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.

AMA Says New Health Policy Must Maintain Coverage for All Currently Covered

https://morningconsult.com/2016/11/15/ama-says-new-health-policy-must-maintain-coverage-for-all-currently-covered/?utm_source=RealClearHealth+Morning+Scan&utm_campaign=5952aea6b6-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_11_16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b4baf6b587-5952aea6b6-84752421

Image result for american medical association

The American Medical Association’s House of Delegates vowed Tuesday to work with the incoming Trump administration and Congress on health care reform, but said any new reforms shouldn’t result in people losing coverage.

“A core principle is that any new reform proposal should not cause individuals currently covered to become uninsured,” the group said in a statement. “We will also advance recommendations to support the delivery of high quality patient care. Policymakers have a notable opportunity to also reduce excessive regulatory burdens that diminish physicians’ time devoted to patient care and increase costs.”

The group added that it was committed to improving health insurance so patients can access high quality and affordable care. The group released a policy framework, noting they would advocate for expanding insurance coverage and choice.

Additionally, the group says it will also advocate to make sure policies offered through insurance exchanges, Medicare Advantage and Medicaid managed care offer wide provider networks. They’re also focused on encouraging prescription drug price and cost transparency.

“The new AMA policy acknowledges the carte blanche approach to drug pricing needs to change to align with the health system’s drive for high-quality care based on value,” AMA President Andrew Gurman said in a separate statement. “This transformation should support drug prices based on overall benefit to patients compared to alternatives for treating the same condition. We need to have the full picture to assess a drug’s true value to patients and the health care system.”

 

 

 

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.

California Dreamin’ in a post-Trump healthcare world

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/finance/suddenly-it-s-much-darker-california-dreaming-may-be-one-silver-lining?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=959610&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTmpjd1pURm1NR0ZqTlRWbSIsInQiOiI5MkdaMWJlaGV4dlppeWNkY1NqNTNtTFJ1MFlrcWtQQWxcL2hvYWVUK3lmNEJRT1lCVTJLQTFwdGFcL0dLWWlGMnBzbGNQbXhDdnFDVUdsdkthR3Y4UzJIVm5sT25iNHJmYWd2aGlFXC9ycVNDST0ifQ%3D%3D

California flag and American flag

The consensus among policymakers and observers: Not good.

“At risk is insurance coverage for literally millions of Americans,” said Anthony Wright, executive director of the advocacy group Health Access California.

Jim Lott, who teaches healthcare policy at USC and Cal State Long Beach and was the longtime executive vice president of the Hospital Association of Southern California, noted that even if parts of the law are preserved the way Trump suggests, it would still be imperiled.

“If you don’t have an employer mandate and an individual mandate, the market would self-destruct,” Lott said. “It will create havoc.”

Barcellona, an attorney by training, concurred with Lott. “The law matters and these federal programs are conditioned on the act being implemented in a certain way,” he said.

Barcellona also brought up a consequence that would be utterly disastrous for millions of middle-class Americans: If the ACA is eliminated in the middle of a calendar year, it could put them on the hook for repaying billions of dollars in premium tax credits.

Donald Trump is about to face a rude awakening over Obamacare

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/12/donald-trump-is-beginning-to-face-a-rude-awakening-over-obamacare/?utm_source=RealClearHealth+Morning+Scan&utm_campaign=c672ab1b84-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_11_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b4baf6b587-c672ab1b84-84752421

After reiterating his promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, President-elect Donald Trump has indicated that he may keep two of the law’s most popular provisions. One is straightforward enough — children up to age 26 being allowed to stay on their parents’ plan. The other — preventing insurance companies from denying coverage because of preexisting conditions — offers a perfect illustration of why Trump and most of the other Republicans critics of Obamacare don’t understand the health insurance market.

Let’s say that in the beautiful new world of “repeal and replace,” insurers are required to sell you insurance despite the fact that your kid has a brain tumor. Insurance companies know what to do with that. Their actuaries can calculate that kids with brain tumors typically require (I’m making this number up) about $200,000 a year in medical care. So they’ll offer to sell you a policy at an annual premium of $240,000.

At this point your response will probably be that such an outcome is not fair. When the law says insurance companies can’t discriminate on the basis for preexisting conditions, surely what it means is that they have to charge roughly the same price for health insurance, irrespective of your preexisting condition. In the language of insurance, that’s called “guaranteed issue at community rates.”

Unfortunately, in the states that have tried guaranteed issues at community rates, the insurance markets have collapsed. That’s because if you guarantee everyone the right to buy health insurance at community rates, then some consumers will game the system. The young and healthy ones won’t buy any health insurance at all — they’ll go without until they are diagnosed with diabetes or a brain tumor or get hit by a truck crossing the street. And when that happens, they will immediately call up Aetna or Anthem and exercise their right to buy health insurance at the low community rate, irrespective of their medical condition. It won’t be long before insurance companies begin losing a ton of money and are forced either to raise premiums through the roof or stop writing policies altogether.

Here’s why Trump is already waffling on Obamacare

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/12/heres-why-trump-is-already-waffling-on-obamacare/

President-elect Donald Trump is already signaling that he might backpedal on his promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act, telling the Wall Street Journal Friday that he’d consider hanging onto popular Obamacare provisions such as “the prohibition against insurers denying coverage because of patients’ existing conditions, and a provision that allows parents to provide years of additional coverage for children on their insurance policies.”

His apparent reluctance to scrap the entire ACA is understandable. In the long run, waffling on repeal will probably be less painful than causing a health-care catastrophe. Trump capitalized on Republicans’ long dislike of the Affordable Care Act by focusing on news, in the last weeks of the campaign, that premiums would increase sharply for many Americans purchasing insurance through its exchanges. But he didn’t promise a pared-down health-care regime. He promised to repeal and replace Obamacare with a plan that would cover everyone, offer more choice and cost less.

It was a populist approach to health care that wasn’t new. Sixteen years ago, in “The America We Deserve,” he wrote: “I’m a conservative on most issues, but a liberal on this one,” an appeal that didn’t hurt candidate Trump. But President Trump is likely to find the issue challenging. Repeal requires only the will of Congress. Replacement is subject to the laws of economics and mathematics, which aren’t on his side.

In the campaign, Trump proposed replacing the Affordable Care Act with a tax deduction for individuals who pay for health insurance out of pocket. Like all tax deductions, such a deduction is worth more to people with higher tax rates. But most of those who would be left without coverage by an ACA repeal are lower-income individuals with tax rates that are already low. Thus, the benefit they’d receive from a deduction doesn’t come close to the financial hit they would experience from an ACA repeal. Independent estimates suggest repeal would cause about 20 million people to lose coverage, only one-quarter of whom would purchase insurance with the deduction. The rest wouldn’t be able to afford it.

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.

Obamacare Faces New Challenge as the Uninsured Rate Plateaus

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/11/03/Obamacare-Faces-New-Challenge-Uninsured-Rate-Plateaus

Amid the administration’s latest drive to sign up millions of Americans for Obamacare coverage, a new government study warns that the uninsured rate may have plateaued after years of dramatic decline.

There were roughly 28 million uninsured Americans during the first six months of this year, a significant change from the 48 million consumers who lacked coverage at the time of the enactment of the Affordable Care Act in 2010. Government-subsidized health insurance policies for low and middle-income people, along with an expansion of the Medicaid program in more than half of the states, have helped more than 20 million uninsured people obtain coverage.