Pages

Friday, December 16, 2011

Health Care Reform Articles - December 16, 2011


Do we need health insurance?


Posted Dec. 15, 2011, at 5:42 p.m.
Do Americans need health insurance? The short answer is no — at least not in the form it currently exists in America.
It is true that in many wealthy countries private insurance companies are used in the financing of universal health care systems. But they are nothing like American companies. They are regulated public utilities and are told by their governments who to insure, what to cover and how much and when to pay. Most are prohibited from making a profit and are required to pay any willing provider. Not exactly the American model.
The purpose of health care financing systems should be — and is in all other wealthy countries — to facilitate the delivery of health care services, to protect individuals and families against huge medical care expenses and to avoid breaking the national bank while they do so. But in America, our private insurance system actually interferes with the delivery of health care and is rapidly becoming too expensive.


December 14, 2011

Lawmakers Offer Bipartisan Plan to Overhaul Medicare




WASHINGTON — A Democratic senator, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and a Republican member of the House, Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, unveiled a bipartisan plan on Wednesday to revamp Medicare and make a fixed federal contribution to the cost of coverage for each beneficiary.
The lawmakers aim to reshape the debate over the giant health insurance program by addressing concerns that have provoked fierce opposition to similar ideas in the past.
Just as important as the details of their proposal was the fact that the two were working together on an issue that both parties have exploited for political advantage.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/us/politics/lawmakers-offer-bipartisan-plan-to-overhaul-medicare.html?pagewanted=print



A better, bipartisan Medicare future.

Wall Street Journal

Democrats are running on Mediscare in 2012 and President Obama has all but called the "premium support" reform un-American, if not the decline and fall of Western civilization. That would seem to put the issue in Newt Gingrich's wheelhouse, but the GOP candidate also claimed in a recent interview that the Paul Ryan reform model is "politically impossible" and "suicide." Well, not so fast.

Today Senator Ron Wyden and Mr. Ryan are releasing a bipartisan defined-contribution health-care plan, as the Oregon Democrat and Wisconsin Republican explain nearby. This is an important moment because it shows that the serious entitlement debate is taking place within the camp of choice and incentives, not the Obama status quo.

Wyden-Ryan shares the same architecture as the House budget. It would replace today's open-ended Medicare with a fixed-dollar subsidy for seniors to choose from a menu of private plans. Costs would fall as insurers and providers innovate to compete for patient market share, rather than responding to fee-for-service price controls.

But there are several key changes. Most of the substantive argument turns on how the premium supports should grow over time. Wyden-Ryan would dispose of a predetermined rate—GDP plus 1%, medical inflation, etc.—and instead use competitive bidding. Insurers and traditional Medicare, which would remain intact, would essentially participate in a reverse auction and the second lowest bid would set the benchmark for a given region. Seniors would pay at the margin for more expensive options.

As a practical matter, competitive bidding may be an improvement over a set formula because it relies on local information and adjusts with the behavioral and organizational responses that will vary from region to region. Medicare as centrally planned from Washington will never be able to keep pace with the market if subject to the same defined payments. In any case, the growth rate to-and-fro is largely an artifact of the Congressional Budget Office, which has admitted there is a "gap in the toolkit" when predicting market-based savings. It knows this first hand from having grossly overestimated the costs of the 2003 prescription drug benefit.

Messrs. Wyden and Ryan also sneak in a reform of the larger employer market, which would allow businesses with fewer than 100 workers to move to a defined-contribution model without tax penalties. Mr. Wyden has been campaigning for such a reform for years from the Democratic backbenches.

The Oregonian voted for the Affordable Care Act, though his decision to join Mr. Ryan is another signal that the entitlement debate is moving in a more promising direction. Variations on defined contribution were also mulled by the "super committee," only to end up on the horns of liberal intransigence.

