The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: $247 Billion in Medicaid not counted in healthcare costs!

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,895

    Default $247 Billion in Medicaid not counted in healthcare costs!

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...ecI3QD9BEM6UG0

    http://tinyurl.com/yhm8nf2

    Analysis: Courting doctors in health care battle
    By DAVID ESPO (AP) 12 hours ago

    WASHINGTON In the special interest war over health care, the White House and congressional Democrats have the nation's drug makers and hospitals generally on their side; the insurance industry, not so much.

    Now the bill's supporters are making a play to lock in the American Medical Association, the organization that says it represents 250,000 doctors and medical students in every state and congressional district. The principal enticement, a $247 billion measure making its way to the Senate floor, aims to wipe out a scheduled 21 percent rate cut for doctors treating Medicare patients and replace it with a permanent, predictable system for future fee increases.

    -more-

  2. #2
    Senior Member TXduckdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    632

    Default

    FYI....the AMA represents about 40% of the physicians in the US.
    Train the dog, the ribbons will take care of themselves.

  3. #3
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,762

    Default

    This is a way to hide the cost of the healthcare reform. They have yet to say how they will pay for this.

  4. #4
    Senior Member TXduckdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    632

    Default

    Just in from the "not a real news agency".

    Senate Leaders Reconsider Medicare 'Doctor Fix' That Critics Say Adds $247B to Debt
    Democratic senators and a coalition of interest groups are pushing for a so-called "doctor fix" -- a 10-year $247 billion measure to block a planned 20 percent cut in Medicare reimbursement fees to doctors mandated by a 1997 federal law.



    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...t/?test=health

    "Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., is leading the way in opposing the unpaid-for Stabenow bill.

    "Things have got to be paid for," the moderate Democrat told reporters Tuesday. "I'm not going to advance things that aren't paid for, by cloture vote or any other vote. I'm as clear as I can be."

    Conrad was referring to a procedural move known as "cloture" that allows the majority leader, with the consent of 60 senators -- two-thirds, if all 100 members are present -- to move beyond a filibuster.

    And Conrad has an alternative to the Stabenow measure. He has paired up with Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, to craft an amendment that stops the cuts for two years, a $25 billion measure that both senators intend to pay for with offsets. "
    Train the dog, the ribbons will take care of themselves.

  5. #5
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...ecI3QD9BEM6UG0

    http://tinyurl.com/yhm8nf2

    Analysis: Courting doctors in health care battle
    By DAVID ESPO (AP) – 12 hours ago

    WASHINGTON — In the special interest war over health care, the White House and congressional Democrats have the nation's drug makers and hospitals generally on their side; the insurance industry, not so much.

    Now the bill's supporters are making a play to lock in the American Medical Association, the organization that says it represents 250,000 doctors and medical students in every state and congressional district. The principal enticement, a $247 billion measure making its way to the Senate floor, aims to wipe out a scheduled 21 percent rate cut for doctors treating Medicare patients and replace it with a permanent, predictable system for future fee increases.

    -more-
    For the record, the costs are for Medicare, not Medicaid. The original bill being modified required that physician fees be reduced every year that health care costs rise faster than inflation. Ever since the bill was passed, bills have been adopted -- generally with Republican sponsorship -- to defer implementation to avoid fee cuts that would result in physicians refusing to accept Medicare patients. The original House bill repealed the requirement for automatic rate cuts at a cost estimated by the CBO at $247 billion over 10 years. A bill to eliminate the requirement for automatic rate cuts was just considered by the Senate. No Republicans supported a motion to end a filibuster and vote on the bill. Accordingly this bill will not pass. I assume that means that Republicans are now arguing that rates should be cut automatically.

    In the meantime, the repeal of these automatic cuts has been removed from the health reform bill, bringing total costs down sufficiently so that CBO now estimates that the bill, if adopted, would reduce the deficit. There is no need to pass the rate change to pass health reform. I am certain that, in the future, a separate bill will be introduced to defer the rate cuts as they have been deferred in the past. This will pass with widespread Republican support since no one believes that such rate cuts can be imposed without disastrous consequences. For now, however, they are still hoping to force the rate revision into any health reform bill to artifically inflate the cost.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    ...In the meantime, the repeal of these automatic cuts has been removed from the health reform bill, bringing total costs down sufficiently so that CBO now estimates that the bill, if adopted, would reduce the deficit. There is no need to pass the rate change to pass health reform.
    I stand corrected.

