Posts Tagged ‘senior citizens’
Tuesday, February 7th, 2012
Job growth in the healthcare profession seems to be virtually recession-proof. In Florida, a state with a sizeable percentage of senior citizens, there are about 960,000 healthcare and social assistance jobs, approximately 13 percent of all nonfarm payroll positions in the state.
Some experts are not as optimistic about job growth in the healthcare sector. “Reform may accelerate the trend toward healthcare’s being the dominant employment sector in the economy,” according to a recent New England Journal of Medicine (now known as NEJM) article. A significant amount of the growth in healthcare that result from reform might be in support positions, rather than physicians and nurses, several economists said. “As for jobs for health professionals, I doubt that this will or can increase the number of doctors or nurses. While there will be greater demand for their services, there will also be offsetting effects as medically unnecessarily procedures are paid less,” said Amitabh Chandra, an economist and public-policy professor at Harvard University.
As the insured population grows under the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), healthcare workers will be in high demand. These gains come on the heels of growth already required to serve an aging population. In Florida, the aging population’s impact on healthcare employment is more dramatic than in the rest of the country: about 17 percent of the state’s population is older than 65, compared with a 13 percent average in the other states., according to the Census Bureau.
Other experts are far more sanguine about healthcare’s ability to create jobs. “The big places we waste money is patients who are discharged and there’s not a lot of follow up and they end up in the hospital a month later,” said Leemore Dafny, an economist at Northwestern University whose expertise is competition in healthcare markets. According to Dafny, reform will create new primary-care physicians and physician “extenders,” such as nurse practitioners; at the same time, it could decelerate growth in spending on medical specialists. “If the ACA is repealed, it will be business as usual — except that more of the population is now uninsured — so the demand for primary-care professionals will increase much more slowly,” said Dafny.
In fact, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the healthcare sector for some time has provided about the only bright spot in an otherwise drab report on job growth. Healthcare employment created 205,100 new jobs in the first eight months of 2011. Approximately 14.1 million people are employed in the healthcare sector with more than 4.7 million jobs at hospitals; more than 6.1 million jobs in ambulatory services; and more than 2.3 million jobs in physicians’ offices, according to BLS statistics.
According to Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, M.D., CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Mark Pinsky, president and CEO of the Opportunity Finance Network, “The current economic recovery effort presents an opportunity to build stronger, healthier communities. That’s a central goal, for example, of the Create Jobs for USA Fund that the OFN and Starbucks launched late last year to support job creation and retention. Economic growth and job creation provide more than income and the ability to afford health insurance and medical care. They also enable us to live in safer homes and neighborhoods, buy healthier food, have more leisure time for physical activity, and experience less health-harming stress. The research clearly shows that health starts in our homes and communities and not in the doctor’s office. In that way, economic policy is, in fact, health policy. The end goal? Create and sustain job growth across the country. Improve communities. Improve health. Give people the opportunities to make smart, healthy decisions so that they can act in the best interests of their communities, themselves, and future generations.”
Healthcare added 17,200 jobs in November of 2011, an increase over the 11,600 jobs reported in October, according to BLS data. Healthcare accounted for 14.3 percent of 120,000 new jobs created across all sectors in November. On the whole, healthcare represented 24 percent of the 1.2 million non-farm jobs created this year and is expected to create 321,000 new jobs by year’s end. That represents a 22 percent increase over the 263,400 healthcare jobs created in 2011.
Tags: Ambulatory services, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census Bureau, Create Jobs for USA Fund, healthcare reform, Job creation, medical school, NEJM, New England Journal of Medicine, Nonfarm payroll positions, nurse practitioners, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, senior citizens
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems, Hospitals | No Comments »
Wednesday, December 21st, 2011
Congress’ end of year to-do list inevitably includes the “doc fix” – billions of dollars to avoid deep rate cuts for physicians who treat Medicare’s 48 million patients. Congressmen and Senators always defer the cuts demanded by a 1997 reimbursement formula — known as the sustainable growth rate (SGR) – and which most believe needs to be entirely rewritten. The deferrals are temporary, and the doc fix has become increasingly difficult to pass through a divided and deficit-wary Congress. In 2010, Congress put off scheduled cuts five times, with the longest delay lasting one year.
The story is the same heading into 2012. If lawmakers are unable to agree before returning home for the holidays, 500,000 physicians will face a stiff 27 percent cut beginning January 1. Although Congressional leaders have vowed to prevent that, they disagree over how to pay for the fix. There is little doubt some agreement will be reached, but that deal could be delayed until early next year.
