Survey Says: Medicaid Recipients Really Like Their Coverage And Care

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/07/10/536448362/survey-says-medicaid-recipients-like-their-coverage-and-care?utm_campaign=KHN%3A%20First%20Edition&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=54085585&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8rNlf0k5iol44O4gm3FRwTaRjuC-Lp8KrW3SmKnA47P5GSjFZs6vqrj0T8BhF2o6xMmEuD54wck2uvPmP2AL9qBq6Tnw&_hsmi=54085585

Is Medicaid the best health care possible?

A lot of people who use it seem to think so.

A new study released by Harvard’s Chan School of Public Health shows that people enrolled in Medicaid are overwhelmingly satisfied with their coverage and care.

The researchers looked at survey data collected by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services from more than 270,000 people who were enrolled in Medicaid in 2013. They gave the program an average rating of 7.9 out of 10, where 10 was considered “the best health care possible.” Nearly half of the respondents rated Medicaid a 9 or 10.

“If nearly half the people are giving it nearly a perfect score, that’s pretty good,” says Michael Barnett, a researcher in the Department of Health Policy and Management at Harvard’s Chan School. “There aren’t a lot of services that we get for anything, government or not, where you’d give it a perfect score.”

The study, published as a research letter in the July 10 issue of JAMA Internal Medicine, also shows that 84 percent of Medicaid recipients felt they were able to get all the medical care they needed in the last six months. Only 3 percent said they could not get care because of long wait times or because doctors would not accept their insurance.

The results applied across the board to those in traditional Medicaid, Medicaid managed care plans and among the elderly and disabled. The study did not include people who got Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act expansion or people in nursing homes.

The survey results come just as Republicans in the Senate are debating a complete overhaul of the Medicaid program, and they counter some of the major arguments for those changes.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, who has championed the Medicaid overhaul, often argues that many doctors refuse to accept Medicaid patients.

“I mean, what good is your coverage if you can’t get a doctor?” he asked in a presentation to reporters in March.

Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price made a similar argument in testimony to the House Ways and Means Committee last month.

“One-third of doctors in America do not accept new Medicaid patients,” he told the committee. His office didn’t respond to a request for comment on the new study.

Barnett, the study’s author, says the new data is the first that shows what Medicaid users think of the program.

“Part of what motivated this study is that there is a lot of rhetoric and what we would call misinformation around ‘What does Medicaid do, how effective is it, and how satisfied are enrollees with their coverage?'” he says. “This is the survey that really provides the most reliable large scale information that we have to date, [with] over 270,000 enrollees, and they’re largely satisfied.”

The bill being considered by the Senate would slowly roll back the expansion of Medicaid benefits to many poor, non-disabled adults, that happened as part of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. And it would change Medicaid from an open-ended program that pays for all the care beneficiaries need, to one that offers states a set amount of money each year based on the number of people who qualify for Medicaid in that state.

The analysis issued by the Congressional Budget Office last month estimates spending on Medicaid would be $770 billion less over ten years under the Senate bill than under current law and that 15 million people would lose Medicaid coverage by 2026.

The Better Care Reconciliation Act: Economic and Employment Consequences for States

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2017/jul/bcra-economic-employment-consequences-states?omnicid=CFC1239758&mid=henrykotula@yahoo.com

Issue: A draft Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA) has been introduced in the U.S. Senate as an alternative to the American Health Care Act (AHCA), which was passed by the House of Representatives on May 4, 2017. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the BCRA would raise the number of uninsured by 22 million by 2026.

Goal: To determine the consequences of the draft BCRA on employment and economic activity in every state. This report updates an earlier analysis of the effects of the AHCA.

Methods: We compute changes in federal spending and revenue from 2018 to 2026 for each state and use the PI+ model to project the effects on states’ employment and economies.

Findings and Conclusions: While the draft BCRA and the AHCA would have similar effects on the number of uninsured Americans, the BCRA would lead to significantly larger job losses and deeper reductions in states’ economies by 2026. A brief spurt in employment would add 753,000 more jobs in 2018, but employment would then deteriorate sharply. By 2026, 1.45 million fewer jobs would exist, compared to levels under the current law. Every state except Hawaii would have fewer jobs and a weaker economy. Employment in health care would be especially hard hit with 919,000 fewer health jobs, but other employment sectors lose jobs too. Gross state products would be $162 billion lower in 2026. States that expanded Medicaid would be especially hard hit.

 

FAQ: How Would The Republican Health Care Bills Affect You?

