On Tuesday night in Bellevue, Senator Karen Keiser (D-Kent), chair of the Senate Health & Long-Term Care Committee, and Representative Eileen Cody (D-Burien), chair of the House Health Care & Wellness Committee, held their second in a series of four healthcare town halls.
Of the first two events in the series, Senator Keiser said she believes, “These are marvelous. Democracy in action.”
Thus far the town halls have gone smoothly and have been largely disruption free. That is in stark contrast to what people have seen from national news sources. “People have a lot of concerns,” said Senator Keiser. “It’s a wonderful development, they’ve been misrepresented.”
This town hall attracted several more members of the political world, including Senator Rodney Tom (D-Bellevue), Representative Ross Hunter (D-Bellevue), Steve Hill, Administrator of the Health Care Authority, and former State Representative Max Vekich, who is currently running to be a Seattle Port Commissioner.
Senator Keiser and Representative Cody emphasized the need for a transition to evidence based methods in healthcare policy, which will help reduce healthcare costs. Keiser cited the $55 million in savings in 2008 on prescription drugs when the drugs were compared by patient outcomes and the effectiveness of the drugs rather than their cost.
Washington legislators are now working with Congressman Jay Inslee to adapt some of that language for H.R. 3200, the healthcare reform bill from the House of Representatives.
Federal healthcare reforms would include consumer protections that prevent rescission, the practice of taking insurance away from consumers after they have become ill, extending health benefits of younger adults that are on their parents’ health plan to the age of 26, ending gender discrimination, and ending cost-sharing for preventative care, such as expensive colonoscopies.
Another key theme in the discussion was aligning physician incentives to patient outcomes. Currently, if a patient has the wrong arm amputated and has to go back in to get the other one removed, the hospital would be paid for both operations. Keiser said that under the new system, “Avoidable errors will not be reimbursed.” That would mean only “paying the hospital when you have recovery” she said.
Confronting popular misnomers in the media, Keiser assured the crowd, “There will be no death panels. There has never been a death panel.”
The pair also confronted reimbursement inequities around the country. Keiser said, Washington is 11% under the national average for Medicare reimbursements, and Florida is 13% over the national average. Yet Washington State has better outcomes, said Keiser.
Currently, taxpayers and people with health insurance pay for those who do not have health insurance but utilize medical facilities. “Healthcare is a system of cost shifting,” said Keiser. “We pay one way or the other.”
Posts Tagged ‘Healthcare’
EVENTS: Healthcare Town Hall Meetings Tonight
Tuesday, August 25th, 2009Tuesday, August 25th
Representative Adam Smith
9th Congressional District
7:00pm – 8:30pm
Harry Long Stadium
6615 111th St SW
Lakewood, WA
State Senator Karen Keiser
State Representative Eileen Cody
7:00pm – 9:00pm
Temple B’nai Torah
15727 NE 4th St
Bellevue, WA
Healthcare town hall goes smoothly for state legislators
Tuesday, August 25th, 2009
Last night over 50 people attended a public discussion on healthcare policy reform with Senator Karen Keiser (D-Kent), chair of the Senate Health & Long-Term Care Committee, and Representative Eileen Cody (D-Burien), chair of the House Health Care & Wellness Committee.
The goal was to discuss the federal healthcare reform bills currently in play and how they would be implemented at the state level.
Unlike town halls hosted by representatives at the federal level, this town hall was far more polite, with fewer outbursts from proponents and opponents.
Senator Keiser said, the current system is in a “death spiral” and we have the option of either letting it go, or fixing it.
As part of a discussion on a public option, Representative Cody said, “Both Senator Keiser and I believe in a public option.” A former nurse for Group Health, the representative later told the crowd she does not believe a Co-op plan will be effective. “I don’t think that [co-ops] will meet the needs as quickly as what we need to do.”
Unlike many federal discussions, there was a fair deal of support for Medicare Advantage plans. “They’re not going to eliminate Medicare Advantage,” said Senator Keiser to a number of cheers.
Lee Marchisio, Governor Chris Gregoire’s Outreach Coordinator, read a statement from the Governor. “[Governor Gregoire] believes we can fix our healthcare system.”
Snohomish County Council Chair Mike Cooper hosted the event, speaking to the crowd first about his recent participation in the healthcare system, as a patient.
After the discussion ended, a gentleman played an unplanned sing-along on his banjo. The chorus of the song was, “Insurance man, we’re gonna fire you… on election day.” Many in the audience joined in by singing and clapping with the song.
Tonight the second healthcare meeting in this series will take place in Bellevue, again with Senator Keiser and Representative Cody.
Temple B’nai Torah
15727 NE 4th St
Bellevue, WA
7-9 pm
A physician’s take on reforming healthcare
Tuesday, August 25th, 2009We’re planning a series of posts by Washington State physicians, but this post from a Dr. Frank Lipman on Huffington Post pre-empts us. It’s well worth a read – particularly if you’re looking at the shortfalls of “reform” from the point of view of care delivery.
I think Washington is barking up the wrong tree. They’re busy arguing about what amounts to health insurance reform, while what this country needs is true health care reform.Interestingly, what is happening in Washington mirrors much of what we do in Western Medicine. We suppress symptoms instead of dealing with the root causes of the problem. All the options on the table now only address how we pay for healthcare, rather than why we are unhealthy and how we change that. If we don’t change why we are unhealthy, not only are we unlikely to secure better medical outcomes, but it will probably bankrupt us too.
For the rest of his post, click here.
Why not “Medicaid for all?”
Monday, August 24th, 2009I received an interesting question from a friend that I think is worth discussing a bit.
“Hey D.J.
I have what may be a silly question regarding the process of health care reform. Rather than drafting bills that effectively create an entirely new and additional system, why hasn’t the notion of expanding medicaid by eliminating age and income restrictions been discussed (maybe it has and I haven’t heard). It seems that it would be an easier avenue to garner support for increased medicaid spending, rather than creating what the Rs consider ‘bigger government.’ “
The primary reason a “Medicaid for all” system has not been promoted is that it’s not feasible given its own structure.
Medicaid covers primarily low-income individuals and, in many cases, large populations of children. The funding model is a hybrid of federal and state dollars, the proportions of which vary from state to state. And therein lies the rub.
To expand Medicaid would mean a large unfunded mandate to the states to pick up part of the cost of those lives. Most states simply don’t have the support of the electorate to increase taxes enough – or cut other services – to get enough money for the program’s expansion. The alternative would be that the federal government could pick up the tab, but with deficits already looming, and more likely to come with reform, it’s not likely the federal government would be willing to do that.
In fact, you’re seeing some of this play out already in this reform bill. Part of the reform package does include an increase in the income levels that trigger Medicaid eligibility. In the near term, meaning the next few years, the reform package includes monies for states from the federal government. However, those dollars gradually decline over time.
For instance, in the Senate Finance Committee whitepapers produced in April, they suggest increasing Medicaid eligibility to 150% for pregnant women, children and parents. The federal government would pay for that increase until 2015 at which point it would shift over 5 years to the states.
There isn’t a state in the country happy about that cost-shifting, unfunded mandate on its way. In some proposed cases, eligibility can run up to 400% of the federal poverty line – an even greater burden on its way for states.
Some governors are starting to pick up on this pending cost-shift, and are vocalizing their concern, as was reported in the NY Times a while back. It appears to be a pretty modest level of noise, but I have a feeling the comments will be loudest after the fact a few years down the road when states have to start picking up the tab.
Washington Basic Health Plan increasing rates
Wednesday, August 5th, 2009Washington State’s Basic Health Plan will no longer cut 40,000 people, but will instead increase monthly rates by about $25 and increase the annual deductible from $150 to $250.
The original idea was to cut 40,000 people from the program to save the state $250 million dollars. Washington has had to cut programs to make up for the nearly $9 billion budget deficit.
Washington Representatives threaten no vote on healthcare reform until Medicare reimbursement inequities addressed
Friday, July 24th, 2009Read the letter from Washington State Representatives Rick Larsen, Norm Dicks, Brian Baird, Adam Smith, and several more from around the country here: Click Here to download the letter.
In the above letter to the House leadership, several Washington State representatives and others from around the country suggest they will not vote for a healthcare reform package unless Medicare reimbursements inequities are addressed.
Physicians’ groups have been pushing to correct inequities in reimbursement rates in numerous government healthcare programs, and the MediFair Act, sponsored by Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, is an attempt at reaching that goal.
Due to lower reimbursement rates many Washington State physicians have struggled financially to provide healthcare for the Medicare patients they have or to accept new Medicare lives into their care.
With additional resources, Washington physicians can reinvest in patient care. This includes funding chronic care registries and health record banking that would have pronounced beneficial effects on healthcare delivery.
Washington physicians would receive about $1200 more per beneficiary if Washington State Medicare reimbursement rates were increased to the national average. Statewide, it represents an increase of over $1 billion.
Proponents of balancing the Medicare reimbursement rates suggest the current system is not the most effective path toward providing the highest quality patient care for patients in Washington State.