    However, you are engaging in the same smoke and mirrors that was the basis for the story. Medicare or Medicaid, the costs must be included in the cost of "healthcare reform" or else there is no true picture of the cost of the program.

    Of course, there's no true picture anyway due to the sleight of hand in Senator Bachus' bill. He should be the first off the end of the plank for trying that "...such sums as may be necessary..." nonsense.

    Eric

  7. #7
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    I stand corrected.

    However, you are engaging in the same smoke and mirrors that was the basis for the story. Medicare or Medicaid, the costs must be included in the cost of "healthcare reform" or else there is no true picture of the cost of the program.

    Of course, there's no true picture anyway due to the sleight of hand in Senator Bachus' bill. He should be the first off the end of the plank for trying that nonsense.

    Eric
    Why shouldn't those costs stand on their own? The change is not essential for health care reform and will be addressed legislatively whether health care reform is adopted or not. Do it as part of a separate bill or don't do it all for now. If Republicans choose to vote to have physician rates paid for Medicare recipients to be automatically cut 21% now and more in the future, let them explain their votes to the electorate. It is not a matter of smoke and mirrors; it is a matter of clarity.

  8. #8
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,762

    Default

    It was voted down in the senate. 13 democrats joined with republicans.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,846

    Default

    Some view this as the first vote on overall health care reform, i.e. showing how much strength the administration has in the arena. We'll have to wait and see if this assessment is correct.

    The prediction is that without eliminating the 20% cut to doctor fees that this legislation would have postponed for ten years, doctors will accept 30% fewer medicare patients. I believe that if doctors refuse the Medicare reimbursement for a procedure, then the "gap" insurors also will not pay the doctor.

    Even if the bill had passed, the reimbursements would have been frozen at present levels for those 10 years ... while costs to the doctors would have continued to increase. By the end of the 10 years, it would have been anticipated that doctors (being under-reimbursed) would have gradually reduced the number of Medicare patients they accepted.

    It would appear that this reimbursement reduction would essentially mean that those on Medicare are back to square one ... no effective insurance if they can't find a doctor who will accept the Medicare reimbursement rate.

    OTOH, if doctors continue to accept Medicare patients, then they will charge higher fees to non-Medicare patients ... thus increasing costs to everyone else.

    This could be one of the important failings of the government's planning. They did not plan for increasing costs. When the program was started they did not anticipate the medical advances that come at a price. Perhaps they also did not anticipate that providing health care for older citizens would increase life span, thus keeping more recipients getting benefits for a longer time.

    They keep saying that Medicare will go bankrupt in a few years. There will still be money going into the fund ... so how will the limited funds be distributed? How will they choose who gets what funds are available?
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  10. #10
    Senior Member dnf777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Western Pa
    Posts
    6,161

    Default

    Suppose Obama gets his healthcare reform with some version of a public option...that would be a victory for his administration by all measures. Assuming the sky doesn't fall, and no major swing in the economic situation occurs......basically all else stays relatively calm....would a healthcare victory "spend" all is political capital and leave him weaker.....or would it embolden him and elevate his political clout??
    God Bless PFC Jamie Harkness. The US Army's newest PFC, but still our neighbor's little girl!

Similar Threads

  1. Credit Cards - Higher Costs Again?
    By WaterDogRem in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-22-2009, 11:39 AM
  2. Is this a reason why our healthcare costs..gdg
    By Uncle Bill in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-10-2009, 05:24 AM
  3. Is it time for the libertarian to rise up and be counted?
    By Ken Bora in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 05-29-2009, 09:12 PM
  4. Trial costs going up(what else is new?)
    By Bob Gutermuth in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 02-27-2008, 12:02 AM
  5. Accurate Info Needed on Club Costs
    By Jerry in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-05-2007, 05:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •