Why hospitals really don’t want to go back to pre-Obamacare days

https://www.axios.com/why-hospitals-really-dont-want-to-go-back-to-pre-obamacare-days-2162243137.html

Image result for pre-Obamacare hospitals

Hospital executives know that if Obamacare is repealed and not replaced, the ranks of the uninsured will swell, and they will still be required to treat those patients.

That’s why they’re hit especially hard these days by the uncertainty over what will happen and when, as Republicans try to figure out how they want to get rid of the law. The biggest concerns for hospital executives: losing Medicaid payments, and having more privately insured patients who can’t pay their bills because of high out-of-pocket costs. Hospitals were just getting relief from uncompensated care, and don’t want those costs to rise again.

The primary concern: It’s not the potential loss of patients with private Obamacare insurance that worries hospitals the most. It’s the loss of patients with Medicaid coverage.

Even though state Medicaid programs pay hospitals less than Medicare or private insurers, it’s still been better than nothing. That’s why state hospital associations have aggressively lobbied for Medicaid expansion in Republican states that haven’t embraced it.

Dennis Dahlen, chief financial officer of Banner Health in Phoenix, recently said there could be “dire consequences” if Medicaid expansion is rolled back and if Republicans move toward Medicaid block grants. That would threaten revenue immediately and lead to more uninsured patients walking into the emergency room.

“Our biggest exposure and biggest concern is Medicaid funding,” Dahlen said. About 13% of Banner’s patient revenue comes from Medicaid.

Hospital leaders support keeping many elements of ACA

http://www.revenuecycleinsights.com/news/hospital-leaders-support-keeping-many-elements-aca?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWWpCaU1USXhZbVEzWkRCaiIsInQiOiJURzlCeG5tb05KNjN5QU9UMGIrVFBoZkxiS3Q2WHdPZDZRNXJ0TFQzemdXdVwvS3pPa3UrcWNOQTVxanpaVW5mMFFoUzk4OXc0ejg2dSs2SkRGWHErZDlqUjlhd1dTQit3c2VBaXdGSDdPK1IzQXEwdWNNaWt6YjFRQ2xyR3JZNloifQ%3D%3D

An overwhelming majority of hospital C-suite and pharmacy executives support preserving the protections in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for patients with preexisting conditions, according to a post-election survey.

Member-based healthcare performance improvement company Vizient conducted the survey to assess how member hospitals were reacting to the planned repeal of the ACA by the Trump administration and Republican leaders in Congress. Vizient also asked executives about their top concerns for the future as well as their priorities for 2017.

Nearly 90 percent of C-suite leaders (89.5 percent) and 96 percent of hospital pharmacy executives surveyed said the ACA’s protections for patients with preexisting conditions should be kept in place.

Other findings from the survey show:

  • 68 percent of hospital C-suite leaders and 35 percent of hospital pharmacy executives want to keep incentives for expanding Medicaid coverage
  • 56 percent of hospital executives and 46 percent of hospital pharmacy leaders want to continue subsidies to help consumers pay for insurance
  • 52 percent of hospital C-suite leaders and 39 percent of pharmacy executives want to continue value-based reimbursements.

The top three priorities for all executives this year were 1) reducing clinical variation across care delivery 2) migrating toward value-based models, and 3) the integration of existing technology systems, Vizient said.

“In reviewing the survey results, central themes come through: uncertainty and concerns about financial viability,” Byron Jobe, president and chief administrative officer for Vizient, said in a statement. “There are many open questions about the future of the ACA, and what a repeal and replacement strategy could look like. As Congress wrestles with these decisions, it’s important to ensure reimbursement levels are enough to allow hospitals to continue their mission of caring for patients in their communities. Equally important, hospitals must quickly gain a clear understanding of where health policy is heading so they can begin to prepare.”

More families with employer-sponsored insurance are needing public assistance

http://www.academyhealth.org/blog/2017-01/more-families-employer-sponsored-insurance-are-needing-public-assistance

Image result for More families with employer-sponsored insurance are needing public assistance

As employer-sponsored insurance becomes more expensive for children, public programs are picking up the slack.

