Opinion: Cancer survivor: Obamacare got me covered – CNN.com

 In January, for the first time since my diagnosis 36 years ago, I will have an individual health plan that offers quality coverage for me and my family. I will save $628 every month on premiums. Best of all — I wasn’t even asked if I’ve ever had cancer.

Opinion: Cancer survivor: Obamacare got me covered – CNN.com

Uninsured in Pennsylvania reaches record high – Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

Overall the number of uninsured Pennsylvanians increased by 11 percent from 2011 to 2012, while nationally the number decreased by 1.4 percent.

The numbers, based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, reflect a troubling trend in health care insurance, which people traditionally received through their employer.

"We continue to see a dangerous erosion of employer-based coverage," said Andy Carter, president and CEO of the Hospital and Healthsystem Association that represents the interests of nearly 240 health facilities.

"The number of Pennsylvanians covered by private, employer-based plans hit an all-time low of 59.5 percent in 2012," he said.

And that’s not solely because people are out of work, he added.

"Three out of every 4 uninsured Pennsylvanians live in a household with at least one working adult, and nearly 4 out of 5 live in Pennsylvania’s suburban and rural regions," Mr. Carter said.

The association has advocated for the expansion of Medicaid as outlined under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Uninsured in Pennsylvania reaches record high – Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Who Will be Uninsured After Health Insurance Reform? – Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

 

  • The ACA would reduce the number of nonelderly people without health insurance by 28 million—from 18.9 to 8.7 percent.
  • Of the 23 million still uninsured, 40 percent would be eligible for, but not enrolled in, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). A further 22 percent would be undocumented immigrants.
  • The majority of those uninsured—19 of the 23 million—would be nonelderly adults:
    • Thirty-seven percent—mostly young singles without dependents—would be eligible for Medicaid, but not enrolled.
    • Twenty-five percent would be undocumented immigrants.
    • Sixteen percent would be exempt from the individual mandate because they would not have an affordable insurance option.
    • Eight percent would be eligible for affordable subsidized coverage in the health benefit exchanges.
    • The remaining 15 percent—most higher-income families with dependents—would likely be subject to the mandate, having an affordable private insurance option despite not qualifying for a subsidy.
  • Who Will be Uninsured After Health Insurance Reform? – Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

    Uninsured in Texas and Florida – NYTimes.com

     

    A new Census Bureau report documents the alarming percentages of people in Texas and Florida without health insurance. Leaders of both states should hang their heads in shame because they have been among the most resistant in the nation to providing coverage for the uninsured under the Affordable Care Act, the law that Republicans deride as “Obamacare.”

    Uninsured in Texas and Florida – NYTimes.com

    Navigators Say GOP Lawmakers’ Information Requests Are ‘Shocking’ – Kaiser Health News

     

    Organizations that received the latest round of health law navigator grants say last week’s letter from House Republicans could have a chilling effect on efforts to hire and train outreach workers to sign up Americans for health insurance by Oct. 1, the opening day for  new online insurance marketplaces.

    The letters were signed by 15 Republican members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and requested that the organizations provide extensive new documents about their participation in the program and schedule a congressional briefing by Sept. 13.  The letters went out to 51 organizations–including hospitals, universities, Indian tribes, patient advocacy groups and food banks—out of 104 that shared $67 million in grants

    "I find the letter quite offensive," says Lisa Hamler-Fugitt, executive director of the Ohio Association of Foodbanks, which received a $1.9 million grant. "It is shocking. It is absolutely shocking."

    The organizations, all in states where the federal government will be setting up insurance marketplaces, are already under a difficult time crunch, with just six weeks from the time they received the grants to hire, train and prepare outreach work forces.

    "Was this an attempt by members of the committee to basically stop and slow down the navigator process?" Hamler-Fugitt says. "We’re going to stop now and pull together voluminous documents to provide back to the committee?"

    Some of those documents don’t yet exist, she says. "We weren’t required to provide position papers, salary ranges, privacy policies or procedures. You don’t do that until you know that you got the award."

