Showing posts with label Affordable Care Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Affordable Care Act. Show all posts

Anne Dunkelberg
Robert Restuccia
TEXAS LONE STAR FORUM
By Anne Dunkelberg and Robert Restuccia
Texans count on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) every day. That’s why we need straight answers from elected officials about proposals to gut Medicaid and CHIP.

When our parents can’t live on their own, it’s Medicaid that provides help to keep them at home, or in nursing home care when home care isn’t enough. When our neighbors living with disabilities need wheelchairs, prosthetics and basic supports to stay independent, Medicaid allows them to continue contributing to our communities. And when parents can’t afford private health insurance or lose their jobs, Texas Medicaid and CHIP protect their kids from becoming uninsured by providing the preventive care they need to stay healthy and letting them see a doctor when they get sick or injured.

Medicaid’s federal and state partnership also protects Texas jobs. Clinics, doctors’ offices, hospitals and other health care businesses count on Medicaid for a dependable source of revenue that supports local jobs.

But Congress is considering proposals that put our families, friends, neighbors and local jobs at risk. Making Medicaid a fixed pot of money that doesn’t grow with need -- commonly referred to as a block grant -- or imposing an unrealistic health care spending cap would set arbitrary limits on federal Medicaid investments.

These proposals do nothing to bring down health care costs. Instead, they just shift costs from the federal government to states, and then on to taxpayers, families and charities. They leave states few choices. States can cut off coverage and make kids, seniors, families and people with disabilities uninsured, which is proven to raise premiums for everyone who has insurance and drives up costs when the uninsured are forced to seek expensive emergency room care.

They can cut payments to doctors’ offices, hospitals and nursing homes, but this puts care and jobs at risk. Congress shifting costs to states is just like an employer shifting more of the premium to the worker. Neither really reforms health care costs, they only push the costs to someone else. Either way, we pay.

Federal debt and deficit control demands serious attention to controlling health care costs, but this can be done while still protecting access and quality in Medicare and Medicaid -- without adding to the ranks of the uninsured. America’s health reform law, the Affordable Care Act, is a good start. It begins the shift away from rewarding too much or too little care, and demands improved quality, safety and outcomes. People with multiple health problems -- like high blood pressure and diabetes -- cost more to treat when their doctors don’t communicate with each other. But the health reform law rewards doctors for reducing costs by coordinating care. Because nursing homes are much more expensive than caring for seniors or people with disabilities in their own homes, the law boosts Medicaid payments when states make it easier to get help in homes or community settings. It also invests in getting more primary care physicians on the job to catch problems early and avoid expensive hospitalizations. The health reform law also cracks down on Medicaid fraud by improving policing and enforcement against overcharges.

We can and should do more. We should crack down on practices that keep more cost-effective generic medicines off the market, and close a loophole that lets drug companies charge Medicare more when seniors on Medicaid need drugs. We should speed up efforts to prevent costly medical errors or hospital-acquired infections, and reward improved care. Finally, we should adopt a budget that includes common-sense ideas such as tax incentives to reduce consumption of sugary drinks which will help cut the budget deficit and avoid costs from illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease.

These ideas will not just bring down Medicaid costs; they will actually drive down health care costs for everyone. And, unlike block grants and spending caps, they will actually improve care for children, seniors and Texans with disabilities who depend upon Medicaid every day, while still protecting health care businesses and local health care jobs.

With so much on the line, Texas families need straight answers from Washington about the real consequences of proposals to weaken Medicaid. We should all demand that Congress try every other viable option before they even consider policies that would put our health care and our economy at risk.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunkelberg is the associate director of Center for Public Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan, nonprofit policy institute committed to improving public policies to better the economic and social conditions of low- and moderate-income Texans. Restuccia is executive director of Community Catalyst, a nonprofit national consumer health advocacy organization based in Boston.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by the Texas Lone Star Forum. 7/11

TENNESSEE EDITORIAL FORUM

By Chris Coleman

When the newly-elected Republican congressman from Maryland, Andy Harris, was told that his government-subsidized health insurance would not go into effect until four weeks after his swearing in, he was furious. According to an article in Politico.com, he demanded to know why it would take so long and what he was supposed to do without 28 days of health care.

Ironically, Harris, like most of Tennessee’s congressional representatives, campaigned against “government health care,” and remains committed to repealing the new health care law, which would give his constituents and the American people the very same benefits and protections he is demanding for himself. The House of Representatives will soon vote on a proposal to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and nearly all of Tennessee’s representatives intend to vote in favor of repeal. In other words, our representatives will attempt to take away from us what they intend to keep for themselves and their own families.

What are the benefits and protections that the opponents of the Affordable Care Act want to keep for themselves but deny to the American people? Here are a few examples:

• When the Affordable Care Act fully goes into effect in 2014, it will guarantee that Americans will have access to health coverage, even if they have a pre-existing condition. Members of Congress already have guaranteed access to government-subsidized health coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions, yet many will vote to take this protection away from American families.

• The Affordable Care Act will provide tax-credit subsidies for millions of Americans to help make insurance premiums affordable. Opponents of the Affordable Care Act hope to deny these subsidies to Americans, even though members of Congress receive subsidies of almost three-quarters of their total health insurance premiums.