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/07/10/535851043/faq-how-would-the-republican-health-care-bills-affect-you?utm_campaign=KHN%3A%20First%20Edition&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=54032167&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9yFPlLzwv6bv_veGcOtV5zmWKdGx8baekhyREYNZdar_-_VxZ4wchI5YAMcbTiK8BX2YEBDLdvhyvjM-5iylDldRkDoQ&_hsmi=54032167

Image result for npr health news

 

Americans Don’t Want Senate’s Health Care Plan, But It’s Unclear What They Do Want

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/10/536007571/americans-dont-want-senates-health-care-plan-but-its-unclear-what-they-do-want?utm_campaign=KHN%3A%20First%20Edition&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=54032167&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9MlH8sIbFZ3DG2JdoJpFn-kOELhmH8atRdphJiCTQa9Fc2GOVrT9UWiFKkp64ZyolZD49IO-n0szUI7L_CfeRozmbmkg&_hsmi=54032167

Americans really, really don’t like the Senate bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

Only 17 percent of U.S. adults approve of the health care bill, according to a recent NPR/Marist/PBS NewsHour poll. In fact, a majority of Americans now approve of the ACA, also known as Obamacare — but just nine months ago, that wasn’t true.

So what do they want?

Maybe they want single-payer health care — a slight majority of Americans now say they would like that kind of system, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. But then, they don’t like it once they hear about the trade-offs. So maybe they simply want Obamacare to go further — that’s what a plurality of respondents told NPR. Or to be more specific, they favor most Obamacare provisions…but not the individual mandate (which is needed to make the ACA work). Or they want to keep the Affordable Care Act but scrap Obamacare (or vice versa).

Some of this uncertainty is perhaps to be expected — as a certain president has pointed out, health care is “complicated.” But if lawmakers are looking to Americans to know what their next move should be, they could be waiting a while. Messy, contradictory, easily swayable opinions on health care are a common theme in American politics, as it turns out.

Inconsistent, changeable opinions

Recent polls on health care show a few areas where Americans’ views on health care are less than clear:

1) Single-payer

A slight majority of the population — 53 percent — approves of a single-payer system, according to a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll, up from 39 in the early 2000s.

But then, the Kaiser pollsters found that they could easily — and substantially — swing that 53 percent by presenting people with potential arguments for and against a single-payer system.

When people heard the argument that the system would “give the government too much control over health care,” opposition rose from 40 to 62 percent. But on the other hand, when presented with the argument that a single-payer system would “reduce health insurance administrative costs,” the share of Americans in favor swung from 55 to 72 percent.

…all of which makes logical sense (people can be swayed by arguments for and against a particular policy — who knew?). But it suggests that it may be a mistake to take Americans’ support or opposition for a given health care policy at face value.

Moreover, in a more intense debate over single-payer, all of these arguments would be made at once, meaning many Americans could easily be swung from one side to another or simply left in a “don’t know” place.

2) Obamacare is relatively popular now. It wasn’t before.

Obamacare was never a super-popular policy. But it did suddenly become more well-liked just after President Obama left office. According to data from Gallup, the law hit its highest popularity ever in April, at 55 percent approval — the first time it ever had majority support in Gallup’s polling (which began in 2012). And that swing was despite the fact that nothing major changed in Obamacare in recent months that would easily account for that swing.

3) Government responsibility for health care has also grown more popular

Relatedly, Americans during the Obama presidency were closely divided over whether the government is responsible for making sure “all Americans have healthcare coverage,” and at times a majority believed it was not the government’s responsibility.

But before the Obama presidency, a majority of Americans consistently said yes, and a majority once again do, according to data from the Pew Research Center and Gallup.

4) Only some of Obamacare is popular

When it comes to Obamacare, Americans tend to like many of the provisions: they like people being able to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26, and they like the idea of exchanges. But they don’t like the individual mandate — the fact that people must buy insurance or pay a penalty. In fact, as the Kaiser Family Foundation found, out of seven Obamacare provisions, the individual mandate was the only one without majority support.

“The elements of the Affordable Care Act are more popular than the act itself,” said Kathleen Weldon, director of data operations and communications at the Roper Center for public opinion. “And that’s largely a political question.”

Again, this isn’t necessarily surprising — the threat of a penalty is understandably less appealing to many than the convenience and security of the age-26 provision. But it does show that what Americans want doesn’t always match up with what is feasible — that individual mandate is a big part of what makes the Affordable Care Act work.

“It would be very hard to put together a functional health policy that wouldn’t have some elements that people disliked,” said Weldon.

