale, Urban Institute
Posted in Healthcare | No Comments »
Tuesday, August 25th, 2009
On July 30, 1965 - nearly 20 years after Harry Truman first proposed national healthcare insurance - President Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare into law. The program, one of the most consequential legacies of the Great Society, provides affordable healthcare insurance for people aged 65 and above.
Franklin Roosevelt was the first president to propose government-mandated healthcare insurance as part of his Social Security program, an effort that proved unsuccessful. After World War II, Truman asked lawmakers to enact a national health insurance plan - again to no avail.
“By the time Truman prepared to leave office in early 1953, he had backed off from his original plan of universal coverage. The focus increasingly turned toward Social Security. Nearly two decades of futile debate ensued, with conservative opponents, joined by the American Medical Association, repeatedly warning of the dangers of ’socialized medicine.’”
The legislative gridlock broke when Johnson won the presidency in the 1964 landslide election and brought sizeable Democratic majorities to the Senate and House. The breakthrough came when House Ways and Means Committee chairman Wilbur Mills of Arkansas had an epiphany and decided to support Medicare. According to Mills, “I can support a payroll tax for financing health benefits just as I have supported a payroll tax for cash benefits.”
The Medicare bill easily cleared the House by 313 - 115 and the Senate by 68 - 21. When Johnson signed the legislation into law at a White House ceremony, Harry Truman - aged 81 - attended and was enrolled as the nation’s first Medicare beneficiary.
Tags: American Medical Association, American's Health Insurance Plans, Franklin Roosevelt, government healthcare, Harry Truman, health benefits, healthcare insurance, Medicare, Medicare beneficiary, payroll tax, President Lyndon Johnson, social security, socialized medicine, universal coverage
Posted in Healthcare | No Comments »
Tuesday, August 11th, 2009
Harry Truman had been Vice President for just 82 days when Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s death catapulted him into the presidency and the spotlight. One of his earliest initiatives was to propose a new national healthcare program in a November 19, 1945 message to Congress.
Truman argued that the federal government should be a major player in the healthcare arena. “The health of American children, like their education, should be recognized as a definite public responsibility.” The most 
controversial aspect of Truman’s plan was an optional national health insurance fund, which would be run by the federal government and open to all Americans. Participants would pay a monthly fee, which would cover all of their medical expenses. The government would pay physicians who joined the program for services rendered, and reimburse the policy holder for lost wages due to illness or injury.
The legislation introduced into the Senate and House of Representatives ran headlong into the American Medical Association’s (AMA) strong opposition. “The AMA characterized the bill as ’socialized medicine’, and in a forerunner to the rhetoric of the McCarthy era, called Truman White House staffers ‘followers of the Moscow party line’”.
Once the Korean War started, Truman was forced to abandon his healthcare bill. Despite his failure, he successfully brought the issue of healthcare in America to the forefront. When Lyndon Johnson signed Medicare into law at the Harry S. Truman library, he said it “all started really with the man from Independence.”
Tags: American Medical Association, federal government, health insurance, Healthcare plan, illness, Medicare, national healthcare, physicians
Posted in Healthcare, Healthcare Village | No Comments »
Friday, August 7th, 2009
Healthcare reform was on the table more than 75 years ago when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt opened a national dialog on the need for comprehensive health insurance.
It was November 14, 1934, when Roosevelt noted the problem of “economic loss due to sickness”, which he described as “a very serious problem for many families with and without income.” Roosevelt was far-sighted as catastrophic illness remains the leading cause of personal bankruptcies. According to FDR, “Whether we come to this form of insurance sooner or later on, I am confident that we can devise a system which 
will enhance and not hinder the remarkable progress which has been and is being made in the practice of the professions of medicine and surgery in the United States.”
Roosevelt then set his Committee on Economic Security (CES) to work on the issue prior to passing the Social Security Act of 1935. The CES admitted to “differences of opinion” regarding the “advisability of establishing compulsory health insurance”, which it believed to be “essential.” The American Medical Association put up strong resistance, characterizing the concept as reeking of communism or socialism. As a result, Roosevelt did not include healthcare insurance in his Social Security legislation.