The cost of congressional intervention, not surprisingly, has grown: Delaying the cuts — the solution Congress has chosen since 2003 — will cost $21 billion for a one-year delay and $38.6 billion for two years. Repealing the formula would add approximately $300 billion to the deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
No one imagined that the SGR would cause so much trouble when it was passed as a minor element of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Nearly 15 years ago, Medicare physician spending, which accounts for a small share of the program’s overall outlay, was growing slowly. The law included other restraints that have since been repealed. Analysts predicted that, at most, the SGR formula would curb physician payments minimally. “It wasn’t viewed as a big deal at the time,” said Paul Van de Water, an economist specializing in Medicare with the research group Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “They needed a few more billion dollars in savings (for the Balanced Budget Act), so they just tacked on the SGR arrangement.”
Kaiser Health News wonders why Congress doesn’t just scrap the SGR formula. “Money is the biggest problem. It would cost about $300 billion to stop the doc fix cuts over the next decade and Congress can’t agree on where to find that kind of cash. Some lawmakers, including Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), have proposed using money saved from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to finance a permanent fix. While the idea has found favor among some Democrats, other Republicans oppose it. For physicians, the prospect of facing big payment cuts is a source of mounting frustration. Some say the uncertainty led them to quit the program, while others are threatening to do so. Still, defections have not been significant to date, according to MedPAC. Physician groups continue to lobby Congress to enact a permanent payment fix.”
Dr. Florence C. Barnett recently decided to quit seeing Medicare patients. She said the plan covered approximately 33 percent of what it cost her to see patients — and found herself facing a growing Medicare patient population after other local neurosurgeons left the program in 2010. “This is the way the government will ration healthcare,” Barnett said. “The people who can afford it will have healthcare, and the people who are only on government support — they will not be able to find a doctor or they will have a very long wait. It’s happening now.”
A survey conducted by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission found that among patients looking for a new primary-care physician in 2010, 79 percent experienced no problems finding one. According to the American Medical Association (AMA), which generally resists limits in reimbursements, nearly 33 percent of primary-care physicians already restrict how many Medicare patients they accept in their practices.
Physicians are once again relying on Congress to put off the impending cut. It’s a scenario that Glen Stream, M.D. and president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, calls a “Lucy and Charlie Brown and the football thing.” In other words, physicians have become numb to the whole situation. This year, that numbness could be risky. “Doctors are sort of numb from this,” Stream said. “It’s concerning because I think there’s a very serious chance that this cut could go into place and yet many practicing physicians have heard this years and years in a row and it always seems to get averted at the last minute. I think that they may not understand the gravity of the situation this time.”
Writing on the MDNews.com website, Maggie Behringer says that “Last year the battle to fund the Medicare deficit — $19 billion for the fiscal year — ended in a one-year measure. The summer saw a hands-off stance from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services when the administration instructed providers to temporarily cease filing claims until Congress resolved a standstill over stimulus spending and unemployment benefits. The cut projected for January, 2012, should Congress fail to enact the customary doc-fix, totals to 27.4 percent. The core conflict for legislators — 19 of whom are physicians, themselves — emerges in the inability of the SGR to adapt in today’s economic environment. The formula was originally developed to bind spending to the economy’s growth. Despite initial success, the exponential climb in healthcare costs quickly surpassed the overall market. The subsequent deficits to fund Medicare were further compounded by the recent depression and ongoing recession. Even if Congress is able to act in time with a temporary doc-fix over the holidays, the fundamental dilemma will remain a question of funding just as the patient population eligible for Medicare benefits enters a major boom.”
Tags: American Academy of Family Physicians, American Medical Association, Balanced Budget Act, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, deficit, Doc fix, Healthcare rationing, Medicare, Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, MedPAC, recession, Senator Jon Kyl, senior citizens, Sustainable Growth Rate
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Monday, November 7th, 2011
Despite rumors to the contrary, the basic monthly premium for Medicare will be less than anticipated in 2012. The new Part B premium, which covers outpatient care, will be $99.90 a month for 2012, approximately $7 less than projected as recently as May. In other words, the majority of senior citizens will pay $3.50 more a month next year, instead of $10.20, as forecast earlier. Some younger retirees who enrolled recently will actually see their rates go down. They have been paying as much as $115.40 a month. Instead, they’ll also pay $99.90 next year. The primary reason for the lower-than-expected premiums is a result of the interaction between Social Security cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) and Medicare.
“Thanks to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Medicare is providing better benefits at lower cost,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. She reassured seniors that they have nothing to fear from the healthcare law, and described keeping premiums in check as “pretty remarkable.”
Some Republicans do not see the connection between Medicare premiums and the ACA. “Lower Medicare premiums are being driven by lower-than-average Medicare spending due to the slow economy” – not the healthcare law, said Antonia Ferrier, spokeswoman Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the ranking Republican on the panel that oversees Medicare.