5) Obamacare vs. ACA

As of February, 35 percent of Americans didn’t know the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare were the same, according to polling organization Morning Consult…a fact famously hammered home when late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel asked people on the street of Los Angeles whether they favored the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare.

None of this is new

Inconsistent opinions on health care have been around for a long time. In one 2001 review of 50 years of public opinion data, for example, experts remarked that “it is striking to see how many conflicting views the public holds on health policy issues,” before laying out an array of messy public views:

“On the one hand, Americans report substantial dissatisfaction with our mixed private/public health care system and with the private health insurance and managed care industries. A majority of Americans indicate general support for a national health plan financed by taxpayers, as well as increased national health spending. On the other hand, these surveys portray a public that is satisfied with their current medical arrangements, in many years does not see health care as a top priority for government action, does not trust the federal government to do what is right, sees their federal taxes as already too high, and does not favor a single-payer (government) type of national health plan.”

Much of this sounds familiar today — indeed, a majority of Americans now believe that it’s government’s responsibility to make sure people have care, but an overwhelming majority of Americans also distrusts the government.

“Over the years these conflicts in beliefs have been difficult to resolve in legislative debates, particularly around the issues of large-scale national health care reform. This is likely to remain the case in the years ahead” they wrote — something lawmakers on Capitol Hill know all too well.

So what do Americans want?

Americans’ views on health care are hard to understand for a number of reasons. One is a lack of knowledge. Some of that knowledge is basic — not knowing there is no difference between the ACA and Obamacare, for example — but many Americans may also not understand how the individual mandate makes other parts of Obamacare work.

Another reason is fear.

“There are some things we do know. Americans fear big changes on something that is an acutely sensitive subject,” said Karlyn Bowman, an expert on public opinion at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute.

She compares it to another policy area Congress continually talks about overhauling.

“In tax reform, change is not at all concerning. It’s just so interesting,” said Bowman. “[Tax policy] is so much less sensitive than health care, which scares the heck out of us because we don’t understand it.”

But that fear is nuanced. People like the broad idea of change, said Ashley Kirzinger, senior survey analyst at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health policy research organization. But it’s the particulars that scare people off.

“People kind of have this enthusiasm for health reform,” she said. She points to the Affordable Care Act. “Once it became a plan that had pros and cons and winners and losers, favorability tends to fall off rather dramatically.”

But then, it’s those very particulars that may have made more Americans suddenly decide they approve of Obamacare.

“A lot of the attitudes towards the ACA and why we’re seeing this trend upwards in favorability is because people weren’t quite sure what was in it, and once they’re hearing about benefits being taken away, then it’s really like, ‘Oh, but we really liked that.'”

And then there’s politics. On all of these questions, there are, of course, sharp political divides driving people’s opinions. The Affordable Care Act became widely known as Obamacare, meaning that many Americans (that is, those who know the two are synonymous) may have linked their approval of the act with their approval of Obama.

Given all this, there are still at least a couple of constants in Americans’ views on health care. Kinzinger says one pops up over and over again.

“Always lower costs,” she said. “When individuals say they want health care reform, what they mean is they want to reduce their own costs when it comes to health care. Premiums, deductibles, any of that. It’s all about cost.”

But most Americans have a more selfless instinct as well, Bowman added.

“[Americans] generally want us to try to cover more people, to give more, because we’re such a generous people,” she said. “We really want to move to that end. But I don’t think we’re very knowledgeable about specifics.”

It’s not that people’s opinions don’t matter or that they’re always unclear — clearly, Americans dislike the Senate bill (according to an Axios analysis, it’s the most unpopular major legislation in 30 years).

But what they want is also hard to deliver — plenty of politicians would certainly like to know how to bring down America’s extremely high health care costs once and for all, and to make sure all Americans can get health care coverage if they want it. But doing so without scaring voters too much, whether it’s by trade-offs or the simple act of overhauling the system, may well be impossible.

 

With Senate Republicans at an impasse over Obamacare, many ask: Now what?

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-senate-healthcare-20170710-story.html?utm_campaign=KHN%3A%20First%20Edition&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=54032167&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9CNFoqnSpWx2lz8NGi-WyCSSZU-joG6QBMWRo05gf8W0IDA6rR0EH5o6j8J0B3bvFt-Bqh8XtJLzUpo8onDvfiDjLLQA&_hsmi=54032167

Image result for With Senate Republicans at an impasse over Obamacare, many ask: Now what?

Senate Republicans, having hit an apparent impasse in their long campaign to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, return to Washington this week in search of a way forward, with support dwindling, time running out and deep divisions within their ranks.