During his second administration, Roosevelt convened the Interdepartmental Committee on Health to research national health insurance. At a National Health Conference in July of 1938, the committee decided that they “must take into account that millions of citizens lack the individual means to pay for adequate medical care.”
Based on the conference’s findings, FDR considered sending a healthcare reform bill to Congress. Once again, he was forced to back off because of resistance from the medical community; instead, he asked for legislation to encourage state governments to take the lead in initiating healthcare reform.
It’s interesting to note that - 70 years later - the American Medical Association now supports the concept.
Tags: American Medical Association, bankruptcy, Congress, economic issues, health insurance, healthcare insurance, healthcare reform
Posted in Healthcare | No Comments »
Thursday, July 16th, 2009
Healthcare providers will slash up to $1.7 trillion in costs over the next 10 years by enhancing the care of chronic diseases, reorganizing administrative procedures and eliminating unnecessary treatments.
This is a sneak peak at how healthcare systems, physicians, pharmaceutical companies, insurers, medical device manufacturers and other stakeholders plan to respond to President Barack Obama’s request that the industry find ways to control patient costs. Among the American Medical Association’s (AMA) suggestions are cutting overused - and often unnecessary — procedures, such as Caesarean sections. The savings are crucial to funding the Obama administration’s proposed health system overhaul.
A new White House study states that reforming healthcare will increase the nation’s GDP by two percent in 2020 and eight percent in 2030, cut unemployment and save families an average of $2,600 a year by 2020. Without healthcare reform, the number of uninsured Americans will rise to 72 million by 2040, compared with 46 million today.
Christina Romer, chair of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, said “The one thing that’s happened relative to the 1990s is the nightmare scenario is getting closer.” Other recommendations include reducing medical errors, using common insurance forms, improving physician performance standards, readmitting fewer patients to hospitals, improving drug development efficiency and expanding in-home care for patients with long-term illnesses.
Tags: AMA, American Medical Association, Caesarean section, Christina Romer, chronic diseases, Economic Advisers, GDP, healthcare industry, healthcare providers, healthcare reform, Healthcare systems, hospitals, in-home care, insurers, long-term illness, medical device manufacturers, patient costs, patients, pharmaceutical companies, physicians, President Barack Obama, reforming healthcare, treatment, uninsured Americans, White House
Posted in Economics, Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Monday, May 18th, 2009
Barack Obama may get his way on healthcare reform with the full cooperation of those who vocally lobbied against it during the 1990s. The timing couldn’t be better — healthcare costs total $2.4 trillion annually (an average of $7,868 per person) and are projected to rise to $4 trillion by 2016.
In a reversal, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, physicians and other industry leaders presented a plan to the White House proposing to save $2 trillion in healthcare delivery costs over the next 10 years. Participants included the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the Advanced Medical Technology Association, America’s Health Insurance Plans and the Service Employees International Union — which master-minded the bold move. Although healthcare costs will continue to rise, this plan will slow the pace.
“We cannot continue down the same dangerous road we’ve been traveling for so many years, with costs that are out of control, because reform is not a luxury that can be postponed, but a necessity that cannot wait,” Obama said.
Obama’s proposed plan is based on the existing system, where employers, the government and individuals share responsibility for paying for privately delivered healthcare. The government will subsidize coverage for additional people and mandate stricter consumer protection.
It’s evident that the healthcare industry has seen the writing on the wall. Their willingness to work with the Obama Administration and Congress - compared with the fierce opposition to Bill Clinton’s healthcare reform efforts 15 years ago - is a turnaround that should translate to real change.
Tags: Advanced Medical Technology Association, American Hospital Association, American Medical Association, American's Health Insurance Plans, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, healthcare costs, healthcare reform, Obama administration, pharmaceutical companies, physicians, President Barack Obama, private healthcare, Service Employees International Union, White House
Posted in Economics, Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