Part B premiums have been frozen at the 2008 level of $96.40 a month for about 75 percent of Medicare beneficiaries because of a lack of a Social Security COLA during the recession. Social Security recently announced a raise of an average of $39 a month for 2012. The Part B premium is of great interest to the 48 million people covered by Medicare. Average premiums for prescription coverage and for popular Medicare Advantage plans will stay flat or dip slightly for 2012, but fewer beneficiaries opt for those benefits. In May, government experts forecast that Medicare premiums would rise to $106.60 for 2012. At that time, they were also estimated a Social Security COLA of just 0.7 percent – but it turned out to be a larger 3.6 percent increase. As a result, rising Medicare costs could be spread among many more people, resulting in smaller individual increases.
“Thanks in part to the Affordable Care Act, people with Medicare are going to have more money in their pockets next year,” added Donald Berwick, MD, administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). “With new tools provided by the Affordable Care Act, we are improving how we pay providers, helping patients get the care they need and spending our healthcare dollars more wisely.”
Advocates for senior citizens also were pleased with the smaller rise in Medicare Part B premiums. “The payment reforms enacted over the past few years, including those in the Affordable Care Act, in addition to crackdowns on fraud, waste and abuse, are partially responsible for the increased optimism about Medicare’s financial health, the lower-than-predicted Part B premium and an almost unheard-of drop in the Part B deductible,” said Joe Baker, president of New York-based Center for Medicare Rights. “These developments help show the promise of the ACA’s delivery system reforms, and why we must let them do their job in the coming years.”
AARP echoes that sentiment. “Millions of America’s seniors are struggling with higher expenses – particularly higher healthcare costs, lower incomes, depleted savings and reduced home equity or homes lost to foreclosure, and this small increase is welcome news,” noted David Certner, AARP’s legislative policy director.
Writing in Family Practice News, Alicia Ault takes issue with the way HHS is tying the low increase to healthcare reform. According to Ault, “Part B premiums are calculated to cover one-fourth the cost of physician services, plus a contingency margin that is essentially equivalent to an insurer’s reserve. This has nothing to do with health reform; it’s been a statutory requirement since, well, for a long time. And the contingency margin is always dependent on what happens with the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula. CMS assumes every year that the SGR will be overturned, so that calculation also has nothing to do with health reform. For an administration that prides itself on transparency, it seems to have done little today to pull back the curtain on Medicare spending — even as Dr. Berwick said that transparency itself had led to lower costs.”
Tags: AARP, Center for Medicare Rights, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Cost-of-living adjustments, Department of Health and Human Services, Donald Berwick, Family Practice News, Kathleen Sebelius, Medicare Advantage, Medicare Part B, Outpatient care, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Premiums, Senator Orrin Hatch, senior citizens, social security, Sustainable Growth Rate formula
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Tuesday, June 28th, 2011
Americans have mixed feelings about what changes should be made to the popular Medicare program. Although 53 percent say the program needs fundamental changes, 58 percent say it is working fine the way it is. Americans were asked to decide which of three statements is closest to their viewpoints: “Medicare works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better”; “There are some good things about Medicare, but fundamental changes are needed”; or “Medicare has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it.”
Twenty-seven percent – including 36 percent of Democrats – believe that only minor changes are needed. Another 13 percent said the program needs to be completely rebuilt. Fully 53 percent said Medicare needs fundamental changes — even though the program has many good points. People who want basic changes include a majority of Republicans and independents, though just 43 percent of Democrats support the plan. A majority of Americans between ages 18 and 64 want significant changes. Just 37 percent of those 65 and older agree.
Additionally, respondents were asked if they wanted to see Medicare “continue the way it is set up now, as a program that pays the doctors and hospitals that treat senior citizens” or “if they think it should be transformed into “a program that gives senior citizens payments towards the purchase of private insurance.” Democrats want to retain Medicare in its present form; Republicans want to transform it into a voucher system in which seniors choose their coverage and are given money to cover their insurance premiums.
So strongly does the Senate Democratic leadership feel, they have reaffirmed that Medicare cuts should not be on the table during the debt ceiling discussions. “Seniors can’t afford it,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said. “The vast majority of the American people, including most Republicans, do not support changing Medicare as we know it, as articulated in that piece of legislation that came from the House. That” piece of legislation is the Paul Ryan (R-WI) plan, “The Path to Prosperity”, which slashes the budget deficit by about $5 trillion over the next decade.
Ryan’s plan would overturn the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and proposes major reforms to Medicaid and Medicare. Medicaid would become a block grant system; the federal government would allocate money to states, giving them greater flexibility to shape their healthcare programs that serve the poor. Currently, the government matches every dollar that states spend on Medicaid; the formula varies from state to state.