The Medicaid Expansion, which was responsible for a large part of the reduction in uninsurance in the United States over the last few years, was mostly aimed at adults. This is because Medicaid has traditionally covered nearly all children in poverty for some time. The CHIP program has bolstered that coverage, so that uninsurance in children fell steadily in the 1990’s and well into the 21st century.

The passage of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) assured that CHIP coverage would continue for some time. But even before that, trouble was brewing with respect to the coverage of children. These troubles were not in the Medicaid  program, though. Issues were arising in the employer-sponsored insurance market.

As I’ve written about in many posts here before, the cost of employer-sponsored insurance has been rising quite steadily for some time. Further, the out-of-pocket costs for such insurance have also been increasing. Deductibles, co-pays, and co-insurance – not to mention premiums – can put the cost of insurance out of reach for many employees even when it is “offered” as a benefit from their job. The costs of insurance have outpaced both income and wages for more than a decade, meaning that more and more must come out of employee’s pockets if they want to maintain coverage for themselves and their children.

 

Koch-backed group details hopes for healthcare reform

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/316875-koch-backed-group-pushes-for-high-risk-pools-medicaid-freeze-in-obamacare

Koch-backed group details hopes for healthcare reform

A conservative group funded by the Koch brothers is pushing for high-risk pools and a freeze on Medicaid expansions as lawmakers try to coalesce around a replacement for ObamaCare.

Freedom Partners began circulating a memo on Capitol Hill Monday with specific reforms it thinks lawmakers should pass, including: the creation of high-risk pools at the state level to cover people with pre-existing conditions; the elimination of the ObamaCare mandate, which required everyone buy insurance or pay a penalty; and the expansion of access to health savings accounts, so people can save and pay for healthcare with pre-tax dollars.

The recommendations fall in line with what top Republicans in Congress have indicated they support.

High-risk pools offer coverage for sick people that otherwise could be denied coverage for having pre-existing conditions if ObamaCare is repealed.

Medicaid Financing: The Basics

Medicaid Financing: The Basics

Image result for Medicaid Financing: The Basics

Medicaid represents $1 out of every $6 spent on health care in the US and is the major source of financing for states to provide coverage to meet the health and long-term needs of their low-income residents. Medicaid is administered by states within broad federal rules and jointly funded by states and the federal government. President-elect Trump and other GOP proposals have put forth fundamental changes in Medicaid financing. This brief examines the following 3 key Medicaid financing questions:

  • How does Medicaid financing work now? States design their Medicaid programs within broad federal rules; in return, Medicaid provides a guarantee of federal matching payments with no pre-set limit.  There are special match rates for the ACA, administration and other services. Medicaid also provides “disproportionate share hospital” payments to hospitals serving many Medicaid and uninsured patients.
  • How much does Medicaid cost and how are funds spent? Payment to private managed care organizations (MCOs) account for 43% of Medicaid spending. Almost two-thirds of all Medicaid spending is for the elderly and persons with disabilities, who make up just one-quarter of all Medicaid enrollees. Medicaid enrollment and spending increases during recessions. Medicaid growth per enrollee has been lower than private health spending. The ACA has provided a significant amount of federal dollars to states.
  • What is the role of Medicaid in federal and state budgets? Medicaid is the third largest domestic program in the federal budget following Medicare and Social Security. Medicaid is a spending item but also the largest source of federal revenues for state budgets. In responding to two major recessions in the last 15 years, states have adopted an array of policies to control Medicaid spending growth. Research shows that the influx of federal dollars from Medicaid spending has positive effects for state economies.

Medicaid Pocket Primer

http://kff.org/medicaid/fact-sheet/medicaid-pocket-primer/?utm_campaign=KFF-2017-January-Medicaid-State-Fact-Sheets&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=41471819&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_S79w90jSbC_aQNCkHzxPacGPZs7cC1nG5ZS0uvISb4SYLhCIP5ePQipcV2y2vvfgT5bXqOi8B2t5k6zuxzez1QOppJw&_hsmi=41471819

Figure 1: Medicaid’s Role for Selected Populations

WHAT IS MEDICAID?

