Obamacare repeal plan stokes fears of market collapse

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/obamacare-repeal-market-collapses-231653?utm_campaign=CHL%3A+Daily+Edition&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=37969677&_hsenc=p2ANqtz–Wv-16E4bE7iT4jhF2j2QKWBhCJZPBLuy-TBTKYxxVNSL8KAVSAyRmDFndXujD1e6r6JMx9BX3zcgMSf3biYBAMLyJug&_hsmi=37969677

161118-obamacare-repeal-getty_1160.jpg

Republicans warned for years that Obamacare would blow up the nation’s individual insurance market. Instead, their own rush to repeal the health care law may be what triggers that death spiral.

GOP lawmakers say they plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act as soon as President-elect Donald Trump takes office, including a transition period of a year or two before it takes effect. That way, they satisfy their base while giving notice to 20 million Obamacare customers that they must find other coverage options.

But repealing the law without a replacement is likely to spook health insurers, who might bolt from the markets prematurely to avoid losses as some people stop paying their premiums, while other people rush to have expensive medical procedures before losing coverage. Insurers would have little incentive to stick around without knowing what to expect at the end of the transition. And that could spell chaos for consumers.

“The discussion right now about repeal and replacement is making the market very, very nervous,” said Washington Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler, a Democrat. “I would not be surprised to see the potential for a stampede to exit the market.”

Even if Congress delays immediate action to kill the health care law, Obamacare insurers would have just a few months to decide whether to stay in the law’s marketplaces for 2018. Deep uncertainty about the Republicans’ Obamacare replacement could drive out those companies, cutting off insurance for, potentially, millions of customers.

“A repeal that kicks the can on replace would put the market in serious jeopardy, and the American people will hold them accountable for the results,” Topher Spiro, who heads health policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, said on a call with Obamacare supporters last week.

Uncertainty about Obamacare’s future is occurring against the backdrop of strong demand for coverage. More than 1 million people signed up through HealthCare.gov in the first two weeks of the current enrollment season, including 100,000 who enrolled the day after the election, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. The administration projects that 13.8 million people will participate this season, which ends about two weeks after Trump takes office. Millions more — including young adults on their parents’ policies and those in expanded Medicaid — will also get coverage this cycle.

Uncertain Fate Of Health Law Giving Health Industry Heartburn

Uncertain Fate Of Health Law Giving Health Industry Heartburn

WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 10:  President-elect Donald Trump (L) talks after a meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama (R) in the Oval Office November 10, 2016 in Washington, DC. Trump is scheduled to meet with members of the Republican leadership in Congress later today on Capitol Hill.  (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Six years into building its business around the Affordable Care Act, the nation’s $3 trillion health care industry may be losing that political playbook.

Industry leaders, like many voters, were stunned by the election of Donald Trump and unprepared for Republicans’ plans to “repeal and replace” Obamacare.

In addition, Trump’s vague and sometimes conflicting statements on health policy have left industry officials guessing as to the details of any substitute for the federal health law.

“It will be repealed and replaced,” Trump said Sunday in an interview on CBS’ “60 Minutes.” At the same time, he vowed to preserve popular provisions of the law like ensuring that people with preexisting conditions can get insurance and allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ health plans.

Charles (Chip) Kahn, chief executive of the Federation of American Hospitals, said that before the election, health groups had not been meeting with Republicans about a rewrite of the law “because the working assumption was we had a program that wasn’t going anywhere. That working assumption is now no longer operative.”

Upending the health law plays havoc with a health industry that had invested heavily in strategies geared to the ACA’s financial incentives. The flipped script initially left some industry groups speechless. Others issued bland statements pledging cooperation with the next administration as they awaited greater clarity from the next president.

Said Donald Crane, who heads CAPG, a national trade group for physician organizations: “Nobody was ready for this. We didn’t have a Plan B.”

The results appear to have rattled the fragile industry coalition that the Obama administration carefully crafted to support the law. Looking ahead, some health sectors might have even more reason to worry.