    The Obama administration used stronger language in describing the letter last week, characterizing it as a "blatant and shameful attempt to intimidate."

    Navigators Say GOP Lawmakers’ Information Requests Are ‘Shocking’ – Kaiser Health News

    Wendell Potter: A Rare Bipartisan Idea to Improve Medicaid and Save Money

     

    The problem is referred to by policy wonks as "churn." Because of the way Medicaid is administered by the states, millions of Americans enrolled in the program lose coverage temporarily every year because of often minor fluctuations in their income or even a change of address. Many are removed from the rolls simply because they can’t take time off from work to go to a Medicaid office to re-verify their incomes every three months, which some states require.

    It’s called churn because most people who are "disenrolled" — to use insurance industry jargon — are eventually reinstated. Their eligibility for Medicaid never changed. They lost coverage solely because of paperwork requirements or a slight and fleeting bump in pay from working overtime during a given week.

    This is unknown in the private insurance world because once you enroll in a health plan, you can stay enrolled in that plan for a year, so long as you keep paying the premiums on time. It doesn’t matter if you move from one street to another or work an extra shift to make a few extra bucks.

    But staying covered for a full year under Medicaid is not a given, and the consequences of this churn are costly, and not just for those most directly affected. The situation is costly to taxpayers, too, because of the unnecessary administrative expense. It costs hundreds of dollars per enrollee to verify income multiple times a year and to process all the paperwork involved in reinstating a beneficiary. When you consider that 58 million of Americans are currently enrolled in Medicaid — a number that will grow substantially next year when many states expand coverage under the Affordable Care Act — billions of taxpayers’ dollars are being wasted because of churn.

    Those who fare the worst, though, are eligible beneficiaries who get dumped into the ranks of the uninsured.

    "Even short gaps in coverage can lead to delay or avoidance of needed care," says Leighton Ku, director of the Center for Health Policy Research at George Washington University’s School of Public Health and Human Services, who along with colleague Erika Steinmetz studied the effects of churn. They released their findings in a report last month.

    Please read on…

    Wendell Potter: A Rare Bipartisan Idea to Improve Medicaid and Save Money

    Overruns Forcing Lower Payments to Some Providers in Stopgap Health Program – NYTimes.com

     

    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said Monday that it was cutting payments to doctors and hospitals after finding that cost overruns are threatening to use up the money available in a health insurance program for people with cancer, heart disease and other serious illnesses.

    The administration had predicted that up to 400,000 people would enroll in the program, created by the 2010 health care law. In fact, about 135,000 have enrolled, but the cost of their claims has far exceeded White House estimates, exhausting most of the $5 billion provided by Congress.

    Under a new policy issued by Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, “health care facilities and providers will get paid less” for providing the same services to patients in the federal program, known as the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan.

    In most cases, payments to health care providers will be capped at Medicare rates, which are substantially less than the commercial insurance rates they have been receiving. The new policy generally prohibits doctors and hospitals from increasing charges to consumers to make up the difference.

    Michael T. Keough, the executive director of the North Carolina Health Insurance Risk Pool, said the new policy was one of several steps taken recently by federal officials to control spending.

    “They are trying to stanch the hemorrhaging,” Mr. Keough said.

    The federal government notified some states last month that it was setting a ceiling on costs that would be reimbursed from June through December of this year. In effect, state officials said, the new limits shift the financial risk of the program from the federal government to those states.

    Congress established the program to provide coverage to people with pre-existing conditions who had been uninsured for at least six months, and Ms. Sebelius has said, “It literally saves lives.”

    The program provides a transition to 2014, when most consumers will be able to obtain insurance regardless of their pre-existing conditions.

    Federal officials froze enrollment in the program in February, but costs continued to grow rapidly.

    Overruns Forcing Lower Payments to Some Providers in Stopgap Health Program – NYTimes.com

    It is worth remembering, that these patients had run out of options for access to treatment before the program.

    Remarks on Medicaid Expansion

    I had the privilege of testifying in favor of Medicaid expansion for Pennsylvania at a hearing of the PA House Democratic Policy Committee, chaired by Rep. Dan Frankel of Allegheny County. (Follow the link for the agenda and other speakers.)