Options are limited as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) assesses the legislative landscape for his Obamacare replacement, which has virtually no hope of passing unless it is substantially amended.

The Better Care Reconciliation Act, which threatens to toss 22 million more Americans into the ranks of the uninsured, has been almost universally panned by patient advocacy groups, doctors and other healthcare providers. It is backed by less than 20% of the public, polls show.

And for the last week, rank and file Republican lawmakers have faced rowdy crowds back home opposing the repeal bill.

At the same time, GOP senators return to work aware that federal intervention is needed to stabilize some Obamacare insurance markets. If not, insurance premiums in some parts of the country could skyrocket, and many Americans — especially those in rural areas — could be left with few healthcare options.

Now, with President Trump sending mixed signals on the path forward, Republicans confront the very real possibility that their promises to end Obamacare might need to be shelved in favor of a bipartisan agreement to improve it.

“For seven years, they pretended like they were all committed to repeal and there were just tactical differences,” said Michael A. Needham, CEO of Heritage Action, a leading conservative advocacy group.

“What we learned this year is there are not tactical differences. There are large numbers of Republicans in the House and the Senate who don’t want to repeal Obamacare.”

That’s not the outcome Republicans had in mind when they set out seven years ago to undo President Obama’s signature domestic achievement.

But as Congress resumes work this week, McConnell is under mounting pressure to develop a face-saving way out.

“They need to start over,” said Dr. Jack Ende, a University of Pennsylvania primary care doctor and president of the American College of Physicians.

“This is a bill that takes away much needed health insurance and healthcare from the people who need it most. You can’t tweak it a little here and little there. … The right strategy is to work on improving what we have.”

Democrats say they are willing to work with Republicans to fix Obamacare, but only after the GOP drops its repeal campaign.

Conservatives warn that doing so would be a political disaster for the GOP, sapping enthusiasm from activists who will be needed soon to start knocking on doors and turning out votes for the 2018 midterm elections.

“If this party switches from repeal of Obamacare to a bailout of Obamacare,” said Needham, “that is catastrophic.”

McConnell, often considered an opportunistic strategist, might still be able to salvage his bill.

But even senators are unsure of his next moves. And the heathcare legislation has shown the limits of his ability to cobble together the 50 votes needed from a 52-seat Senate GOP majority. Votes are not expected until mid-July, at the earliest.

“Clearly, the draft plan is dead,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician who has offered his own proposal.

“Is the serious rewrite plan dead?” he asked in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.” “I don’t know. I haven’t seen the serious rewrite.”

McConnell’s efforts have been complicated by the deep divisions among Republican senators. The majority leader was forced to put off a vote on the bill last month amid opposition from both conservatives and centrists.

“Whether or not we can come together, I don’t know,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Sunday on “Meet the Press.”

Conservatives want the most complete repeal of Obamacare possible, and they have opened a direct line of negotiation with the White House, appearing to turn Trump to their side, for now.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) back a proposal that would dramatically roll back insurance protections in the current law, allowing insurers to offer cheaper, skimpier health policies they say would drive down costs, at least for healthy consumers.

An assessment of Cruz’s “consumer choice” plan is expected this week from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

“There’s no doubt this has been a rocky path,” Cruz said Sunday on “Face the Nation.” “But I continue to believe we can get this done.”

But other GOP senators and advocacy groups are warning that Cruz’s plan would further destabilize insurance markets by dividing healthier and sicker consumers.

Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa said last week he worried that the Cruz amendment could be a “subterfuge” to get around Obamacare’s protections for those with preexisting conditions. “Obviously, I would object to that,” he told Iowa Public Radio.

Politically, the Cruz approach does little to help McConnell amass 50 votes for passage. Although it pleases conservatives who say the Senate GOP bill does not go far enough in ending Obamacare’s insurance mandates, it is almost certain to drive away more centrist Republicans.

The centrists have been most concerned about steep cuts to Medicaid. McConnell’s bill would slash nearly $800 billion from the government’s healthcare safety net over the decade and leave millions of poor Americans without access to care. Particularly hard hit would be poorer, rural counties, many of which backed Trump last year.

In Nevada, the Medicaid cuts would leave nearly 200,000 uninsured, prompting the state’s Republican senator, Dean Heller, to oppose the bill.

Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), whose states rely heavily on Medicaid money to address the opioid crisis, are also opposed to the bill. They have sought tens of billions of dollars to make up for the lost funds.

One idea floated to preserve some healthcare aid would retain a 3.8% tax in investment income imposed by Obamacare on high-income households. That would maintain about $175 billion in revenue over the decade that could help with Medicaid.