The brutal math is that Medicare spending has been growing about three percentage points faster every year than the overall economy for the last quarter-century and is now the main driver of the fiscal crisis. Mr. Obama has ruled out any structural reforms and his only fallback is the command-and-control technocracy that continues to fail and will ultimately harm patient care. The Wyden-Ryan deal shows that smart liberals prefer a different future.
Cost of broken health care system is killing us



Written by Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr. | Rainbow Push Coalition   
Wednesday, 07 December 2011 15:33

I suffer from a harsh case of gout that requires constant treatment. Suddenly this year, I discovered that the generic drug I was using that cost about 3 cents a pill had been banned and replaced by a proprietary drug — a brand name — that cost $5 a pill. Welcome to America’s broken health-care system.

Walkouts by Nurses Loom as Hospitals Seek to Cut Costs


The specter of nursing strikes is looming on both coasts, as newly empowered nurses’ unions confront hospitals pressed to cut costs amid changes in health care financing.
In New York, over 6,000 registered nurses are poised to walk out of three of the city’s most prestigious hospitals before the year’s end, mainly over changes to their health benefits and what they say are strains in staffing. The hospitals — Mount Sinai, Montefiore Medical Center and St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center — already are contracting for strike replacements at more than double normal wages.

Gingrich Push on Health Care Appears at Odds With G.O.P.


Shortly before the passage of President Obama’s stimulus bill in 2009, Newt Gingrich’s political committee put out a video of Mr. Gingrich denouncing it as a “big politician, big bureaucracy, pork-laden bill.”
“It should be stopped,” he said.
But at the same time, Mr. Gingrich was cheering a $19 billion part of the package that promoted the use of electronic health records, something that benefited clients of his consulting business. “I am delighted that President Obama has picked this as a key part of thestimulus package,” he told health care executives in a January 2009 conference call.

Clients of Gingrich’s firm benefited from his support of stimulus funds

WASHINGTON – Newt Gingrich seized the TV airwaves in 2009 to bash newly elected President Obama’s stimulus package, calling it “entirely a pork-barrel bill’’ that would do little to solve the recession.
Later, in a separate web video, the former House speaker stepped back from his blanket criticism. He explained that he strongly supported spending $27 billion of stimulus funds to encourage doctors and hospitals to create electronic medical records for their patients. Left unsaid was that his private consulting business in Washington has received large payments from medical technology companies that stand to profiit from the federal money.

LePage says Medicaid cuts a necessity

The governor defends his plan, while down the hall scores of Mainers testify about how the targeted benefits aided them.

AUGUSTA — Six months ago, John Wilson could no longer manage his HIV and his cancer.
He was going to the hospital emergency room for help and was in danger of being evicted from his apartment in Lewiston, he said.
On Thursday, Wilson, who's 40, told Maine lawmakers that his life turned around after he was introduced to a state-funded case manager, who helped him keep his apartment and get medical care. "Literally, she saved my life," he said.

If Head Start loses funding, kids will suffer, advocates say

By Susan M. Cover scover@mainetoday.com
MaineToday Media State House Writer
AUGUSTA — Angela Krehbiel Vancil's two children have benefited from Head Start, the federal early childhood intervention program for low-income families.

click image to enlarge

The mother from North Monmouth is concerned that budget cuts proposed by Gov. Paul LePage will mean that 300 children won't be able to participate in the program in the future. That's because enrollment would be capped, and some of the children already in the program would not be allowed to return.

LePage stands by MaineCare cuts, asks to oversee MaineHousing

Posted Dec. 15, 2011, at 8:30 p.m.
AUGUSTA, Maine — Gov. Paul LePage reiterated the need for a sweeping overhaul of MaineCare at the State House on Thursday, while elsewhere in the building scores of opponents testified before lawmakers for a second day.
At a public hearing on the governor’s proposed cuts to MaineCare, many spoke out against planned funding rollbacks for mental health services and substance abuse programs, as well as a loss of benefits for some low-income adults. A handful of supporters stepped to the podium in favor of the reforms.
Others, including the advocacy group Maine Equal Justice Partners, questioned the proposal’s legality, saying it violates a key provision of the federal Affordable Care Act. The provision essentially prohibits states from making it more difficult to enroll in Medicaid, such as through stricter eligibility requirements, as state health insurance exchanges mandated by 2014 are established. MaineCare is the state’s version of the federal Medicaid program.

No comments:

Post a Comment