SCOTUS to Delay Ruling on ACA?

[This article posted on February 22, 2012. It is posted within the following categories: Corporate, Healthcare Policy & The Media, Politics & The Law, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

Recall that the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments next month as to the constitutionality of the ACA, with a decision expected on the insurance mandate of the law by this summer. Via TPM, there are indications that the high court may be considering an option to delay that decision.

The temporary escape hatch involves the Anti-Injunction Act, an age-old law that says courts may not halt a tax that isn’t yet being collected. (Under the Affordable Care Act, it won’t be collected until 2014.) Although the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals last fall tossed out a lawsuit against the mandate on this basis, most courts have decreed that the statute doesn’t apply here.

This opens up an entirely new wrinkle on the means to the ends of whatever decision is reached regarding this important provision in the law — so much so, that the SCOTUS has added time to discuss the taxation implications behind the “age old” Anti-Injunction Act.

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Federal Dollars Set to Loan Funds for Health Plan Startups in States Ahead of Reform

[This article posted on February 22, 2012. It is posted within the following categories: CMS, Corporate, Healthcare Policy & The Media, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

The federal government has given opponents of the ACA another reason to gripe: it has announced the formation of loans to initiate health plans on the new exchange platform in individual states. Think of the offering has a cooperative of sorts, built for the delivery of services within an exchange. CMS intends to oversee the adoption of at least one co-op per state via this method. Of course, emergency stopgaps are in place for the recipients of loans that may have problems satisfying the terms set forth by the feds; interest rates will be typically less than 1 percent.

Naturally, the behavior of such a healthcare delivery system is a reflection of the acronym used by the ACA’s program promoting it: the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan. Proponents of the initiative are bullish on it, as the GOP-led legislature has incrementally cut initial CMS plan estimates earmarked for this purpose. Skeptics wonder if these loan startups will carry the heft needed to compete with established private insurers in the newly formed exchange marketplace in two years. The best intentions of non-profits in this case will have to be tempered by the new reality of such competition for healthcare consumer loyalty come 2014 under the law. Should be interesting to watch. | LINK

ACA Medicare Advantage Provisions Lauded by Dems … as Discussions Continue on the Entitlement’s ‘Doc-Fix’

[This article posted on February 2, 2012. It is posted within the following categories: CMS, Politics & The Law, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

Here’s a convenient talking point for the Obama campaign as it begins to coalesce its message surrounding healthcare reform spending under the ACA: enrollment in Medicare Advantage is up since the beginning of the current decade, while premiums have been on the decline. HHS Sec’y Sebelius attributes this to the core provisions within the ACA allowing stipulations of bonus payments based upon quality, changes to enrollment periods, new medical loss ratio requirements and penalties, and the power for CMS to reject plan bids.

According to Humana’s last quarterly report, it bought two Medicare Advantage contractors in the third quarter of last year and enrollment increased over the past 12 months. Wellpoint also acquired an Advantage contractor in 2011 and saw increased enrollment.

While it may be a little premature to trumpet reform to this sector of Medicare spending by the government as being a permanent fixture of ACA implementation, it does highlight the need to revisit the drama surrounding payments to providers in FFS plans. Will the doc-fix ever be truly fixed? Bipartisan Senate and House members tasked with establishing a permanent end to reimbursement cuts to physicians will have their work cut out for them starting today — apparently considering everything from repeal of the SGR in its current form for Medicare spending to the use of war funds to finance such a permanent patch. Should be interesting.

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Survey: Public Opinion on ACA Ahead of SCOTUS Ruling

[This article posted on February 1, 2012. It is posted within the following categories: Corporate, Healthcare Policy & The Media, Knowledge & Medicine, Politics & The Law, Science & Research, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

We’re inching closer to the multi-day arguments set to happen before the SCOTUS regarding the constitutionality of the ACA, specifically, the individual mandate provision. A Kaiser Foundation tracking poll indicates that a third of all voters (respondents) think that the entire law will be revoked if the high court finds the plaintiffs’ assertions has cause. Perhaps what is more important is the fact that Americans remain divided over the issue of the existence of the law.