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) said Democrats will not accept a “mini” Ryan plan. “The Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it must be taken off the table, but Republicans should know that we will not support any mini version plan of ‘Ryan’ either,” Schumer said. “We want to make our position on Medicare perfectly clear. No matter what we do in these debt-limit talks, we must preserve the program in its current form, and we will not allow cuts to seniors’ benefits.“
Slashing Medicare will be a major issue in the 2012 election. According to Harvard political scientist and pollster Robert Blendon, “Older Americans tend to vote at much higher rates than other voters,” he said. “They are the group that most care about healthcare as a voting issue.”
“Medicare for us is a pillar of health and economic security for our seniors,” said Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who is the House Minority Leader. “It’s an ethic, it’s a value…and we intend to fight for it. Pelosi is well aware that there is a problem with Medicare and acknowledges that the program is not financially sound enough to support the retirement of 78 million baby boomers who are joining the program. Additionally, she knows that Medicare costs strongly impact the nation’s debt and deficit problem. Additionally, she says that she prefers not to use Medicare as a weapon against Republicans. “Would you rather have success with the issue, or would you rather have a fight in the election? Of course you’d rather have success,” she said. “That’s what you came here to do. That’s what’s important to the well-being of the American people.”
Another recent poll, conducted by the Pew Research Center, found that older Americans do not have a favorable opinion about privatizing Medicare. Fifty-one percent of people aged 50 and over oppose the plan, while just 29 percent support it. Even among Republicans, more respondents oppose the plan than support it. The changes are designed to save the program’s finances by trimming government benefits for all Americans under the age of 55. Medicare says it will run out of funds to pay full benefits by 2024. One person polled is Michael A. Smith, a 54-year-old lifelong Republican who is currently unemployed and lives in the Philadelphia suburbs. “A community like this, they want jobs and no changes in the funds they’ve paid into all their lives,” Smith said.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has stated that Ryan’s plan would not allow insurers to charge sick people more than healthy ones. Insurance companies would set premiums at the same level for everyone of the same age. Although Ryan’s plan would leave Medicare intact for anyone now 55 or older, Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, CA, said older voters have a hard time believing that. “Anytime you say, `But this doesn’t affect current senior citizens,’ they think it’s going to affect them,” he said. “Seniors are very, very sophisticated when it comes to these programs. They figure any change could have a loophole or an exception or a provision that could end up hurting them after all. They’re very zealous about safeguarding the programs from which they benefit.”
Tags: 2012 election, Block grant system, Congressional Budget Office, Debt-limit talks, Harvard, House of Representatives, insurance premiums, Medicaid, Medicare, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pew Research Center, Polls, Representative Nancy Pelosi, Representative Paul Ryan, Robert Blendon, Senate, Senator Charles Schumer, Senator Harry Reid, senior citizens, Voucher system, “Path to Prosperity”
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Monday, June 27th, 2011
Seventy percent of Americans oppose cuts to Medicare and 57 percent are against cutting Medicaid, even when they are aware that the programs constitute an outsized weight in the federal deficit. Of the two wildly popular programs, Medicaid is the most vulnerable. 
Writing in the Washington Post about a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation about the health of Medicare and Medicaid, Ezra Klein says “It doesn’t matter whether Eric Cantor says he’s bargaining for the Ryan budget or not. The GOP cannot privatize and voucherize Medicare. They can’t even get close. It’s too easy an issue for Democrats, too dangerous an issue with seniors, and too slipshod a policy even for Michele Bachmann. The attack on Medicaid, however, is another story. That one might actually work. And if it does, it’ll actually be worse. ‘in-the-know political circles,’ says Chris Jennings, who ran President Bill Clinton’s healthcare reform efforts, ‘it’s just assumed Medicaid is going to be hit. No one is going to want to touch Medicare. Medicare is where the political juice is. But we’re going to need savings. So that leads to Medicaid.’ There are two reasons Medicaid is more vulnerable than Medicare. The first is who it serves. Medicaid goes to two groups of people: the poor and the disabled. Most of the program’s enrollees are kids from poor families, though most of the program’s money is spent on the small fraction of beneficiaries who are disabled and/or elderly. These groups have one thing in common: They’re politically powerless.”
It’s a little-known fact that Medicaid covers more people than Medicare. In 2010, according to the Department of Health and Human Services, Medicaid covered 53.9 million people, compared with Medicare’s 47.3 million. Additionally, Medicaid patients are also among society’s most vulnerable. “Kids (and) pregnant women are the vast majority,” according to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “But then older seniors, many of whom are in nursing homes…and very disabled individuals” are also covered by Medicaid.
