Republicans Race The Clock On Health Care — But The Calendar Is Not Helping

Republicans Race The Clock On Health Care — But The Calendar Is Not Helping

Back in January, Republicans boasted they would deliver a “repeal and replace” bill for the Affordable Care Act to President Donald Trump’s desk by the end of the month.

In the interim, that bravado has faded as their efforts stalled and they found out how complicated undoing a major law can be. With summer just around the corner, and most of official Washington swept up in scandals surrounding Trump, the health overhaul delays are starting to back up the rest of the 2018 agenda.

One of the immediate casualties is the renewal of the Children’s Health Insurance Program. CHIP covers just under 9 million children in low- and moderate-income families, at a cost of about $15 billion a year.

Funding for CHIP does not technically end until Sept. 30, but it is already too late for states to plan their budgets effectively. They needed to know about future funding while their legislatures were still in session, but, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, the local lawmakers have already adjourned for the year in more than half of the states.

“If [Congress] had wanted to do what states needed with respect to CHIP, it would be done already,” said Joan Alker of the Georgetown Center for Children and Families.

“Certainty and predictability [are] important,” agreed Matt Salo, executive director of the National Association of Medicaid Directors. “If we don’t know that the money is going to be there, we have to start planning to dismantle things early, and that has a real human toll.”

In a March letter urging prompt action, the Medicaid directors noted that while the end of September might seem far off, “as the program nears the end of its congressional funding, states will be required to notify current CHIP beneficiaries of the termination of their coverage. This process may be required to begin as early as July in some states.”

CHIP has long been a bipartisan program — one of its original sponsors is Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who chairs the Finance Committee that oversees it. It was created in 1997, and last reauthorized in 2015, for two years. But a Finance hearing that was intended to launch the effort to renew the program was abruptly canceled this month, amid suggestions that Republicans might want to hold the program’s renewal hostage to force Democrats and moderate Republicans to make concessions on the bill to replace the Affordable Care Act.

“It’s a very difficult time with respect to children’s coverage,” said Alker. Not only is the future of CHIP in doubt, but also the House-passed health bill would make major cuts to the Medicaid program, and many states have chosen to roll CHIP into the Medicaid program.”

“We’ve just achieved a historic level in coverage of kids,” she said, referring to a new report finding that more than 93 percent of eligible U.S. children now have health insurance under CHIP. “Now all three legs of that coverage stool — CHIP, Medicaid and ACA — are up for grabs.”

But it’s not just CHIP at risk due to the congested congressional calendar. Congress also can’t do the tax bill Republicans badly want until lawmakers wrap up the health bill.

That is because Republicans want to use the same budget procedure, called reconciliation, for both bills. That procedure forbids a filibuster in the Senate and allows passage with a simple majority.

There’s a catch, though. The health bill’s reconciliation instructions were part of the fiscal 2017 budget resolution, which Congress passed in January. Lawmakers would need to adopt a fiscal 2018 budget resolution in order to use the same fast-track procedures for their tax changes.

And they cannot do both at the same time. “Once Congress adopts a new budget resolution for fiscal year 2018,” said Ed Lorenzen, a budget-process expert at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, that new resolution “supplants the fiscal year 2017 resolution and the reconciliation instructions in the fiscal year 2017 budget are moot.”

That means if Congress wanted to continue with the health bill, it would need 60 votes in the Senate, not a simple majority.

There is, however, a loophole of sorts. Congress “can start the next budget resolution before they finish health care,” said Lorenzen. “They just can’t finish the new budget resolution until they finish health care.”

So the House and Senate could each pass its own separate budget blueprint, and even meet to come to a consensus on its final product. But they cannot take the last step of the process — with each approving a conference report or identical resolutions — until the health bill is done or given up for dead. They could also start work on a tax plan, although, again, they could not take the bill to the floor of the Senate until they finish health care and the new budget resolution.

At least that’s what most budget experts and lawmakers assume. “There’s no precedent to go on,” said Lorenzen, because no budget reconciliation bill has taken Congress this far into a fiscal year. “So nobody really knows.”

Trump’s $4.1 trillion budget: 9 healthcare takeaways

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/trump-s-4-1-trillion-budget-9-healthcare-takeaways.html

Image result for federal healthcare budget cuts

President Donald Trump’s first full budget proposal will include $3.6 trillion in spending cuts to balance the budget in the next decade.

Although the full $4.1 trillion budget plan, titled “A New Foundation for American Greatness,” will be released Tuesday, Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney briefed White House reporters Monday on the budget.

Here are nine of the key proposals related to healthcare in President Trump’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2018, which begins Oct. 1.

1. Medicaid cuts. President Trump’s budget includes $610 billion in Medicaid cuts over 10 years. The reduction is in addition to the $839 billion pulled from Medicaid under the proposed American Health Care Act, the ACA repeal and replacement bill that phases out Medicaid expansion, according to The Hill.

2. Repeal and replace the ACA. The budget assumes passage of the AHCA. The Trump administration expects to save $250 billion over 10 years by repealing and replacing the ACA. These savings are in addition to the $610 billion in proposed Medicaid cuts in the budget, according to The New York Times.