But making a concession like that for centrist senators risks losing conservatives who want all taxes in the current healthcare law repealed.

McConnell has been trying to stitch together enough votes by tacking on amendments and provisions to meet the needs of both flanks of his party.

But with barely a dozen legislative days before Congress recesses for the monthlong August break — and other priorities that need action — the Senate has limited time.

Trump has further complicated McConnell’s task, giving mixed signals about how he wants to proceed.

Earlier this year, the president pushed to repeal the current law and replace it “simultaneously,” undermining the Senate Republican leader’s original plan to repeal the law now and replace it in a few years.

Last week, Trump abruptly shifted positions, siding with Sens. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) who have revived McConnell’s original plan as their own.

That repeal now, replace later concept has long been the preferred approach of the powerful Koch network of conservative advocacy organizations and was floated again last month at the group’s semi-annual retreat for wealthy donors.

“The president gets our concerns. I think he shares our concerns,” said Paul’s spokesman. “Also he wants to get to a final bill.”

As the debate continues, resistance is building. Protesters have been camping out and picketing lawmakers’ offices. As many as a dozen Republican senators now oppose the bill, a number that will likely grow.

“There’s no constituency for this bill,” said one GOP aide in the Senate, granted anonymity to discuss the private assessments. “If we don’t vote for it, who’s going to be burning up our phones?”

 

Here’s What a Bipartisan Health Care Deal Might Look Like

https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/07/08/Here-s-What-Bipartisan-Health-Care-Deal-Might-Look

Image result for bipartisanship

Practically overnight, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) placed the once-unthinkable notion of a bipartisan deal with the Democrats to salvage the Affordable Care Act well within the realm of possibility.

For months, McConnell, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and President Trump vowed to move with alacrity to repeal and replace Obamacare with a far superior GOP health insurance plan that would bring down premium costs , provide tax relief for wealthier Americans and the health care industry, and phase out expanded Medicaid coverage for millions of poor and disabled people.

But with the Senate’s 52 Republicans still badly divided over how best to proceed and time running out before a long August recess, McConnell said Thursday during a speech in Kentucky that if his party cannot muster at least 50 votes to rewrite the Obamacare law, it would have no choice but to work with the Democrats to produce a more modest bill to support the law’s existing insurance market.

“No action is not an alternative ,” McConnell said during a speech at a Rotary Club lunch in Glasgow, Kentucky. “We’ve got the insurance markets imploding all over the country, including in this state.”

The Republicans have long argued that Obamacare is in a “death spiral,” with premiums going through the roof and more and more major health care insurers pulling out of the market after incurring huge losses on the ACA exchanges. The Trump White House, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Internal Revenue Service have also taken executive actions that have undercut enrollment and insurer participation.

But the veteran Senate majority leader has begun facing up to the harsh political reality that as many as a dozen conservative and moderate Republicans currently oppose a bill that McConnell almost single-handedly drafted behind closed door. Now it will take a herculean effort to muster a minimum of 50 votes needed to pass the bill under expedited budget reconciliation rules that were designed to avert a filibuster.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Congressional Budget Office director and Republican economic adviser, said on Friday that McConnell “has done the [political] arithmetic right” and that there may be no choice but to cut a deal with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

“We know that the exchanges are melting down under current law,” Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, said in an interview. “We know that the cost-sharing money [to subsidize insurers] has to come from somewhere or they will continue to melt down, and insurers will leave, and premiums will continue to skyrocket.”

However, he warned that such an agreement would have serious political ramifications for the GOP and could touch off a conservative backlash, especially in the House. “It’s going to be a really bad deal for Republicans, and House Republicans are going to have to eat it.”

Michael F. Cannon, director of health policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said McConnell might have raised the idea of working with Democrats to force recalcitrant Republicans into line. However, he said it was high risk for a party that for the past seven years has promised to repeal and replace Obamacare.

“If he does pursue a bill with Democrats to bail out the exchanges, then it will cause a rift in his own party much bigger than the rift he sees right now,” Cannon cautioned.

Schumer on Thursday called McConnell’s comments encouraging, and that his caucus is “eager to work with Republicans to stabilize the markets and improve the law.” The minority leaders have said for weeks that the Democrats were ready to bargain with the GOP and the White House on virtually any issue provided the Republicans abandoned their effort to repeal former President Barack Obama’s signature program.