Although states and the federal government share the cost of Medicaid, what grates on some governors is the rules that come with the money. “Governors just want flexibility to run our states,” said Republican New Jersey Governor Chris Christie at the annual National Governors Association meeting in February. “We don’t want to pay 50 percent of the cost of Medicaid and have zero percent of the authority. And I don’t think that’s an unreasonable thing to be asking for.” Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi agrees. “If I could get total flexibility, I would take a two percent cap in a heartbeat,” he said. Barbour’s preference is to receive a lump sum – what it gets now from the federal government, plus two percent to fund Medicaid.
Dr. Donald Berwick, administrator of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, (CMS) said “There’s a right way to reform Medicare and a wrong way,” Berwick believes that the direction he is taking — modeled on his successful patient safety campaigns at the Institute for Healthcare Improvement – will bring about needed healthcare change. The Obama administration’s efforts to improve patient safety are more or less bipartisan. There is little cause to dispute CMS’ data: the agency spent $4.4 billion in 2009 caring for patients harmed in hospitals and an additional $26 billion on patients who were readmitted within 30 days. The Partnership for Patients, funded through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), seeks to reduce preventable injuries by 40 percent and cut hospital readmissions by 20 percent in just two years. According to CMS, achieving the Partnership’s goals will result in 1.8 million fewer patient injuries, allow more than 1.6 million patients to recover complication-free and save up to $35 billion in health costs.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius described contentious portions of the ACA as the inaugural steps toward entitlement reform. Sebelius criticized proposals to transform federal Medicaid funding into block grants for states. When some lawmakers asked her to speak about the Obama administration’s alternative proposal to rein in entitlement spending, Sebelius pointed to two provisions of the new law. The ACA created a new board of independent experts that will recommend Medicare payment cuts. Its recommendations will take effect automatically unless Congress blocks them — and proposes equivalent savings. According to Sebelius, the panel represents “a big step in terms of entitlement reform that actually doesn’t potentially cause harm to our seniors.” She also pointed to an HHS effort to create new methods of dealing with people who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid because those patients represent a lopsided share of the programs’ costs.
Tags: Block grants, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Disabled, Dr Donald Berwick, Ezra Klein, Governor Chris Christie, Institute for Healthcare Improvement, Kaiser Family Foundation, Kathleen Sebelius, Medicaid, Medicare, National Governors Association, Obama administration, Partnership for Patients, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, poor, President Bill Clinton, Representative Eric Cantor, Representative Michele Bachmann, Representative Paul Ryan, senior citizens
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Thursday, June 23rd, 2011
Five Senators want to take the House-passed Medicare plan off the table in bipartisan deficit reduction talks, claiming that the plan effectively dismantles the program. According to the Senators, the Medicare plan, which passed as part of a budget proposal in April, would jeopardize senior citizens’ current benefits and double out-of-pocket costs. The five are Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD); Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH); Senator Bill Nelson, (D-FL); Senator Claire McCaskill, (D-MO); and Senator Jon Tester, (D-MT).
In a letter to Vice President Joe Biden, the senators wrote: “We are aware the administration has rejected this proposal since its passage by the House, and we applaud your efforts to educate the American people about its serious implications. We encourage you to remain unwavering in opposition to this scheme. For the good of the nation’s seniors, it must remain off the table.”
According to the letter,“This proposal would never pass Congress on its own, and it does not belong in a larger deal either. It would be devastating for America’s seniors, who would see their out-of-pocket costs for healthcare double and the benefits they currently enjoy jeopardized. Under this risky proposal, insurance company bureaucrats would decide what seniors get.” Biden is leading talks to raise the debt ceiling and negotiating with lawmakers regarding ways to reduce the deficit as a trade-off to raise the debt ceiling.
The deficit and debt limit – whose ceiling the nation is rapidly approaching – are part of the conversation on Capitol Hill. “I’m willing. I’m ready. It is time to have the conversation” about deficit cuts and the debt limit, said House Speaker John Boehner
(R-OH), urging President Barack Obama to involve himself personally. “It is time to play large ball, not small ball.” House Democratic leader Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said, “I could never support any arrangement that reduced benefits for Medicare. Absolutely not,” she said,” emphasizing a position she and other Democrats had laid out at their own meeting with the president. Given Medicare’s size — nearly $500 billion a year — any deal on cutting future deficits is likely to include savings from the program, and may include the benefit cuts that most Democrats oppose.
The Obama administration has come out against the Medicare reforms in the House plan – authored by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI). The Senators insist that this is a non starter, and stressed that they must not be a point of negotiation during the ongoing debt ceiling talks. Despite the Democrats’ opposition, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) insists that the Medicare reform plan will be “on the table” in negotiations. “We are going to discuss what ought to be done,” McConnell said. “I can assure you that to get my vote to raise the debt ceiling, for whatever that is worth…Medicare will be a part of it.”
Some Republicans are backing away from Ryan’s proposal. For example, presidential candidate Newt Gingrich had egg on his face after suggesting that the plan is “radical… right-wing social engineering,” Gingrich’s explanations proved too little, too late for many conservatives, who continue to hammer the former House speaker for his gaffe.
In an op-ed piece for the San Francisco Sentinel, Chrystia Freeland writes that “The political theater in the United States this week has been all about the ‘debt ceiling’: Congress voting not to increase it; President Barack Obama and the House Republicans are meeting to discuss it; and the Treasury warning that failure to raise it will bring economic apocalypse for the United States and the world. Elites like to accuse ordinary Americans of a lack of political sophistication, but everyone from Main Street to Wall Street is savvy enough to understand that so far, the fighting over the ceiling is pure Kabuki. As with the budget deal earlier this year, the real negotiating is unlikely to happen until the very last minute. But everyone also understands that this summer game of brinkmanship matters because it is a proxy war being fought over a very real problem: the growing national debt and deficit. At just under 60 percent of gross domestic product, the U.S. national debt is lower than that of France, Germany and Britain. And the rest of the world still seems delighted to lend the United States money on historically generous terms.”
Tags: 2012 election, Debt limit, deficit, Healthcare benefits, House Budget Committee, House of Representatives, Kabuki, Main Street, Medicare, Newt Gingrich, out-of-pocket expenses, President Barack Obama, Representative John Boehner, Representative Nancy Pelosi, Representative Paul Ryan, Senator Ben Cardin, Senator Claire McCaskill, Senator Jon Tester, Senator Mitch McConnell, Senator Sherrod Brown Senator Bill Nelson, senior citizens, Treasury Department, Vice President Joe Biden, Wall Street, “Social engineering”
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Tuesday, May 24th, 2011
America’s senior citizens can breathe a sigh of relief. Even as the majority Republicans in the House of Representatives wield a surgeon’s scalpel to slash spending from the federal budget, they are unlikely to succeed at making significant changes to the extremely popular Medicare program. The Democratic-controlled Senate rejected serious cuts in the proposed legislation, which also included an attempt to block implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Congressional Democrats and the Obama Administration pointed out that the Republican budget measure’s block on implementation funding would endanger short-term funding for Medicare.
The legislation would create “significant disruptions in services” to Medicare recipients, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote to Senator Max Baucus (D-MT). The payment delays, Sebelius wrote, would halt the need to undertake a lengthy process to issue new regulations governing Medicare Advantage payment rates since the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) put in place its own set of payment rate rules. The Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) analysis questioned that claim because it believes that the Republican bill will reduce spending by $1.6 billion through the rest of 2011. Democrats maintain that the CBO’s review of Medicare spending is a separate issue from HHS’s lawful authority to fund the program.
Despite the Senate Democrats’ united front, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) is “ready to take on health programs” as legislators on both sides of the aisle struggle with long-term spending concerns. Lawmakers continue talks regarding the current year spending measure still under consideration. A new continuing resolution that would fund government operations until April 8 has emerged. Though it includes deeper spending cuts, it is free of controversial riders such as language to restrict ACA implementation funds. Meanwhile, the CBO issued a report that legislation designed to further the defunding goal would add $5.7 billion to the deficit.
Democratic leaders insisted that some form of compromise by the House GOP members is now needed. “We’re looking for some give on the Republican side,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH), he said, “needs something to bring his freshmen into the real world.” Boehner, referencing the Democrats and the White House, said “I hope the talks are going to continue, but we are not going to get very far if they don’t get serious about doing what the American people expect of us. “This is not going to be easy. Our goal, as I’ve said many times, is to cut spending and keep the government open.”
Tags: Congressional Budget Office, deficit, Democrats, Department of Health and Human Services, Federal budget, GOP, House Budget Committee, House of Representatives, Kathleen Sebelius, Medicare, Obama administration, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Representative John Boehner, Representative Paul Ryan, Senate, Senator Charles Schumer, Senator Max Baucus, senior citizens
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Monday, April 11th, 2011
A Congressional proposal to reform Medicare will transfer a significant share of the cost to the nation’s senior citizens – a constituency that is known for high voter turnout in elections. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) added fodder for critics, concluding that the majority of future retirees would pay considerably more for healthcare under the “Path to Prosperity” approach — which turns Medicare into a voucher-like plan for Americans who are currently 54 and younger. Representative Paul Ryan
(R-WI), who introduced the plan, said “We don’t want to turn the safety net into a hammock that lulls people to lives of complacencies and dependencies, into a permanent condition where they never get on their feet.” Instead of coverage for a set of prescribed benefits, Americans in their mid-50s and younger would receive a federal payment to purchase private insurance from a choice of government-regulated plans. If the proposal becomes law, beginning in 2022, Americans would have a vastly different experience when they became eligible for Medicare. The age for eligibility would rise from 65 to 67, according to the CBO.