As the anniversary of the Affordable Care Act approaches on March 23, Americans remain as divided on the law as ever, with 37 percent in January saying they have a favorable view of it, and 44 percent having an unfavorable view. At the same time, the share of the public that favors expanding the law (31%) or keeping it in its current form (19%) remains larger than the share who would like to see the law repealed outright (22%) or repealed and replaced with a Republican-backed alternative (18%).

Mitt Romney, the probable GOP nominee for president, will have to exploit the differences between presiding over the initiation of the reform law’s progenitor in his home state of Mass. and Obama’s finished product — backed by the full faith and support of Big Insurance. | LINK to study PDF

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Wisconsin Governor Backs Up Anti-Healthcare Reform Claim with Denial of Fed Funds

[This article posted on January 19, 2012. It is posted within the following categories: Healthcare Policy & The Media, Politics & The Law, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

Embattled WI governor, Scott Walker (R), issued a statement yesterday opposing the implementation of a state exchange as provisioned by the ACA — opting to defer action on the measure until the case is heard by the SCOTUS in March. In doing so, he will be returning almost $40 M in federal funding earmarked for the healthcare exchange. Whether this is earnest on his part or merely a symbolic gesture to Wisconsin GOP faithful in the wake of a pending certified recall vote on his office remains to be seen. Walker has always been against the passage of the reform law, instead focusing on efforts to deny federal assistance in doing so (states which choose this path will have to demonstrate fiscal independence on healthcare exchange creation by 1/1/13 or will be mandated a program by the feds).

Is this entire episode a game of chicken by Walker in light of his sudden vulnerability? It is, if one listens to the rhetoric from the state’s Democrats on the issue. Advocacy groups are also weighing their own disapproval of the governor’s intentions. The SOCTUS will hear testimony on the constitutionality of the reform law (notably, the mandate for coverage) over a two day period by the end of March. By the end of Februrary numerous amicus briefs will be filed by both Obama admin (DOJ) and plaintiffs (states) in the case. In spite of all the rancor surrounding this issue, it will difficult to envision striking of the mandate provision, much less the entire reform law as two lower courts have offered split decisions on the matter — prompting the SCOTUS to act quickly on a decision on the entirety of the ACA well before the election. | PDF brief from UCB Labor Center in support of the ACA’s constitutionality

Whistleblower Lawsuit Prompts Fed Action on Alleged Medicare Long Term Care Fraud

[This article posted on January 5, 2012. It is posted within the following categories: CMS, Corporate, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

The long term care marketplace is one of those sectors in healthcare delivery on the cusp of markedly innovative practices in this young century, buoyed by the sudden proliferation of the senior Boomer demographic. Sky’s the limit on the impact of care services and offerings a market-based approach can muster on the eve of reform. Unfortunately, certain models are ripe for abuse.

The DOJ said today it joined a whistleblower case against AseraCare in federal court in Birmingham, Alabama, accusing the closely held company of seeking to cheat Medicare for the hospice care of patients who weren’t terminally ill. The U.S. is seeking three times the damages and a penalty of $5,500 to $11,000 per claim.

The hospice company is owned by a national company that provides services within LTC. Whistleblowers prompted the government action when the hospice operation recruited Medicare beneficiaries and continued to fraudulently collect payments by inappropriately cycling those patients under the hospice benefit. The process would continue upon initial termination of Medicare payments for those services once the initial LTC services ceased. Multiple referrals for covered services later, the LTC contractor would continue to collect those payments, based upon allegedly fraudulent qualifying practices by the LTC contractor/company.

The case is an interesting one which will, hopefully, provide Medicare reform in yet another overlooked care sector that will only increase in prevalence as the rate of patients diagnosed with chronic disease and disability skyrockets. More here

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Year-End Health Policy Musings

[This article posted on December 23, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: CMS, Corporate, Diversions, Healthcare Policy & The Media, Politics & The Law, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

As 2011 fades into 2012 and the inevitable roll of “best of” lists begins to infiltrate the print, online, and broadcast media universe, healthcare policy is sure to be included. One of those bridging year-end/new year issues apprears to be headed in a more assured direction, as the House GOP and Senate Dems have agreed on a 2 month extension of the payroll tax cut — including the Medicare “doc-fix” provision. Here’s hoping GOP Speaker Boehner does the right thing and continues to push for a yearlong extension…

Of course, this saga is the first of many issues sure to keep the health policy flames ablaze in ’12. Concerns by states of rising Medicaid expenses as reform draws closer; more permanent solutions to incremental and programmatic Medicare reimbursements to be sought; continued legal challenges to the ACA (which the SCOTUS will be taking up in an unprecedented 3-day affair); and last — but certainly not least — the 2012 campaign itself. Will an Obama defeat mean the end of reform as we presently are getting to know it, or will a (narrow?) victory for the president bring greater sympathy for cause, establishing the type of legacy for his top domestic issue he so desperately desires after two terms in office? As always, stay tuned. Next year looks to be an exciting one.