According to several policy experts, here are five areas where a bipartisan health care compromise might be struck:

  1. Cost sharing — One of the pillars of the Obamacare markets is the $7 billion a year in federal cost-sharing subsidies to insurance companies that allow them to help offset the cost of the monthly premiums and copayments of low and moderate income Americans who make between $12,000 and $48,000 a year. House Republicans challenged the constitutionality of those subsidies in court, and Congress and the Trump administration have agreed to continue the payments pending a final outcome of the case.
    But without more certainty of the future of those subsidies, many major insurance companies have begun pulling out of markets throughout the country. If both parties are concerned about stabilizing the Obamacare insurance markets and making sure they don’t go under, making the cost-sharing subsidies permanent would be a good place to start.
  2. Reviving Risk Corridors –Before the Republicans succeeded in turning off the spigot, an Obamacare reinsurance program or so-called “risk corridors” funneled billions of dollars to insurers to offset the unforeseen costs of their most expensive enrollee.
    Republicans led by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) led an effort to kill off the program, arguing that it constituted an unjustifiable “bailout” of the insurance industry. But Republican and Democratic negotiators would likely have to reconsider reviving the program – and tax revenue to pay for it – to further stabilize the insurance market.
  3. Tax Repeal – The Senate GOP plan includes a tax cut of $700 billion over the coming decade, which would be achieved by repealing all the tax hikes in Obamacare passed to help finance the health insurance program. The cost of that massive tax relief for mainly wealthy Americans and the pharmaceutical, health care and insurance industries, would be offset by deep cuts in Medicaid for millions of poor and disabled Americans.
    Democrats are adamant about blocking wholesale cuts in Medicaid. However, they might be open to some horse trading to repeal some of the Obamacare taxes while preserving others, in order to prevent massive cuts in Medicaid.
  4. Medicaid Spending– The Senate GOP bill would allow 31 states that expanded Medicaid to millions of childless, able-bodied, low-income adults to continue receiving bonus federal funding through 2013, before beginning to reduce it between 2021 and 2024.
    Democrats would be insistent on preserving expanded Medicaid even longer and would have considerable leverage in order to achieve that goal. Moreover, there is virtually no interest on their part in transforming Medicaid from an open-ended entitlement to a per-capita-cap block grant to the states. But amid growing concern about the long-term impact of growing entitlements on the debt, Democratic negotiators might be open to reforms to slow the rate of growth of Medicaid.
  5. Lowering premiums – There is little disagreement between the two parties on the need to bring down premiums and copayments that have literally priced many families out of the market, even with tax subsidies. Yet finding a compromise that satisfies the Democrats demands to preserve Obamacare levels of benefits – including a ban on insurers discriminating against people with preexisting medical conditions — and GOP insistence on allowing skimpier, less expensive policies for younger and healthier people – will be hard to do.
    “All of this adds up to huge new spending, but the Democrats would be in charge, and McConnell knows it,” Joe Antos, a health care expert with the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said. “They won’t get everything, but I don’t expect any compromise to look like a Republican bill. Nonetheless, if the Democrats aren’t too greedy, such a bill could pass in the Senate, but would be rejected in the House.”

AHCA could mean 725K fewer healthcare jobs by 2026

http://www.healthcaredive.com/news/ahca-could-mean-725k-fewer-healthcare-jobs-by-2026/445131/

Image result for fewer jobs

Dive Brief:

  • The American Health Care Act (AHCA), as it was passed in the House, would result in the loss of 924,000 jobs over 10 years and spark economic downturns in every state, according to research by the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health and The Commonwealth Fund.
  • The healthcare sector would be hit the hardest, with 725,000 jobs lost by 2026. There would be fewer healthcare jobs immediately in 17 states. The states that would be most affected overall include New York, Pennsylvania and Florida.
  • The primary cause of the job disappearances and state economic downturns would be cuts to healthcare funding, such as more than $800 billion to Medicaid, and lower premium subsidies.

Dive Insight:

The analysis is of the House version of the bill, and the Senate is expected to make changes when it brings its own version up for a vote. But with those negotiations going on behind closed doors, there is not enough information to makes estimates based on the Senate bill.

The report is a warning call to the healthcare industry and another black mark on the increasingly unpopular AHCA. The bill is already opposed by most major industry groups. They balk at the huge cuts to Medicaid and the Congressional Budget Office estimates up to 23 million people would lose coverage.

The threat of jobs losses could become another rallying cry. In fact, healthcare executives shaken by the potential for repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are already scaling back hiring and new projects in the face of uncertainty. Former CMS Administrator Andy Slavitt said a poll he conducted found nearly 40% of executives said they are slowing hiring and 31% are cutting capital expenses.