The hospital industry may be the most vulnerable to proposed changes, which could result in millions of Americans losing health coverage, both through the insurance exchanges and expansion in the Medicaid program for those with lower incomes.

Not Just Obamacare: Medicaid, Medicare Also On GOP’s Chopping Block

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obamacare-medicaid-medicare-gop-chopping-block_us_582a19b8e4b060adb56fbae7?jn7jtocg8bzqia4i

rious about repealing Obamacare, and doing so quickly. But don’t assume their dismantling of government health insurance programs will stop there.

For about two decades now, Republicans have been talking about radically changing the government’s two largest health insurance programs, Medicaid and Medicare.

The goal with Medicaid is to turn the program almost entirely over to the states, but with less money to run it. The goal with Medicare is to convert it from a government-run insurance program into a voucher system ― while, once again, reducing the money that goes into the program.

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has championed these ideas for years. Trump has not. In fact, in a 2015 interview his campaign website highlighted, he vowed that “I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid.” But the health care agenda on Trump’s transition website, which went live Thursday, vows to “modernize Medicare” and allow more “flexibility” for Medicaid.

In Washington, those are euphemisms for precisely the kind of Medicare and Medicaid plans Ryan has long envisioned. And while it’s never clear what Trump really thinks or how he’ll act, it sure looks like both he and congressional Republicans are out to undo Lyndon Johnson’s health care legacy, not just Barack Obama’s.

f course, whenever Trump or Republicans talk about dismantling existing government programs, they insist they will replace them with something better ― implying that the people who depend on those programs now won’t be worse off.

But Republicans are not trying to replicate what Medicaid, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act do now. Nor are they trying to maintain the current, historically high level of health coverage nationwide that these programs have produced. Their goal is to slash government spending on health care and to peel back regulations on parts of the health care industry, particularly insurers.

This would mean lower taxes, and an insurance market that operates with less government interference. It would also reduce how many people get help paying for health coverage, and make it so that those who continue to receive government-sponsored health benefits will get less help than they do now.

It’s difficult to be precise about the real-world effects, because the Republican plans for replacing existing government insurance programs remain so undefined. Ryan’s“A Better Way” proposal is a broad, 37-page outline without dollar figures, and Senate Republican leaders have never produced an actual Obamacare “replacement” plan.

But the Republican plans in circulation, along with the vague ― and shifting ― health care principles Trump endorsed during the campaign, have common themes. And from those it’s possible to glean a big-picture idea of what a fully realized version of the Republican health care agenda would mean.

20 Questions for President Trump

20 Questions for President Trump

whitehouse_featured

The last six and a half years have been uncharted territory in our nation’s century-long debate over health reform. For the first time the fight was about how to implement an attempt at near-universal coverage rather over what this plan should look like and what could win enough support in Congress. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has survived major political, legislative, and legal tests, including dozens of repeal votes, two Supreme Court decisions, the 2012 presidential election, and state-level resistance.

I was outside the Supreme Court on June 25, 2015 when the King v. Burwell decision was released. I was there the moment activists switched their signs from saying “Don’t you dare take my care” to “The ACA is here to stay.” I wrote that we could finally say with some certainty that they were right, the law is here to stay. They were wrong. I was wrong.

Donald Trump’s victory throws the future of health reform into complete chaos. He will take office in January 2017 with Republican majorities in the House and Senate. President Trump, Speaker Ryan, and Senate Majority Leader McConnell have all made repeated promises to get rid of Obamacare. They will face enormous pressure to follow through with their threats of repeal. Approximately 21 million people are projected to lose insurance if they follow through with their initial proposals.

The first step to figuring out where to go from here is understanding what decisions are on the horizon. Here are my first 20 questions about health reform under the Trump administration , in no particular order:

What Would Block Grants or Limits on Per Capita Spending Mean for Medicaid?

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2016/nov/medicaid-block-grants

ABSTRACT

Issue: President-elect Trump and some in Congress have called for establishing absolute limits on the federal government’s spending on Medicaid, not only for the population covered through the Affordable Care Act’s eligibility expansion but for the program overall. Such a change would effectively reverse a 50-year trend of expanding Medicaid in order to protect the most vulnerable Americans.