Ryan’s proposal slashes $1.4 trillion from Medicaid over the next decade. He proposes to cut $630 billion off the budget by more or less repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s provisions that extend coverage to include anyone living on less than 133 percent of the poverty rate — just under $30,000 for a family of four. Additionally, Ryan’s plan eliminates subsidies for private insurance premiums for those just above the poverty line. According to CBO estimates, nearly 17 million people without insurance would have been covered by the Medicaid expansion.
Representative Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), the ranking Budget Committee Democrat, said Republicans are protecting tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy to the detriment of the middle class and the poor. “It doesn’t reform Medicare, it deforms and dismantles it,” Van Hollen said. As for Medicaid, Ryan’s proposal “rips apart the safety net” for poor and older people. “A typical beneficiary would spend more for healthcare under the proposal,” according to the CBO analysis. “Although the uncertainty in future federal spending on healthcare would decrease under the proposal, that uncertainty would be transferred to future beneficiaries,” the CBO analysis said. “If the volume, complexity, and costs of medical services turned out to be greater than expected, future beneficiaries would pay higher premiums and cost-sharing amount than are currently projected.”
Ryan’s budget resolution would improve the nation’s overall fiscal health, cutting projected deficits in President Obama‘s budget and moving the federal government towards a surplus by 2040, according to the non-partisan CBO. Ryan believes that the cuts are necessary to save the programs. “This is not a budget. This is a cause,” he said. “The social safety net is fraying at the seams.” Chip Kahn, president of the Federation of American Hospitals, said that Ryan’s proposal would “result in the loss of health coverage for millions of low-income Americans, reduce critical benefits for others, and make it more difficult for hospitals, clinicians and other healthcare providers to deliver the care so many need.” Other critics maintain that Ryan’s approach will shift the higher costs to individuals, much as the change from defined-benefit pensions to 401(k) plans has increased retirement risk. Senior citizens, the disabled and the poor likely will pay more for healthcare, even as Washington pays less. Additionally, Ryan’s plan would permanently extend George W. Bush’s tax cuts.
“The idealized notion that older consumers would be making these annual choices may have some merit as an idea, but it doesn’t seem to be taking place in practice,” said Patricia Neuman, director of the Medicare Policy Project at the non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation. Picking the right health plan could become even more critical if premiums outpace federal subsidies. In 2010, 50 percent of the nation’s Medicare recipients reported incomes of less than $21,000 a year, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis.
In an opinion piece in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the “Monday Morning Economist” Stephen Herrington writes “The tax cut proposal is not getting the attention it deserves. If it shapes up to be anything like was described in Ryan’s Road Map, it will create massive dislocations and disruptions in the economy. Ryan’s plan was/is to cut the top tax bracket from 35 percent to 25 percent with the promise/expectation that this would not impact revenues. In a departure from the standard ‘trickle down’ excuse for tax cuts, Ryan meant/means to offset the admitted loss in revenues by eliminating all manner of deductions. The deductions in our current tax code, such as medical, mortgage and state income tax expense are there for a purpose. Eliminating them will introduce wild distortions in markets and effectively push the tax cuts for the rich onto the other 98 percent of us. Elimination of the medical expense deduction will intensify the impact of the Medicare/Medicaid part of the plan. It is as if Ryan thinks the magic of the free market can absorb any shock in real time. No more mortgage deduction? No problem, I just won’t buy a house at all until the lack of the mortgage deduction causes prices to fall by half.”
Tags: 401 (k) plans, Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Defined benefit pensions, Federal budget, Federation of American Hospitals, George W Bush, healthcare providers, House Budget Committee, Kaiser Family Foundation, Low-income Americans, Medicaid, Medicare, Medicare Policy Project, mortgages, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama, Privatization, Representative Chris Van Hollen, Representative Paul Ryan, Ryan’s Road Map, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, senior citizens, Social safety net, Stephen Herrington, Tax bracket, tax cuts, vouchers, “The Path to Prosperity”
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Thursday, April 7th, 2011
Even though the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the law of the land, the healthcare lobby is alive and well. Various federal agencies are working on full implementation of the law in 2014. And with legislative tweaks and efforts to defund the law underway, lobbying on healthcare is ongoing. So far, more than 180 groups have registered to continue shaping the law, according to the Sunlight Foundation.