Healthcare job growth spiked after the passage of the ACA, which the AHCA seeks to replace. The ACA helped create about 240,000 jobs in the industry, and employment increased from an average of 1.7% in 2010 to 2.5% from 2014 to 2016. But that trend has tempered. Healthcare has averaged 22,000 job gains a month so far this year. The average monthly gain in 2016 was 32,000.

The AHCA phases out Medicaid expansion, which has been an economic boon for states that decided to expand. The authors of the latest report said those states would be hit hardest in financial terms by the bill.

“Hospitals, health systems, clinics and pharmacies might be forced to close or lay off staff as federal funding for healthcare is cut and the number of uninsured patients grows,” the researchers wrote.

Healthcare Triage News: The Senate’s BCRA Bill – High Premiums, Huge Deductibles, AND Massive Medicaid Cuts

Healthcare Triage News: The Senate’s BCRA Bill – High Premiums, Huge Deductibles, AND Massive Medicaid Cuts

Image result for Healthcare Triage News: The Senate’s BCRA Bill – High Premiums, Huge Deductibles, AND Massive Medicaid Cuts

 

GOP pessimism rising on ObamaCare repeal

GOP pessimism rising on ObamaCare repeal

Image result for no quick fix

Senate Republicans are returning to Washington increasingly pessimistic about their plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare.

They’ve had to put off plans for a vote next week, and they’ve seen loyal members either double down on their opposition to the bill, or at least question whether they will back it.

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas)—a “no” vote that took many in Washington by surprise—distanced himself the closed-door process used to draft the Senate bill.

“It takes two parties who want to come together. Not just Republicans. Not just Democrats,” he said during a polite, but pointed, meeting with constituents in rural Kansas.

Asked if he could support the bill, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told constituents that “I don’t know if we’re even going to get a bill up,” according to the Des Moines Register.

Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), who normally aligns with leadership, also came out as “no” over the recess break.

Even Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) appeared to suggest that Republicans might need to move to plan B involving stabilizing insurance markets if they can’t pass their bill.

“If my side is unable to agree on an adequate replacement, then some kind of action with regard to private health insurance markets must occur,” he said at a Rotary Club meeting in Kentucky.

The gloomy outlook highlights why McConnell had sought to finish work on the repeal-and-replace legislation before the July 4 recess.

McConnell didn’t want his members to face additional pressure over the break, and he also wasn’t keen on spending more time on healthcare. His conference now faces a marathon three-week session to take action on the issue.

The caucus remains deeply divided with rank-and-file members signaling they don’t believe they are close to a deal that could capture 50 votes.

“We’re still several weeks away from a vote, I think,” Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said a televised Q & A event, while dozens of protesters urged him to oppose the Senate bill.

Moran added that there wasn’t “significant consensus” on how to fix healthcare.

“[It’s] almost impossible to try to solve when you’re trying to do it with 51 votes in the United States Senate, in which there is not significant consensus on what the end result ought to be,” he said.

Leadership held a flurry of closed-door negotiations before the recess as they tried to reach deals that would win over undecided lawmakers, including adding more money for opioid treatment.

With a slim 52-seat majority, McConnell can only afford to lose two GOP senators and still let Vice President Pence break a tie. With Hoeven’s defection there are roughly 10 GOP senators publicly opposed to the bill.

“Compared to how optimistic I was the week before now … I’m very pessimistic,” Grassley told constituents in Mount Pleasant, Iowa, before adding that he thinks Congress will get something done even if repeal now and replace later.

Republicans have campaigned for years on repealing and replacing ObamaCare, arguing the Affordable Care Act is “failing” and in a “death spiral,” and insisting that the law is not fixable.

McConnell’s staff were quick to note that the GOP leader’s comments are similar to remarks he made after a closed-door meeting with Senate Republicans and Trump at the White House. But the pivot comes as McConnell is trying to wrangle his caucus behind his legislation even as conservatives appear to be digging in for a fight.

If the warning was meant to be a signal to unruly Republicans that it was either the Senate bill or working with Democrats, there was no sign they had an immediate impact.

A few hours after McConnell’s comments, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a conservative opponent of the Senate bill who believes it would leave too much of ObamaCare in place, held a press conference to tout his proposal to loosen rules on association healthcare plans.

He said he’d heard no feedback from leadership.

“No, none. We’ve reached out to Senate Republican leadership,” Paul told reporters. “We’ve described some of the things with the association plans…and we have not gotten any feedback. Now I talked to the president about it, and he was very receptive.”

Conservatives are also demanding an amendment from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) that would allow insurers to sell plans that don’t meet ObamaCare regulations.