    Good morning. I am Dr. Chris Hughes, state director for Doctors for America, a nation-wide group of physicians advocating for high quality, affordable health care. I have been an intensive care physician for my entire career, now approaching 25 years, and within the past year I have also begun practicing hospice and palliative medicine. I am a former Trustee of the Pennsylvania Medical Society and Chair of the Patient Safety Committee. I have completed graduate studies in health policy at Thomas Jefferson University, and I am now teaching there as well in the Graduate School of Population Health.

    I tell you this to let you know that I can get down in the weeds with you about the nuts and bolts of implementation of the Affordable Care Act, and I know a fair amount about health care financing, access, cost shifting, and all the rest. But you have a fine panel assembled here today who can do that for you, and I know you all know your way around these topics as well.

    I am here as a physician and a representative of my profession. Every doctor you know, and every nurse and pharmacist and social worker and everyone in the front lines of health care, for that matter, can tell you stories of how our health care system has failed someone. Our system fails people regularly, and often spectacularly, and often cruelly, day in, day out.

    I’ve had patients who work full time in jobs that fall far short of the American dream. They get by, but they can’t afford health insurance.

    I’ll give you a few of my patients’ stories here, not just to point out the obvious- that we are mistreating our fellow human beings – but that we are misspending countless dollars on the wrong end of the system.

    There’s the cabbie who recognizes his diabetes and determines to work harder and longer so he can buy insurance before he is stricken with the label even worse than diabetes: preexisting condition! He doesn’t make it and ends up in the ICU with diabetic ketoacidosis.

    There’s the construction worker who has a controllable seizure disorder that goes uncontrolled because he can’t afford to go to the doctor. He ends up in the ICU multiple times.

    There’s the woman who stays home to care for her dying mother and loses her insurance along with her job. When she finally gets to a doctor for herself, her own cancer is far advanced.

    The laid-off engineer whose cough turns bloody for months and months before he “accesses” the health care system – through the ED and my ICU with already far advanced cancer.

    These are people who are doing the right thing – working, caring for family members – and still have to go begging for health care. How many hours does an American have to work to “deserve” health care? 40? 50? 60? I’ve seen all of these.

    Not long ago, expanding access to health care was a nonpartisan goal. As recently as 2007, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators, including Republicans Jim DeMint and Trent Lott, ( let me repeat that, “Jim DeMint and Trent Lott” ) wrote a letter to then-President George W. Bush pointing out that our health care system was in urgent need of repair. "Further delay is unacceptable as costs continue to skyrocket, our population ages and chronic illness increases. In addition, our businesses are at a severe disadvantage when their competitors in the global market get health care for ‘free.’ "

    Their No. 1 priority? It was to "Ensure that all Americans would have affordable, quality, private health coverage, while protecting current government programs. We believe the health care system cannot be fixed without providing solutions for everyone. Otherwise, the costs of those without insurance will continue to be shifted to those who do have coverage."

    Medicaid expansion and the Affordable Care Act will get us closer to this than at any time in our history.

    You will hear some physicians speak out against all of this. But what you generally will not hear is their leadership and organizations speaking out against it, except perhaps in the deep south. There is a reason for this. As leaders of our profession, we have to come to terms that we are not just in it for ourselves. We are in it for our profession as well, and that means we have to put our patients’ interests above our own, and that means we have to do our best to ensure that everyone has access to high quality, affordable health care. Don’t just take my word for it. The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation and other organizations put together a Charter on Medical Professionalism about ten years ago, specifically making this part of our professional responsibility. If you go to their website, you will find that virtually every physician organization you can think of has endorsed it. That means the anesthesiologists and orthopedic surgeons as well as the pediatricians and the family practitioners.

    For Medicaid expansion specifically, we should note here that the major national physician organizations, including the AMA, and the organizations representing internists, family practice, pediatricians, psychiatry and more, all endorse Medicaid expansion. On the state level, all of these organizations state chapters endorse it as well, with the exception of the Pennsylvania Medical Society, who have endorsed general terms of expansion only.