Ever since President Barack Obama began the long journey to reform, healthcare lobbyists went into high gear. During 2009 and 2010, $1.06 billion was spent on lobbying; more than $500 million was spent lobbying the legislation in each year, according to a report from the Center for Responsive Politics. Lobbyists for 1,251 organizations worked on healthcare reform in 2009 and 2010, according to the Sunlight Foundation. Individual lobbyists who reported working on health related legislation totaled 3,154 in 2010, with Big Pharma topping the list. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America spent $22 million and employs 52 lobbyists. Political donors with ties to the healthcare sector raised $137 million for federal candidates in the 2010 elections. That is $30 million less than that sector raised during the 2008 presidential race.
Barbara Kennelley, a former Congresswoman and current President and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, notes that lobbyists tried to raise an alarm among senior citizens about how the law might impact Medicare. “When the Affordable Care Act became law last March, critics predicted doom for the seniors and people with disabilities who rely on Medicare. They said that coverage would disappear, benefits would be cut, and death panels were on their way – none of which was true. But these lies scared many seniors about the law before it was explained to them. Now, one year later, as the implementation of the law moves forward, Medicare is still sound – it’s stronger than it was before the law was passed – and millions of people with Medicare are benefitting from the law.”
Medicare has cracked down hard on waste, fraud, and abuse. The Obama administration last year recovered $4 billion in Medicare fraud. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act provides tools to crack down even further, specifically saying that Medicare’s guaranteed benefits – hospital care, doctors’ services, home health services, drug coverage, etc. – are protected. “Benefits are as good as ever – better, in fact, Kennelly said. “Prescription drugs are more affordable. This year the nearly four million beneficiaries who fall into the prescription drug ‘doughnut hole’ will receive discounts on their drugs. These discounts will increase over the next few years until the doughnut hole is closed.”
It’s now 2011 and the lobbying is still going full steam ahead. So far this year, more than 180 firms have registered to lobby for new clients on healthcare issues, 16 of which disclosed the Affordable Care Act as a specific lobbying interest, according to Sunlight’s Lobbying Registration Tracker.
The Obama administration is frustrated that the battle against healthcare reform hasn’t ended. “There still is a lot of intentional misinformation by opponents that continues to be repeated,” said Kathleen Sebelius, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack agrees with Sebelius and believes that perceptions of the law are shifting as the benefits are implemented. Vilsack noted that as farmers and small businesses file their 2010 tax returns, they are seeing a tax credit for small businesses of up to 35 percent for premiums paid on health insurance for employees. “I think the acceptance of this and the awareness of this is going to grow substantially,” Vilsack said.
Tags: Barbara Kennelley, Big Pharma, Capitol Hill, Center for Responsive Politics, Congressmen, death panels, Department of Agriculture, Department of Health and Human Services, Doughnut hole, Healthcare lobbyists, Kathleen Sebelius, Medicare, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, President Barack Obama, Senators, senior citizens, Sunlight Foundation, Sunlight's Lobbying Registration Tracker, Tom Vilsack
Posted in Healthcare, Hospital Systems | No Comments »
Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010
Americans are aging and living longer than ever, according to a report entitled “Older Americans 2010: Key Indicators of Well-Being” compiled by 15 federal agencies.
The full report, which details demographics, economics, health status, health risks and healthcare can be found at a dedicated website. According to the report, Americans who live to 65 can expected to survive approximately 18.5 additional years, four more years than in 1960. Women who live to 85 can expect to live 6.8 more years and men 5.7 years. As impressive as those life expectancies are, people living in most of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Costa Rica – and even Cuba — can expect to live longer.
An estimated 39 million Americans were 65 or older in 2008 – approximately 13 percent of the population. In 2030 – when the entire baby boomer generation will be 65 or older – there will be 72 million senior citizens or approximately 20 percent of the population. By 2050, the over-85 population is expected to grow from 5.8 million to 19 million. Healthcare costs for the average senior, adjusted for inflation, rose from $9,224 in 1992 to $15,081 in 2006. Heart disease remains the leading cause of death for people 65 and older, though at half the rate recorded in 1981 – just 1,297 per 100,000. Strokes, cancer, respiratory diseases and Alzheimer’s are the next leading causes of death. Healthcare ate up 28 percent of out-of-pocket spending among the poor and nearly poor in 2006; that compares to 12 percent in 1977.
Tags: Alzheimer's Disease, baby boomers, federal government, healthcare costs, life expectancy, senior citizens
Posted in Healthcare, Healthcare Village | No Comments »