But the demand has riled GOP aides and other members of the caucus, who are accusing Cruz of making unrealistic demands that can’t get 50 votes. GOP leadership has sent two versions of their bill to the CBO, one that would include Cruz’s proposal and one without.

Just hours after McConnell’s comments, Cruz became the latest GOP senator to call for simply repealing ObamaCare without a replacement plan as a plan B.

“We have had – for seven years – we have promised to do that,” Cruz said. “Repealing Obamacare was the single biggest factor producing a Republican House, a Republican Senate and, I think, ultimately a Republican president.”

The move would either require Republicans to get 60 votes for a replacement plan or use the fiscal year 2018 budget as a vehicle, scrapping their plans for tax reform.

Senate GOP leadership has signaled the idea is a non-starter even after it got the backing of Trump and a growing number of senators.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) told local reporters that he was willing to see if McConnell could “get the ball across the finish line” by the time lawmakers return to Washington, but if not he supported separating repeal and replace.

“If we can’t get this done instead of walking away from either repeal or replace … I don’t want that to happen,” he said. “So I think it would be a more prudent legislative step to unbundle repeal and replace.”

Section 1332 State Innovation Waivers: Current Status and Potential Changes

Section 1332 State Innovation Waivers: Current Status and Potential Changes

Image result for Section 1332 State Innovation Waivers: Current Status and Potential Changes

Section 1332 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) authorizes states to waive key requirements under the law in order to experiment with different health coverage models. As Republicans in Congress debate repeal and replacement of the ACA, renewed attention is being paid to these waivers as a mechanism for giving states flexibility to restructure their health care markets. The waiver authority is generally broad, though certain process and outcome standards must be satisfied. State interest in 1332 waivers to date has been limited; however, changes to the statutory waiver requirements included in the Senate Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 (BCRA) or other signals from the Trump administration could spark increased state action. This brief describes current 1332 waiver activity and raises questions regarding the future of these waivers, particularly in the context of proposed changes under discussion.

What Does Section 1332 Allow?

Beginning in 2017, states can request 5-year waivers of certain ACA provisions through Section 1332. States may seeks waivers of requirements related to the essential health benefits (EHBs) and metal tiers of coverage (bronze, silver, gold, and platinum) along with the associated limits on cost sharing for covered benefits. They may alter the premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions, including requesting an aggregate payment of what residents would otherwise have received in premium tax credits and cost-sharing reductions. States may also modify or replace the marketplaces and change or eliminate the individual and/or employer mandates (See Appendix A for more detail on these provisions).

The ACA includes guardrails limiting how 1332 waivers can be used by states. The current statutory language requires that state waiver applications must demonstrate that the innovation plan will:

  • Provide coverage that is at least as comprehensive in covered benefits;
  • Provide coverage that is at least as affordable (taking into account premiums and excessive cost sharing);
  • Provide coverage to at least a comparable number of state residents; and
  • Not increase the federal deficit.

Additionally, while states can submit ACA innovation waivers in conjunction with Medicaid waivers (under Sec. 1115 of the Social Security Act), innovation waivers cannot be used to change Medicaid program requirements.

In 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued final regulations outlining the procedures for state innovation waiver applications. In 2015, HHS and the Treasury Department issued guidance on how they would interpret the law’s requirements for waivers to provide for comparable coverage, comprehensiveness, affordability, and budget neutrality. Unlike regulations and statutes, guidance is not legally-binding, and therefore, can be more easily changed by subsequent administrations.1 On his first day in office, President Trump issued an executive order suggesting that states would be given increased flexibility with regard to ACA implementation.

The 2015 guidance offered a fairly strict interpretation of the statutory guardrails for 1332 waivers. It emphasized the need to protect access to care and affordability for vulnerable populations, including the poor, the elderly, and those with high health needs and risks, noting that impacts on these populations would be considered in assessing whether any waiver met the statutory guidelines. The guidance also specified that coverage and affordability would be measured annually as well as over the life of the waiver and that comprehensiveness of coverage would evaluate coverage under all ten essential health benefit (EHB) categories and under any one EHB category. In calculating deficit neutrality, states cannot use savings from a separate 1115 waiver to offset spending under a 1332 waiver, and any changes in the cost of Medicaid that might result from a waiver would also be measured. Finally, with respect to waiver administration, the guidance noted that to the extent waiver programs envision new methods for determining eligibility for or delivering subsidies, states would need to build their own systems and could not rely on IRS or HHS to customize operations of healthcare.gov or the federal tax system to accommodate individual state programs.