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Healthcare Consumers Search for Urgent Care ‘Option’ in Quest for Value

[This article posted on December 12, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: Corporate, Knowledge & Medicine, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

As a primary care geriatrician, I am especially fortunate to have the dual experience of meeting the difficulty of treating chronic disease and, at the same time, making a difference in the lives of patients and their families. But, I have also been bitten by the acute care bug. For the past couple of years, I have also done urgent care medicine part time. I really enjoy it. And it seems to be falling into a healthcare delivery niche, as far as reform is concerned.

Across the country, an estimated 3 million patients visit these centers each week, according to the Urgent Care Association of America, a trade group based in Chicago. To meet increased demand, the number of facilities has steadily increased from 8,000 in 2008 to more than 9,200 this year, the association said. About 600 new urgent centers opened this year. Fueling that rise are two longstanding trends — crowded emergency rooms and a lack of primary care doctors. Urgent care operators also say another factor is helping to propel business: the drive to lower costs.

I’m not sure what to make of the supposition that the cost savings derived from urgent care as an emergency department surrogate. In the long run, these presumed cost savings will likely be minimal if patients-as-conumers remain in the mindset that urgent care access is equivalent to primary care access. Yes, the decreasing numbers of primary care physicians may be entering a critical phase, and as this scenario demonstrates, urgent care as a delivery mechanism, will not replace the reality of impaired access to primary care. Paitents desirous of value as recipients of health care will always gravitate toward the path of least resistance. Only by increasing the primary care workforce can that level of access and value actually be realized. | LINK

Functionally Strangled by Drug Treatment, Minnesota Patient Loses Trust but Gains Empowerment

[This article posted on December 9, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: Corporate, Diversions, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

When she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, a Minnesota woman thought that her carefully chosen neurologist had her best interests in mind when prescribing initial treatments to modify the disease. That was before a little detective work uncovered the real motivation for her physician’s patterns of prescribing that left her even more debilitated than when she was initially showing symptoms.

It worried me that none of them ever suggested that I discontinue treatment—or switch to another treatment—even after I reported that my injection site reactions were affecting my quality of life. Despite the fact that my neurologist insisted that I begin disease-modifying therapy, I was never contacted by him, his nurse, or anyone else in the neurology clinic with questions about how my Copaxone injections were going.

The patient, a U of M philosophy graduate student, puts into her own words the ethical issue she gradually uncovered while under the specialist’s care. Just how influential are pharma companies’ financial compensations for physicians who choose to prescribe their products? Just how willing are they to prescribe knowingly untested medications without concern as to their problematic and potentially lethal adverse effects? Her answer came at her next appointment, after enduring months of increasingly debilitating pain and enfeebling function from the trial with the first drug.

[M]y neurologist informed me that I’d begun to develop lesions inside my brain stem. He explained that this was a very bad place to have lesions, occupied as it is with regulating some of the body’s basic functions, such as breathing. He strongly recommended that I go back on MS treatment, suggesting this time a drug called Tysabri (natalizumab), which had worked wonders for some of his patients but also carried some amount of risk. Worried about the new lesions, but knowing little about the drug he was advising, I told him I’d think about it. I needed to be convinced through my own investigations that this drug would be worth taking.