Medicaid is the nation’s public health insurance program for people with low income. The Medicaid program covers more than 70 million Americans, or 1 in 5, including many with complex and costly needs for care. The vast majority of Medicaid enrollees lack access to other affordable health insurance. Medicaid covers a broad array of health services and limits enrollee out-of-pocket costs. The program is also the principal source of long-term care coverage for Americans. As the nation’s single largest insurer, Medicaid provides significant financing for hospitals, community health centers, physicians, and nursing homes, and jobs in the health care sector. The Medicaid program finances over 16% of all personal health care spending in the U.S.

HOW IS THE MEDICAID PROGRAM STRUCTURED? 

Medicaid is a federal-state program. Subject to federal standards, states design and administer their own Medicaid programs. Beyond the federal requirements, states have extensive flexibility to determine covered populations, covered services, health care delivery models, methods for paying physicians and hospitals, and many other aspects of their Medicaid programs. States can also get Section 1115 waivers to test and implement approaches that diverge from federal Medicaid rules but that the Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) determines advance program objectives. All Americans who meet Medicaid eligibility requirements are guaranteed coverage.

The federal government matches state Medicaid spending on an open-ended basis. The guarantee of federal matching funds increases state resources for coverage of their low-income residents and also permits state Medicaid programs to respond to demographic and economic shifts, changing coverage needs, technological innovations, public health emergencies such as the opioid addiction crisis, and disasters and other events beyond states’ control. Medicaid is a complex program because it has evolved over time to serve diverse populations with a wide range of needs, including many individuals who are very poor and very frail, and because of wide variation across state Medicaid programs. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) within HHS is the federal agency responsible for Medicaid. Title XIX of the Social Security Act and a large body of federal regulations govern the program, defining federal Medicaid requirements and state options and authorities.

Medicaid Financing: The Basics

http://kff.org/report-section/medicaid-financing-the-basics-issue-brief/

 Figure 1: Medicaid costs are shared by the states and the federal government.

 

Republican governors have a stake in keeping the Medicaid expansion. Will congressional Republicans listen?

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2017/01/24/medicaid-governors-and-congress/

Image result for Republican governors have a stake in keeping the Medicaid expansion. Will congressional Republicans listen?

The House and Senate took the first steps two weeks ago towards an eventual repeal of parts of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). At the same time, significant uncertainty as to how efforts proceed from here remains. There are disagreements among congressional Republicans on virtually every component of a path forward, including a timeline, the connections between a repeal bill and an approach to replacement, and what, if any, components of the law should be preserved.

One important set of actors, however, has already begun to weigh in on the process: several of the nation’s Republican governors. In particular, a number—including Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Rick Snyder of Michigan, John Kasich of Ohio, Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, and Brian Sandoval of Nevada—have voiced concerns about eliminating the Medicaid expansion. Together, these governors—several of whom recently met with members of the Senate Finance Committee to discuss the law—lead roughly one third of the 16 states that chose to expand Medicaid and currently have Republican executives. According to new data from the Kaiser Family Foundation, they represent roughly 2.2 million individuals who enrolled in Medicaid in 2015 thanks to the ACA’s expansion, or roughly 6 percent of the total population in these states. (By comparison, the national average for states for which Kaiser was able to obtain data is roughly 7 percent of a state’s population.)

In the case of Medicaid, as political scientist Shanna Rose has demonstrated, Republican governors have a long history of taking a different tack than their national counterparts. One source of this state-level variation involves the ability of the Secretary of Health and Human Services to waive provisions of federal law, at a state’s request, to allow for Medicaid pilot, or demonstration, programs. Beginning in earnest during the Reagan administration and escalating in particular under Clinton, governors nationwide have experimented with service delivery through waivers. Some feared that this experimentation could lead to restricted access, but research by Frank Thompson and Courtney Burke finds that, pre-ACA, governors more often than not used section 1115 Medicaid waivers to expand access for low-income Americans. This historical trend has continued throughout the ACA era, as governors have bargained with the Obama administration to secure waivers that expand access to Medicaid in their states.