• The Affordable Care Act will eliminate the prescription drug benefit gap, the so-called “donut hole,” for people on Medicare. Elimination of the donut hole started last year, when everyone on Medicare who reached the donut hole received a $250 check to help them pay for their medications.

• This year, seniors falling into the donut hole will get a 50 percent discount on brand-name drugs and other discounts on generic drugs. These discounts will increase each year until the donut hole is completely eliminated in 2020. Repealing the Affordable Care Act would eliminate this important improvement in Medicare for seniors and people with disabilities, even though Congressional insurance plans include prescription drug benefits without a coverage gap.

There are many other examples of protections and benefits that members of Congress receive that Americans would lose if the Affordable Care Act is repealed, from limits on out-of-pocket costs when they or their family members get sick, to the right to appeal wrongful denials of insurance claims.

Responding to charges that it is hypocritical to accept government-subsidized health insurance while denying it to American families, several newly elected Congressmen—Bobby Schilling and Joe Walsh of Illinois, Bill Johnson of Ohio, and Mike Kelley of Pennsylvania—have honored their campaign rhetoric by refusing to accept congressional health care.

Other representatives reject the charges of hypocrisy. Freshman Congressman Michael Grimm (R-NY) told reporters, "What am I, not supposed to have health care? It's practicality. I'm not going to become a burden on the state because I don't have health care, and God forbid I get into an accident and I can't afford an operation. That can't happen to anyone."

Unfortunately, that happens to people all the time because most people, unlike Reps. Harris, Grimm, and the entire Tennessee congressional delegation, do not have access to government-subsidized health care. And it will continue to happen if opponents of the Affordable Care Act succeed in their efforts to repeal it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coleman is Staff Attorney of the Tennessee Justice Center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by Tennessee Editorial Forum. 2/11

LOUISIANA FORUM

By Mike Stagg

Governor Bobby Jindal continues to fight healthcare reform even though the political fight is over now that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the law of the land.

Since President Obama signed it into law, Jindal has ordered Attorney General Buddy Caldwell to file suit against the law. He has reversed Insurance Commissioner Jim Donelon’s plan to participate in the high-risk pools the law creates which provide coverage to adults who have been denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions. And he’s had DHH Secretary Alan Levine act as the administration’s public face in the effort to pass a constitutional amendment here to nullify aspects of the ACA, particularly the individual mandate to buy coverage.

These moves might advance the governor’s national political ambitions, but they are bad for Louisiana and harmful to its citizens.

The ACA addresses much of what ails healthcare in Louisiana. Chronic disease is rampant in our state, particularly heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure and cancer. We have higher death rates from those diseases here than the rest of the country. This is because these diseases go untreated for too long. When people finally go to a doctor, the disease has reached more advanced stages and is harder and more expensive to treat.

That these chronic diseases go untreated for so long is largely attributable to the fact that people don’t have access to care to detect those diseases at the earliest stages. The primary barrier to care is cost.

The ACA will knock down that barrier by providing tax breaks to businesses and subsidies to individuals so that they can afford insurance. That coverage will enable Louisianans to get the care they need when they need it.

The act also mandates that insurance pay the full cost of regular checkups and wellness exams, making it more likely that chronic diseases will be detected earlier.

The prevalence of chronic disease in Louisiana also restricts the ability of residents here to get insurance. The pre-existing condition exclusion severely limits the ability of small businesses to get coverage. It also limits the freedom of Louisiana citizens to change jobs or start businesses because of their inability to get coverage. The pre-existing condition exclusion for adults will be outlawed under ACA by 2014. The ACA will eliminate the pre-existing exclusion for children this summer.

The biggest burden on healthcare providers in Louisiana is the large percentage of people who don’t have health insurance and can’t pay for the care they need. Over the past five years, that percentage has fluctuated between 18 and 24 percent of adults between the ages of 19 and 64.

Providing healthcare to those without insurance is a major financial burden on doctors, clinics and hospitals. It drives up the cost of care for those with insurance as providers shift costs for care for those without insurance onto those with the deepest pockets — health insurance companies. Cost shifting adds an estimated $900 to the annual cost of premiums for each person insured.

The ACA will dramatically lower the number of people without either health insurance or Medicaid coverage. That will benefit providers who will have more paying customers. That will help those with health insurance as the need to shift costs onto those with coverage dissipates.

The act expands Medicaid eligibility to those earning up to 133 percent of the poverty level. The federal government will initially pick up the tab for the Medicaid expansion, and later it will cover 90 percent of the cost. Jindal claims the state will not be able to afford this cost whenever it arrives. He apparently believes state revenues will never increase again. Or, perhaps, he’s just philosophically opposed to people being able to access care without government assistance -- an odd position for someone who has worked in government for most of his adult life.

The Affordable Care Act is good for what ails Louisiana. Expanding access to affordable health insurance will improve the quality of life for our citizens and the financial viability of community hospitals and other providers. It will enable residents to afford the care they need in order to manage the chronic diseases that plague them and help children avoid those diseases or detect them while they are still manageable.

Governor Jindal needs to quit looking at this issue through the lens of his national ambitions. If he does that, he will quit fighting ACA and embrace the positive changes it will bring to our state.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stagg is a Lafayette-based healthcare information technology consultant and editor of the newsletter Democratic Louisiana.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by Louisiana Forum 6/10