    But this concept is really not controversial among physicians and health care providers. We see everything from the catastrophes to the small indignities. They are tragic, unnecessary, and we are on the road to ending them.

    Some in the provider community have expressed concerns about Medicaid in particular as the way we are providing access, so I would like to take a moment to address the concerns we hear most often.

    First, that Medicaid is “bad” insurance. What is bad about Medicaid is largely fixed in the ACA. Namely, it is very poorly reimbursed for providers. You’ve already heard [I assume] from HCWP why hospitals want it, but for providers in primary care, the frontlines of health care, they get a massive boost in reimbursement under the new law. Pennsylvania has historically had awful reimbursement in the Medicaid program, among the worst in the nation. Now, reimbursement will go to par with Medicare reimbursement, a huge incentive for providers to take on Medicaid patients whom they may have been reluctant to see previously. There are other new innovations such as Patient Centered Medical Homes and others, coming down the pike, that should really give people who previously had no chance at excellent care, a chance to avoid complications, avoid the ER and avoid the hospital.

    I’ve also heard the strange claim that having Medicaid is worse than having no insurance. I suppose that in a vacuum where there is no good data, and where one sees, like I do, patients with no insurance or Medicaid, who don’t know how or aren’t able to access a doctor – you’d be amazed at how often this happens – you could look at patients who get very sick and attribute that to Medicaid, but we do have data now. In Oregon, due to a fairly bizarre set of circumstances a few years ago, Medicaid eligibility was determined by lottery, creating a natural experiment of haves and have-nots. In the first year, those who were enrolled were 70 percent more likely to have a usual source of care, were 55 percent more likely to see the same doctor over time, received 30 percent more hospital care and received 35 percent more outpatient care, and much more.

    People often ask me why I am so passionate about this, and I always tell them, “I blame the nuns.” Growing up Catholic, there was nothing so drilled into me as Matthew 25. We used to sing a hymn based on it, “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers,” on a regular basis at Mass. And we went to Mass before school every day!

    It turns out this is a pretty universal sentiment. I checked. Go to the websites of every mainstream Christian denomination in America and it will be in there somewhere: The Social Gospel and Social Justice. Dignity of the individual. Our duties to the less fortunate. It is a component of every major religion and philosophy in the world, with one notable exception – Ayn Rand’s. And I mention Ayn Rand and her most famous book, Atlas Shrugged, because it is perennially listed as the second most influential book in America after the Bible. A damning fact for us.

    In spite of that, I am glad that social justice and a commitment to the fair distribution of our health care resources is integral to the sense of duty of my profession, the nursing profession and all health professions.

    I encourage debate about how we get to universal health care, but I refuse to accept that America, alone among all modern nations, and Pennsylvania in particular, will reject the idea that we need to get there. And right now, Medicaid expansion, the Health Insurance Exchanges and many other components of the Affordable Care Act are our best hope. Let’s not squander it.

    Thank You.

    A Possibly Fatal Mistake – NYTimes.com

    A Possibly Fatal Mistake – NYTimes.com

    But the cancer has kept growing, and I went to the E.R. again on Sept. 17 when I found that I was losing all strength in my legs. They did an M.R.I. and saw that there were tumors pressing on my spinal cord. They have been treating me with radiation for three weeks now to shrink those tumors and will continue to do so for another week.

    I submitted an application to the hospital for charity care and was approved. The bill is already north of $550,000. Based on the low income on my tax return they knocked it down to $1,339. Swedish Medical Center has treated me better than I ever deserved.

    Some doctor bills are not covered by the charity application, and I expect to spend all of my I.R.A. assets before I’m done. Some doctors have been generously treating me without sending bills, and I am humbled by their ethic of service to the patient.

    Some things I have to pay for, like $1,700 for the Lupron hormone therapy and $1,400 for an ambulance trip. It’s an arbitrary and haphazard system, and I’m just lucky to live in a city with a highly competent and generous hospital like Swedish.