/PRNewswire/ -- As October 1, 2009 signals the beginning of the new fiscal year 2010, the American Health Care Association (AHCA) said cuts of up to $16 billion over ten years to Medicare funded nursing home care being put into effect today by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) must be taken into account by U.S. Senate and House leaders as they continue to refine the financing details of their respective health care reform bills.
"By any standard, the $16 billion ten-year cuts to Medicare funded nursing home care going into effect today represent an enormous blow to the stability our sector requires to ensure the ongoing provision of quality nursing home care," said Bruce Yarwood, President and CEO of AHCA. "As health reform deliberations continue, we respectfully urge lawmakers to keep in mind that any additional Medicare cuts will be on top of this $16 billion ten year regulatory cut implemented today. Without a doubt, the care and well being of the nation's most vulnerable seniors will clearly be at stake if any new cuts are excessive."
Yarwood said it is critical to keep in mind the nature as well as the structural fragility of America's nursing home patient-base and workforce. America's nursing homes provide care and services to 1.6 million patients annually. 52% are over age 85, 73% are women, 14% are non-white, and 54% have annual incomes of less than $10,000 annually. The AHCA leader noted nursing homes and other long-term care facilities employ over 2.1 million caregivers - 86% of whom are women, and 30% of whom are non-white. The average worker is a single, low income mother between the ages of 25 and 54.
"Arguments being made by some that seniors' benefits will not be reduced by cuts now contemplated ignore the fact that when Medicare cuts provider reimbursement, providers, in turn, are forced to cut staff because labor expenses comprise 70 percent of facility costs. Cutting staff within a facility, has a direct, immediate, negative impact on patients and their care - and that is what we fear most in terms of how the eventual final reform bill may be crafted."
Yarwood also urged lawmakers to take into account the fact the Medicaid program already under funds the cost of providing care by at least $4.2 billion annually, according to Eljay, LLC, thereby already placing enormous stress on facilities and staff before federal Medicare cuts even enter the picture.
The National Governors' Association (NGA), National Council of State Legislators (NCSL), and other independent policy analysts and organizations, he said, have already sounded the alarm that state Medicaid funding cuts coupled with poor economic conditions are already threatening vulnerable populations. "As independent research has corroborated time and again, Medicare and Medicaid funding must be viewed together - not in isolation," Yarwood continued. "The combination of cuts to both programs present a clear and present danger to every aspect of facility operations - and ultimately to patient care itself."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reform. Show all posts
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
No Taxes, Just the Give Me the Health Plan
TT Note: Hmmm. Illegal? Don't have to pay taxes? But Americans pay for health care of illegal aliens? Doesn't seem right, does it? Let your Congressman know your views on the subject.
Congressional Research Service: Illegal Aliens Can Receive Benefits Under House Health Care Bill
/PRNewswire/ -- Tuesday, the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the "research arm" for the United States Congress, issued a report validating an analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), that illegal aliens would be able to receive benefits under the House health care reform bill, America's Affordable Health Care Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200).
The report, Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200, states definitively, "H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitizens - whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently - participating in the Exchange." H.R. 3200 establishes a Health Insurance Exchange which would provide individuals and small businesses with access to health care plans, including the "public option" to be managed by the government.
CRS also confirms FAIR's assessment that the House bill does not include a mechanism to prevent illegal aliens from receiving "affordability credits" that would subsidize the purchase of private health insurance. CRS specifically noted the absence "of a provision in the bill specifying the verification procedure." Because the language is ambiguous, all CRS could reasonably conclude is that any eligibility determination would be the responsibility of the Health Choices Commissioner.
The CRS analysis comes after weeks of denials by Members of Congress that illegal aliens could receive benefits under the House bill. These denials were echoed by countless media and health care "experts" who dismissed public concerns as myths, or as politically orchestrated attacks.
"Case closed. Illegal aliens will be eligible to participate in the health care program offered by the House bill unless Congress acts to amend the bill," stated Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "The loopholes and omissions in the House bill are not there by accident," continued Stein. "These loopholes were intended to extend benefits to illegal aliens while allowing Members of Congress to deny those facts to the American people."
The House Ways & Means Committee had the opportunity to include language that would have barred illegal aliens from enrolling in the proposed public option or receiving the affordability credits, but chose not to. An amendment offered by Rep. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) would have applied the same eligibility verification procedures for coverage under H.R. 3200 that have been used for years to prove eligibility for Medicaid. That amendment was rejected by a party-line vote.
Based on its own findings and those of CRS, FAIR is calling on Congress to:
-- Adopt clear language that makes illegal aliens (and nonimmigrants)
ineligible for enrollment in publicly funded or subsidized health
insurance programs.
-- Require electronic eligibility verification for any health care reform
proposal through the existing Systematic Alien Verification for
Entitlements (SAVE) system.