Goal: To explore the two most common proposals for reengineering federal funding of Medicaid: block grants that set limits on total annual spending regardless of enrollment, and caps that limit average spending per enrollee.

Methods: Review of existing policy proposals and other documents.

Key findings and conclusions: Current proposals for dramatically reducing federal spending on Medicaid would achieve this goal by creating fixed-funding formulas divorced from the actual costs of providing care. As such, they would create funding gaps for states to either absorb or, more likely, offset through new limits placed on their programs. As a result, block-granting Medicaid or instituting “per capita caps” would most likely reduce the number of Americans eligible for Medicaid and narrow coverage for remaining enrollees. The latter approach would, however, allow for population growth, though its desirability to the new president and Congress is unclear. The full extent of funding and benefit reductions is as yet unknown.

Expect Medicaid to Change, but Not Shrivel, Under Donald Trump

The expansion of Medicaid, a central pillar of the Affordable Care Act, faces immense uncertainty next year, with President-elect Donald J. Trump and top Republicans in Congress embracing proposals that could leave millions of poorer Americans without health insurance and jeopardize a major element of President Obama’s legacy.

But influential figures in surprising quarters of the new administration might balk at a broad rollback of Medicaid’s reach, favoring new conditions for access to the government insurance program for the poor but not wholesale cutbacks.

Mike Pence, the vice president-elect, is proud of the Medicaid expansion he engineered as governor of Indiana, one of 31 states that expanded eligibility under the Affordable Care Act. The Indiana program has conservative features that emphasize “personal responsibility” and require Medicaid beneficiaries to make monthly contributions to savings accounts earmarked for health care.

Another Trump adviser, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, hails the expansion of Medicaid in his state, saying more than half a million people are receiving “more and better health care.” The federal government pays the full cost for newly eligible beneficiaries from 2014 through 2016 and at least 90 percent of the costs in later years under the health law.

It is hard to overstate the importance of Medicaid, which insures 77 million people, pays for more than half of all births in some states, covers about two-thirds of nursing home residents and provides treatment for many people addicted to opioids. Spending on Medicaid, by the federal government and states combined, exceeds $500 billion a year.

Of the 20 million people who have gained coverage under the Affordable Care Act, officials estimate, 12 million are insured by Medicaid — with few of the problems that have plagued the new insurance exchanges, or marketplaces.

But change is coming. In his campaign manifesto, Mr. Trump said Congress must repeal the Affordable Care Act and give each state a lump sum of federal money — a block grant — for Medicaid. Congress passed legislation in January to repeal the health law and roll back its Medicaid expansion. Mr. Obama vetoed the measure, but Speaker Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin has vowed to put similar legislation on a Republican president’s desk.

Ryan now has the muscle to phase out Medicare — within months

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Ryan-now-has-the-muscle-to-phase-out-Medicare-10613139.php?utm_campaign=KHN%3A+Daily+Health+Policy+Report&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=37625118&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8__03zRw-gu7XJrwOBmO6XYdGObArnMQTK9_dRrTgDh69s7q3OUq53AcYCfr9bwrtHj5mbLYOPIBBdQVoE_yCtdZWBTg&_hsmi=37625118

Image result for Ryan now has the muscle to phase out Medicare — within months

House Speaker Paul Ryan’s plan to phase out Medicare is nothing new. But now, under a Trump presidency and with both houses of Congress in Republican hands, it looks like he could finally make it happen, possibly within months.

Back in 2011, as a U.S. representative for Wisconsin’s 1st Congressional District, Ryan floated a plan to turn Medicare into a “premium support” program. The “premium support” would be a payment that would let you buy insurance from private insurers. But you won’t get full coverage.

As Josh Marshall acidly noted Sunday in a blog for TPM, “In any case, rather than Medicare you’ll have insurance from an insurance company, which everybody should love because haven’t you heard from your parents and grandparents how bummed they were when they had to give up their private insurance for Medicare?

“You’ll hear lots of people calling this ‘reform’ and other catchwords. But Medicare is a single payer, universal health care system. Replacing it with private insurance means getting rid of it. Even calling it ‘privatization’ masks what is really afoot.”

On Fox News Special Report on Thursday, Ryan was asked about entitlement reform. His answer:

“You have to remember, when Obamacare became Obamacare, Obamacare rewrote Medicare, rewrote Medicaid. If you are going to repeal and replace Obamacare, you have to address those issues as well. What a lot of folks don’t realize is this 21-person board called the IPAP is about to kick in with price controls on Medicare. What people don’t realize is because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke, Medicare is going to have price controls because of Obamacare, Medicaid is in fiscal straits. You have to deal with those issues if you are going to repeal and replace Obamacare. Medicare has serious problems [because of] Obamacare. Those are part of our plan.”

Marshall says that’s false, and Ryan knows it. Instead of putting Medicare under deeper financial stress, the Affordable Care Act has had the opposite effect and actually extended Medicare’s solvency by over 10 years, he says.

According to Medicare’s trustees, the “Part A” trust fund — the costliest component of Medicare, covering hospitalization — is set to become insolvent in 2028. In 2009, before the passage of the Affordable Care Act, it was projected that fund would go broke in 2017.

The 1 thing about healthcare that needs to change: 4 executives weigh in

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/the-1-thing-about-healthcare-that-needs-to-change-4-executives-weigh-in.html

Self-Discovery

From the shift to value-based care to increased price transparency, the healthcare industry is in the midst of significant changes that are aimed at efficiently improving care. However, for that goal to be achieved, problems in the industry such as disparity in access to care and confusing billing systems still need to be addressed, according to healthcare executives.

In a panel discussion on Nov. 9 at the Becker’s 5th Annual CEO + CFO Roundtable in Chicago moderated by Rhoda Weiss, PhD, nationally recognized consultant, speaker, and author, four great minds in healthcare discussed the changes they would like to see in the industry, what gives them pride in their organizations and the issues that keep them awake at night.

Hospital executives’ 12 most pressing post-election questions, answered

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/hospital-executives-12-most-pressing-post-election-questions-answered.html

Image result for key health policy issues

https://www.advisory.com/Research/Health-Care-Advisory-Board/Expert-Insights/2016/2016-Election-12-Questions-Every-Executive-Should-Be-Asking

In a stunning upset, Donald Trump took the stage early yesterday morning to claim victory as the next president of the United States while Republicans celebrated retaining control of both the House and the Senate.

While the outcome of the election has long been expected to have a far-reaching impact across a number of policy areas, the Republican sweep of Congress and White House could result in profound changes in health policy after a hard-fought election on both sides of the aisle.

Although the exact implications of the race will become more apparent in the coming days and weeks, we expect Republicans to emphasize the election results as a mandate for change and use the opportunity to pursue significant new initiatives.

So what can providers expect from a Trump administration and a GOP Congress? Let’s take a look at what’s potentially in store for Medicare, Medicaid, and the private insurance market—and what those changes mean for provider strategy—by looking at the most common questions I’ve already received following the election.

Here’s Why 24 Million People Still Don’t Have Health Insurance

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/08/19/Here-s-Why-24-Million-People-Still-Don-t-Have-Health-Insurance

Despite its seemingly endless political and financial travails, Obamacare has taken a big bite out of the number of uninsured Americans since it was enacted in 2010. An estimated 20 million more people are now covered by private health insurance obtained through subsidized government exchanges or expanded Medicaid for the poor.

But as the curtain begins to ring down on President Obama’s administration, roughly 20 million to 24 million people still lack health insurance, a huge piece of unfinished business that will be left to the next president and a new Congress to address. And that raises two interesting questions: precisely who are the uninsured today and why haven’t they been able to obtain coverage?

A national survey by the Commonwealth Fund conducted last February through April finds “notable shifts” in the demographic composition of the uninsured since the Affordable Care Act first took effect in 2014.

A quick snapshot of the detailed findings tells the stories of millions of people either purposefully rejecting health care insurance, not qualifying for a federal program, or being unaware of their options to acquire coverage.