3. Medicare unscathed. The budget makes no changes to the Medicare program or to core Social Security benefits, two programs President Trump vowed during his campaign to leave alone, according to The Hill.

4. Reduction in CHIP funding. Under the budget, $5.8 billion would be cut from the Children’s Health Insurance Program over 10 years, according to a budget document posted by The Washington Post.

5. NIH funding cut. Under the budget proposal, the National Institutes of Health budget would be reduced from $31.8 billion to $26 billion, according to The Washington Post.

6. Cuts to CDC funding. Several CDC programs would be hit with cuts under the budget proposal. One of the biggest cuts is to the agency’s chronic disease prevention programs, which would have funding reduced by $222 million, according to The Washington Post.

7. Veterans Choice Program extended. The budget calls for extension of the Veterans Choice Program, which allows veterans to go outside of the Veterans Affairs system for care. Under the budget, $29 billion more would be spent on this program over 10 years, according to The New York Times.

8. Medical malpractice limits. The budget includes medical malpractice reforms, such as capping awards for noneconomic damages, that are intended to reduce the practice of defensive medicine. The Trump administration expects these changes to save Medicare $31 billion over a decade, according to The New York Times.

9. Funds substance abuse treatment. The budget would allocate $500 million to expand access to treatments, including medication-assisted treatment, for those suffering from opioid addiction. The budget also includes $1.9 billion in block grants for states to use for substance abuse treatment and $25 million for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration for expanding access to critical interventions. SAMHSA would also receive an additional $24 million to equip first responders with overdose reversing drugs.

ACHE report: High healthcare CEO turnover rates now the norm

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/ache-reports-continued-high-turnover-among-healthcare-ceos?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=959610&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT0RGaE9USTFOR1F4T0dGbSIsInQiOiJsMHdQVHhVK1pcL0c4S0JpV21SZXJxaVFNU3M5TWFHWWRJSU1XWnp1Szl0VkJlT29xdkFzNWJqdE9YMURvUTJYVjl4NVB3RHlBcVpZMEJVUEVVMVZNakFnUUVPNWV4SzU5amdCeGNWTURDdllzYzhrQWwxdFJHdHlxMDZidnlYN3MifQ%3D%3D

Boardroom

The high healthcare CEO turnover rates seen over the past several years continued in 2016, according to the American College of Healthcare Executives (ACHE).

The turnover rate was 18% for healthcare CEOs in 2016, down from the record high of 20% in 2013, ACHE announced. Still, this level was approximately equivalent to those seen over the past few years, which the association notes are among the highest in the past 20 years.

Structural changes in the industry appear to be among the main drivers of this trend, according to ACHE President and CEO Deborah J. Bowen. “The ongoing consolidation of healthcare organizations, continuing movement toward new models of care and retiring leaders from the baby boomer era,” she said in the announcement, are likely influences behind the high turnover rates.

These results align with other recent reports of unprecedented turnover throughout hospitals, which are on pace to turn over half their overall staff every five years, according to previous reporting byFierceHealthcare. High turnover rates in the C-suite present organizations with problems beyond recruitment and retention, however, since changes to top leadership can have a ripple effect throughout the leadership pipeline.

RELATED: Hospitals nationwide face unprecedented turnover, report says

With the multiyear trend continuing unabated, Bowen urges healthcare organizations to ensure they have developed succession plans and that they keep them up to date. “Succession planning should include not only naming and preparing immediate successors to C-suite positions, but more broadly an emphasis on developing the pipeline of future leaders,” she said.

ACHE found the highest rate of turnover in the District of Columbia, which came in at a whopping 67%. That result appears to be an outlier, as the second- and third-highest states of New Hampshire and Washington came in at 38% and 30%, respectively. All other states showed adjusted turnover percentages under 30. Alaska, North Dakota and Delaware showed the most stable trends, all three in single digits.

Trump budget proposal cuts billions and would ‘devastate’ healthcare programs

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/healthcare/trump-budget-proposal-cuts-billions-and-would-devastate-healthcare-programs?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=959610&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT0RGaE9USTFOR1F4T0dGbSIsInQiOiJsMHdQVHhVK1pcL0c4S0JpV21SZXJxaVFNU3M5TWFHWWRJSU1XWnp1Szl0VkJlT29xdkFzNWJqdE9YMURvUTJYVjl4NVB3RHlBcVpZMEJVUEVVMVZNakFnUUVPNWV4SzU5amdCeGNWTURDdllzYzhrQWwxdFJHdHlxMDZidnlYN3MifQ%3D%3D

Despite criticism over his initial proposal in March that included huge cuts to the Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, President Trump’s fleshed-out 2018 budget will slash billions from those health programs in order to spend more on the military and cover planned tax cuts.

The full budget plan is due to be released this morning at 11 a.m., but the White House administration inadvertently posted the section (PDF) that dealt with cuts to the HHS late Monday before it quickly took it offline.

In addition to a proposal to eliminate $800 billion from Medicaid, the Trump administration wants to make deep cuts to other health programs, including:

  • $5.8 billion from the overall NIH budget, including $1 billion from the National Cancer Institute, $838 million from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and $575 million from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
  • $1.2 billion from the CDC
  • $403 million from health workforce programs, including diversity training, mental and behavioral programs, and select nursing and physician training programs
  • $22 million from the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT.

Divisions emerge in the Senate on pre-existing conditions

Divisions emerge in the Senate on pre-existing conditions

Divisions emerge in the Senate on pre-existing conditions

Senate Republicans are showing early divisions over what to do about ObamaCare’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

Some conservatives, including Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), want to simply repeal those provisions and other ObamaCare regulations and leave them up to the states.

But advocates of a more centrist approach, like Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), are speaking out in favor of pre-existing condition protections and endorsing a “Jimmy Kimmel test” for the bill, where no one can be denied coverage.

Other senators are exploring a middle ground where states would have to automatically enroll people in health insurance before they could get a waiver for the regulations, though conservatives object to that idea as Washington overreach.

The disagreements over what to do about preexisting conditions point to the larger difficulty facing Senate Republicans as they seek to find consensus on a host of contentious issues in the healthcare bill.

HOW TO SUCCEED WITH MULES IN A BEAUTY PAGENT

How to Succeed with Mules in a Beauty Pageant

Mules come in many forms. Some are loud, opinionated, and adversarial.

A pleasant mule is stubborn in a beauty queen’s skin.

Beauty queen mules are more dangerous than conspicuous resistance. You end up tolerating negative behaviors and poor results because you falsely believe performance will improve.

Beauty queen mules seem humble, even as they kick back.

3 qualities of beauty queen mules:

  1. Subtle forms of blame are normal and pervasive. Beauty queen mules can’t accept the thought that they’re responsible.
  2. Suggestions or ideas that might improve performance are seldom, if ever, good enough.
  3. Justification for poor choices is normal. They don’t say, “I was wrong.”

Hope is destructive when disappointment becomes a pattern.

Things mules say:

  1. “I don’t really have time to work on this right now.”
  2. “The reason Betty’s projects come in under budget is she has a better team than I have.”
  3. “That’s a great idea.” (But in the end, nothing changes.)

5 things to do with beauty queen mules:

#1. Stop defending your ideas. Beauty queen mules love explaining why your ideas won’t work. Input isn’t good enough to cause them to actually change their behavior.

#2. Stop offering advice. The moment you realize that suggestions are never good enough, stop offering suggestions. Stiff-necks don’t want to change. They want others to change.

#3. Let them be right. “You know, you’re right. My suggestion was off base. Your way is probably better.”

#4. Establish consequences. “This is what’s going to happen if things don’t improve.” The only thing that might help a stiff-neck is suffering.

#5. Set a deadline and remove them if performance or relationships don’t improve. Don’t let hope be the reason you tolerate a mule while others suffer.

Shielding mules from consequences rewards stubbornness, prolongs irresponsibility, and discourages teams.

How might leaders identify and deal with beauty queen mules?

Taking the Nuclear Option Off the Table

Taking the Nuclear Option Off the Table

Image result for nuclear explosion

Last Thursday, fifteen states and the District of Columbia moved to intervene in House v. Price, the case about the ACA’s cost-sharing reductions. At the same time, they asked the court to hear the case promptly.

This is a bigger deal than it may seem, and could offer some comfort to insurers that are in desperate need of it. Apologies for the long post, but the law here is complex and uncertain.

* * *

When the House of Representatives sued the Obama administration a few years back, it argued that Congress never appropriated the money to make cost-sharing payments. The district court sided with the House and entered an injunction prohibiting the payments. The court, however, puts its injunction on hold to allow for an appeal.

The Trump administration has now inherited the lawsuit, and the health-care industry is waiting on tenterhooks to see what it will do. For now, the case has been put on hold. But if Trump drops the appeal, which he has threatened to do, the injunction would spring into effect and the cost-sharing payments would cease immediately, destabilizing insurance markets across the country. It’s the nuclear option.

If the states are allowed to intervene, however, they could pursue the appeal even if Trump decides to drop it. With the appeal in place, the injunction couldn’t take effect until the case is heard and decided.

What’s more, the states are very likely to prevail. Not on the merits: as I’ve written before, the House is right that there’s no appropriation to make the cost-sharing payments. But the D.C. Circuit is likely to be skeptical of the district court’s conclusion that the House of Representatives has standing to sue. That’s why the states want to court to decide the case quickly: they hope to get rid of the lawsuit once and for all.

Allowing the states to intervene would not eliminate uncertainty. The D.C. Circuit could always surprise us and affirm the district court’s decision. Premiums for 2018 would still have to rise in response to the risk that payments might stop sometime next year. And even if the House loses, the Trump administration might be tempted to stop making the payments anyhow—although it’s not clear that it has the legal authority to do so without going through the cumbersome process of withdrawing an Obama-era rule.

Still, insurers could breathe a bit easier. If the states are allowed to intervene, Trump couldn’t blow up the individual markets in a fit of pique.