-- Maintain a five-year eligibility waiting period for legal immigrants
to ensure that individuals don't come to the U.S. and immediately tap
the system.
"For the past month, irate citizens, concerned that their tax dollars will be used to fund health care for illegal aliens, have been unfairly portrayed as uninformed rabble by their elected representatives and a host of media organizations," said Stein. "It is time for the politicians to close the loopholes, and for the media establishment to acknowledge that they got it wrong."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
Congressional Research Service: Illegal Aliens Can Receive Benefits Under House Health Care Bill
/PRNewswire/ -- Tuesday, the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the "research arm" for the United States Congress, issued a report validating an analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), that illegal aliens would be able to receive benefits under the House health care reform bill, America's Affordable Health Care Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200).
The report, Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200, states definitively, "H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitizens - whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently - participating in the Exchange." H.R. 3200 establishes a Health Insurance Exchange which would provide individuals and small businesses with access to health care plans, including the "public option" to be managed by the government.
CRS also confirms FAIR's assessment that the House bill does not include a mechanism to prevent illegal aliens from receiving "affordability credits" that would subsidize the purchase of private health insurance. CRS specifically noted the absence "of a provision in the bill specifying the verification procedure." Because the language is ambiguous, all CRS could reasonably conclude is that any eligibility determination would be the responsibility of the Health Choices Commissioner.
The CRS analysis comes after weeks of denials by Members of Congress that illegal aliens could receive benefits under the House bill. These denials were echoed by countless media and health care "experts" who dismissed public concerns as myths, or as politically orchestrated attacks.
"Case closed. Illegal aliens will be eligible to participate in the health care program offered by the House bill unless Congress acts to amend the bill," stated Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "The loopholes and omissions in the House bill are not there by accident," continued Stein. "These loopholes were intended to extend benefits to illegal aliens while allowing Members of Congress to deny those facts to the American people."
The House Ways & Means Committee had the opportunity to include language that would have barred illegal aliens from enrolling in the proposed public option or receiving the affordability credits, but chose not to. An amendment offered by Rep. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) would have applied the same eligibility verification procedures for coverage under H.R. 3200 that have been used for years to prove eligibility for Medicaid. That amendment was rejected by a party-line vote.
Based on its own findings and those of CRS, FAIR is calling on Congress to:
-- Adopt clear language that makes illegal aliens (and nonimmigrants)
ineligible for enrollment in publicly funded or subsidized health
insurance programs.
-- Require electronic eligibility verification for any health care reform
proposal through the existing Systematic Alien Verification for
Entitlements (SAVE) system.
-- Maintain a five-year eligibility waiting period for legal immigrants
to ensure that individuals don't come to the U.S. and immediately tap
the system.
"For the past month, irate citizens, concerned that their tax dollars will be used to fund health care for illegal aliens, have been unfairly portrayed as uninformed rabble by their elected representatives and a host of media organizations," said Stein. "It is time for the politicians to close the loopholes, and for the media establishment to acknowledge that they got it wrong."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Long-Term Care: The Next Big Women's Issue?
/PRNewswire/ -- Long-term care is getting a lot of exposure in the current health-reform discussions, but we ain't seen nothin' yet, according to Denise Gott, Chairman of the Board of LTC Financial Partners LLC (LTCFP) -- http://www.ltcfp.com/ -- one of the nation's largest and most experienced long-term care insurance agencies. "Wait until the most-affected individuals get wind of what's in store for them; all hell could break loose," she says.
And who are those individuals? The millions who succumb to longer-lasting illnesses and injuries, requiring help with eating, toileting, dressing or moving around?
"No," says Gott. "It's the women who end up caring for them. They're the ones suddenly forced to provide 24/7 assistance to their husband, parent or other loved one who can't function on their own anymore." A majority of women will eventually need long-term care themselves, "but they tend to live longer than men, and social norms still consign females to the care giving role. So they're the ones who have to sacrifice their futures when they're still relatively young and fit, with years of productive, enjoyable life still to live."
Long-term care insurance would free women from this forced care giving, since it provides funds for professional nursing home or in-home care, "but the vast majority of women have no long-term care buffer. No policy for their husband or mother or father, let alone for themselves." Ordinary health insurance doesn't cover long-term care, nor does Medicare. Medicaid does, but only for the less affluent who lack assets.
The media's recent attention to long-term care centers around the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) Act of 2009, which would create a public insurance program for adults who become functionally disabled. "But the benefits would be less than half of those provided by a typical private policy, and they wouldn't kick in for five years," Gott says. "This could be better than nothing for lower-income people, but inadequate, in my opinion, for the middle class. Women would still be saddled with significant care giving chores."
A better solution would be "significant new tax incentives to help people buy private LTC insurance on their own, tailored to their needs," Gott attests. "Women should be screaming about this to their representatives in Congress. Their futures depend on it."
Also, the talk shows should be talking it up, Gott says. "I'm surprised Oprah, The View, and 60 Minutes aren't all over this."
Forced care giving has an economic as well as lifestyle downside. "Household income dwindles whenever a woman has to give up her job for unpaid care duties," says Gott. "Multiply that by the millions of women affected, and think of the drain on the economy. It extends into the billions." Tax breaks for long-term care insurance, "would be a great federal investment, helping us pay for other aspects of health reform."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
And who are those individuals? The millions who succumb to longer-lasting illnesses and injuries, requiring help with eating, toileting, dressing or moving around?
"No," says Gott. "It's the women who end up caring for them. They're the ones suddenly forced to provide 24/7 assistance to their husband, parent or other loved one who can't function on their own anymore." A majority of women will eventually need long-term care themselves, "but they tend to live longer than men, and social norms still consign females to the care giving role. So they're the ones who have to sacrifice their futures when they're still relatively young and fit, with years of productive, enjoyable life still to live."
Long-term care insurance would free women from this forced care giving, since it provides funds for professional nursing home or in-home care, "but the vast majority of women have no long-term care buffer. No policy for their husband or mother or father, let alone for themselves." Ordinary health insurance doesn't cover long-term care, nor does Medicare. Medicaid does, but only for the less affluent who lack assets.
The media's recent attention to long-term care centers around the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) Act of 2009, which would create a public insurance program for adults who become functionally disabled. "But the benefits would be less than half of those provided by a typical private policy, and they wouldn't kick in for five years," Gott says. "This could be better than nothing for lower-income people, but inadequate, in my opinion, for the middle class. Women would still be saddled with significant care giving chores."
A better solution would be "significant new tax incentives to help people buy private LTC insurance on their own, tailored to their needs," Gott attests. "Women should be screaming about this to their representatives in Congress. Their futures depend on it."
Also, the talk shows should be talking it up, Gott says. "I'm surprised Oprah, The View, and 60 Minutes aren't all over this."
Forced care giving has an economic as well as lifestyle downside. "Household income dwindles whenever a woman has to give up her job for unpaid care duties," says Gott. "Multiply that by the millions of women affected, and think of the drain on the economy. It extends into the billions." Tax breaks for long-term care insurance, "would be a great federal investment, helping us pay for other aspects of health reform."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Congressional Credit Card Reform a 'Charade,' Consumer Advocate Says
/PRNewswire / -- The credit card legislation passed yesterday by the United States Senate won't protect consumers against outrageous interest rates or other egregious practices and represents an astounding victory for the banking and credit card industry, a consumer advocate said today.
Harvey Rosenfield, head of the California-based Consumer Education Foundation, noted that under the Senate bill:
-- There is no cap on credit card interest rates. In recent months,
companies have raised interest rates for some consumers -- even those
with good credit -- to over 30%.
-- Companies can raise interest rates on future purchases at any time.
The bill only prevents companies from increasing interest rates on
previous purchases.
-- Credit card companies can unilaterally changes the terms of the credit
card contract.
-- Companies can still use fine print "arbitration" clauses to prevent
consumers from suing them in court.
"This is not 'reform,' it's a charade," said Rosenfield. "After what American consumers have gone through, they deserve real relief. After all, the banking industry would not exist today were it not for a trillion dollar taxpayer bailout that allows banks to borrow our money from the US Treasury at a fraction of a percentage point and then turn around and loan it to us at twenty to fifty times that rate."
"The credit card industry's attempt to portray this as a defeat is just posturing designed to protect its political allies in Washington. As usual, no one in that city seems to be looking out for the interests of the people of our country."
The Consumer Education Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. In March, it co-published a two hundred page report on the causes of the financial debacle: "Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America." The report can be downloaded at WallStreetWatch.org.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Harvey Rosenfield, head of the California-based Consumer Education Foundation, noted that under the Senate bill:
-- There is no cap on credit card interest rates. In recent months,
companies have raised interest rates for some consumers -- even those
with good credit -- to over 30%.
-- Companies can raise interest rates on future purchases at any time.
The bill only prevents companies from increasing interest rates on
previous purchases.
-- Credit card companies can unilaterally changes the terms of the credit
card contract.
-- Companies can still use fine print "arbitration" clauses to prevent
consumers from suing them in court.
"This is not 'reform,' it's a charade," said Rosenfield. "After what American consumers have gone through, they deserve real relief. After all, the banking industry would not exist today were it not for a trillion dollar taxpayer bailout that allows banks to borrow our money from the US Treasury at a fraction of a percentage point and then turn around and loan it to us at twenty to fifty times that rate."
"The credit card industry's attempt to portray this as a defeat is just posturing designed to protect its political allies in Washington. As usual, no one in that city seems to be looking out for the interests of the people of our country."
The Consumer Education Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. In March, it co-published a two hundred page report on the causes of the financial debacle: "Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America." The report can be downloaded at WallStreetWatch.org.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