Her investigations were not only telling, but they are also indicative of an all-to-familiar refrain for patients of (mostly specialist) physicians who pocket major coin from pharma companies to get these ridiculously expensive agents to the marketplace, at the risk of patient harm. In Minnesota, the patient was assisted by a database which lists pharmaceutical third parties with which a prescribing physician has a financial interest. She makes little doubt of her eagerness for this requirement to spread nationally as the result of the reform law. | PDF LINK

Minnesota Makes Public Exchange Prototypes

[This article posted on December 6, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: Corporate, Healthcare Policy & The Media, Knowledge & Medicine, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

Are the citizens of Minnesota ready to take a look at prototype models for healthcare exchanges? The marketplace stimuli as part of reform are being unveiled today. Although it may seem early for such exposure, MN must demonstrate that it can operate an exchange as part of reform much sooner — just over a year from now, in fact. Four companies have placed demo modules up for public review. Playing around with a couple of them, I get the feel of sites that are actually consumer portals into products that resemble reservation services, only instead of purchasing a flight or hotel accomodations, I am choosing a provider which can treat certain chronic conditions more cheaply, for instance, in one organization in comparison another based upon my personal situation.

States participating in this exercise which are not able to fully integrate these virtual exchanges at the outset of reform will get fed assists. Minnesota seems ahead of the curve here, as the governor has taken a seemingly personal role in getting this state’s offerings public and implementing diligent task-force support to the process early.

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Berwick Offers Criticisms on Eve of Departure

[This article posted on December 5, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: CMS, Healthcare Policy & The Media, Politics & The Law, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

He’s leaving his much embattled post, and he is not mincing words. Don Berwick will be stepping down as CMS head in lieu of what was sure to be a highly contentious Senate confirmation procedure next year. Calling much of what Medicare “does” as wasteful, the departing CMS chief sounded more like he was delivering a eulogy than offering up hopeful solutions to be implemented in his absence.

Dr. Donald M. Berwick, listed five reasons for what he described as the “extremely high level of waste.” They are overtreatment of patients, the failure to coordinate care, the administrative complexity of the health care system, burdensome rules and fraud. “Much is done that does not help patients at all,” Berwick said, “and many physicians know it.”

Berwick’s ascension came at a time in which President Obama was looking for a CMS chief who shared the same sense of analytical urgency in efforts to fix the nation’s ailing healthcare delivery system. Berwick sounded the clarion call for reform, but received very little cooperation from the GOP side of the ideological aisle, with those members of congress (and some Dems) essentially putting up a wall between him and any actionable improvements. Perhaps his own words project why he was essentially doomed from the start.

Berwick said he had not sought the job. Indeed, he said, “I did not even know if I was fit for it.” He took the post, he said, because he sensed that immense “tectonic shifts” were occurring in the health care delivery system.“I came with an agenda,” Berwick said. “I wanted to try to change the agency to be a force for improvement, covering one out of three Americans.”

Restating the obvious really does physicians he laments no good unless positive change, outside of obvious hyperbole, does occur. According to many pundits — including this one — his replacement offers more of the same, with true change occuring only if legislative control swings back to the Dems in 2012. | LINK

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Healthcare Follies

[This article posted on November 20, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: Diversions, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

It seems a little simplistic, as a well as little troublesome, to place the entire immediate future of healthcare reform as it relates to the individual mandate in the hands of such an august body. (Image via KFF.)

[This article is contained within the following tags:

Minnesota: Healthcare Economist Predicts Positive Access to Care Under Reform

[This article posted on November 19, 2011. It is posted within the following categories: Knowledge & Medicine, Politics & The Law, Science & Research, via Michael Douglas, MD, MBA.]

Political coalitions here in Minnesota have largely towed the Democratic line, having gone decidedly blue in the last presidential election in spite of reports that the state was a purple one “in play” in an ultimate result that was anything but close.  The building within the democratic base also stands to reap benefits with respect to the reform law by its inception in 2014.

This, according to an MIT healthcare economist.

[Jonathon Gruber] told members of a governor’s task force Thursday that the federal health care law will reduce the health insurance racial disparities in Minnesota. [...] Gruber projects that almost 300,000 additional Minnesota residents would gain insurance coverage by 2016, and that those who currently buy health insurance on the individual market could pay 20 percent less in premiums after taxes.

Gruber was speaking in terms of the savings generated by increased access to healthcare with the advent of exchanges under reform. Dem Governor Mark Dayton has recently formed a couple of healthcare task forces — one of which will exclusively work to develop an exchange to increase access to the state’s un- and under-insured. | LINK

[This article is contained within the following tags: