E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 experts provides the training. They include fellow police officers, mental health professionals, family members and people who live with mental health conditions. In addition to clinical information, and learning about community resources (and how to link to them), trainees hear personal stories, acquire de-escalation skills and put knowledge into practice through role play. Officers and people who have had their own crises act out a number of no-holdsbarred, real-life scenarios. They also get a sense of what it's like to experience extreme mental health symptoms, such as hearing voices. It's not always pretty to watch or listen to, but the outcomes of the CIT training show great promise. Research shows that when CIT trained officers respond to a call there are myriad benefits. The use of physical restraints goes way down, as do injuries to people in crisis and to officers. People are less likely to be arrested and taken to jail. And because officers know how to connect people to community services, the need to use the most expensive emergency services can sometimes be avoided. Equally valuable is the goodwill that CIT engenders. Officers report greater satisfaction in knowing how to help people, and citizens report greater trust in their police. If cities as large as Philadelphia and Houston and rural communities such as New River Valley in Virginia and Cambria County, Pennsylvania, can institute CIT, why aren't there teams in every community? Of course it costs money to pull officers off the street, to train police dispatchers, to pay for materials and for costs associated with using community buildings. Grants from government entities and foundations can at times help to offset these costs. And much of the training is done by volunteers. While the basics of the training program remain the same, it must be tailored to each locality. Therefore, more than anything else instituting a CIT program takes commitment and coordination. This usually begins with a person, or small group of people, building a coalition of community stakeholders. How many fewer tragedies might there be if more people stepped forward to become CIT champions? (CNN, 1/10/14) How To Stop Tragic Shootings Of Mentally Ill By Debbie F. Plotnick It breaks my heart to read about the death of Keith Vidal, the North Carolina teenager who, his family says, suffered from schizophrenia, and who was shot and killed after police arrived to help with a crisis last Sunday. Many details of the case are still unclear, and it's hard to know who or what is responsible. Tragically, incidents such as this appear over and over again in the news. The scenario goes something like this: Police are called to assist with a person who is experiencing a mental health crisis. There is an escalation in tensions, perhaps the introduction of a real or imagined threat, and this leads to someone getting hurt, or worse, killed. And it's not always the person in crisis; sometimes it is the police officer. Debbie Plotnick Another all too common outcome is that the person in crisis ends up not at the hospital, but at the jail. Police officers, families and certainly people with mental health conditions don't want this to happen. And it doesn't have to. There is a time-tested, well researched way to lessen the likelihood that calling the police for assistance will end badly. In 1988, an approach was developed in Memphis, Tennessee, that has been slowly — too slowly — making its way throughout the country. It's called Crisis Intervention Team Training, usually just referred to as CIT. Here's how CIT works: A team of police officers (or other first responders) from one department or jurisdiction, or from a coalition of neighboring departments, undergoes a comprehensive week-long (40-hour) training program that does several things. It teaches some basics about mental illnesses, substance abuse disorders and developmental disabilities, and it explains how to recognize and interact with someone with these conditions that is crisis. News reports indicate that the detective who was put on administrative leave after the Keith Vidal shooting had not completed the CIT program, though others in the Southport Police Department, where he served, had. If true, we can't know whether this would have changed the outcome, but it most certainly could have helped. A cadre of community http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/10/opinion/plotnickteen-shooting/index.html?hpt=op_t1 Mental Health Technicians In Demand San Jacinto College's certificate comprises 33 hours of courses and is intended to take a year to complete -- fall, spring and summer. More and more people are seeking psychiatric services to help manage or solve issues ranging from stress at work or ongoing depression to anxiety disorders and substance abuse. As the demand for psychiatric services continues to grow, so too will the need for qualified mental health technicians. In fact, 1 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 employment of mental health technicians - also known as psychiatric technicians or psychiatric aides - is expected to increase 15 percent from 2010 to 2020, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The BLS also notes that "there is likely to be an increase in the number of people with cognitive mental diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease. Demand for psychiatric technicians and aides in residential facilities are expected to rise as a result." Those hoping to become mental health technicians need postsecondary education and some degree of on-the-job training before they may start working without direct supervision. Local community colleges, such as San Jacinto College, provide the education and training to pursue a career as a mental health technician. San Jacinto College's mental health services program is designed to train these technicians. The mental health technician training program prepares students to care for mentally impaired or emotionally disturbed individuals following physician's instructions and hospital procedures. "Our program provides a one-year certificate that comprises 33 hours of courses and is intended to take a year to complete - fall, spring and summer. It encompasses eight courses that deal with the various elements and skills a mental health technicians will need," said Alfred Lara, director of San Jacinto College's mental health services program. "These include abnormal psychology, assessment, group therapy, basic nursing skills and other relevant courses culminating to a capstone course of a practicum, where we send students into a psychiatric hospital setting for a semester to put into practice the concepts learned, and get training from experienced mental health technicians and counselors." Lara said San Jacinto College also maintains partnerships with community centers and psychiatric hospitals that allow students to immerse themselves at their facilities and benefit from the additional practicum experience. "Oftentimes, students are hired by these facilities at which they have completed their practicum, and this is the best source for them to be hired. For those not hired on at their practicum site, our practicum coordinator assists each graduate in finding proper placement for employment," Lara said. Houston Community College also offers a Human Service Technology program, designed for students interested in the field of human services. The program equips students for employment as technicians in a range of human service facilities, including those seeking to become mental health technicians. "The Human Service Technology Program offers classes in basic counseling, orientation to social services, counseling theories, family interventions, assessment, group counseling and co-occurring disorders," said Richard Rosing, a mental health associate for Human Service Technology at Houston Community College's Coleman College for Health Sciences. "The complete associate degree takes two years, with specialty areas being able to complete in either one semester or one year." (Houston Chronicle, 1/10/14) http://www.chron.com/news/article/Mental-healthtechnicians-in-demand-5132102.php Teen Homelessness: An American Disgrace In the US, children under 18 represent one-third of the US homeless population. 2.8 million American children have at least one episode of homelessness every year, while 1.35 million are permanently homeless. Sadly it’s not a new problem. Seattle first became concerned about their homeless teens in the 1990s. In 1999, shortly before moving to New Zealand, I worked in a community clinic with a special outreach program for homeless teenagers. Prior to the 2008 economic meltdown, approximately ten percent of homeless teens had access to state and city-run shelters. Over the last five years, chronic state and city budget deficits have forced most of them to close. US Teen Homelessness Rivals the Third World In third world countries, homeless children are called “street kids.” The US government prefers to call them “unaccompanied minors.” Giving it a fancy name on it doesn’t hide the fact that rate of homeless American children per capita is worse than some third world countries. Among countries who keep a count of homeless children under 18, India has the highest rate of street children per capita, with 1 homeless child per 61 residents. Egypt is next with 1 per 110, then Pakistan (1 per 120), Kenya (1 per 133), Russia (1 per 141), and Congo (1 per 148). The per capita rate of child homelessness in the US is 1 per 245 residents. This is worse than the Philippines (1 per 360), Honduras (1 per 370), Jamaica (1 per 419), Uruguay (1 per 1,000), and Morocco (1 per 1066). Germany, in contrast, has 1 homeless child per 4,100 residents. Why American Teens Become Homeless Approximately fifty percent of homeless teenagers wind up on the streets due to conflict with their parents. Another twenty percent are there due to a breakdown of their foster care placement. Others are homeless because their parents are homeless. Of teenagers made homeless by family conflict, forty percent are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual teens whose parents refuse to accept their sexuality (25% of LGBT teens are rejected by their parents). Another large proportion are victims of physical, sexual and/or emotional abuse. Forty percent of homeless teenagers report being beaten. Twenty-five percent report a history of sexual 2 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 abuse. Forty percent have parents who are mentally ill or who have substance abuse problems. Ten percent have run away because they’re pregnant. Some leave home because of alcohol and drug problems of their own. Many homeless teens work at minimum wage jobs that don’t pay enough for an apartment. However faced with a (true) unemployment rate over 20%, most face long term unemployment. legislative advocacy director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness. "This is a key protection. It's a cornerstone of what has made the benefit work for people with mental illness." Sperling said that patients with mental health issues often have to try a variety of drugs before they find the right one for their condition. He questioned whether the change would help crack down on the problem of improperly prescribed antipsychotics, saying it amounted to a blunt instrument. The National Kidney Foundation also voiced worries. Legislative policy director Tonya Saffer said transplant patients often depend on combinations of medication, so having the broadest possible choice is crucial. "Covering all immunosuppressant drugs is very important for the patient and very important to protect the transplanted organ from rejection," Saffer said. The proposal could lead to "patients having to go through multiple channels to try and get a drug," which would put patients at risk, she added. In the proposal, the administration said the new policy was developed after careful consultation with a broad range of experts. The three other types of drugs that have protected status — for cancer, HIV/AIDS and preventing seizures — would remain protected. If adopted in the coming months, the new policy could take effect as early as 2015. The administration estimates it could save the taxpayers a total of $720 million by 2019. Beneficiaries may also be able to save. That's because the drug plans can drive a harder bargain for manufacturer discounts when a drug is not protected. "The circumstances that existed when this policy was originally implemented have changed dramatically in the more than seven years the program has been in operation," the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said in its proposal. "We are concerned that requiring essentially open coverage of certain classes and categories of drugs presents both financial disadvantages and patient welfare concerns ... as a result of increased drug prices and overutilization," the proposal added. A leading industry analyst said the proposal would represent a significant change for Medicare's prescription benefit, which is highly popular with beneficiaries. "It is a weakening of a patient protection," said Dan Mendelson, CEO of Avalare Health, a market analysis firm. "I'm not sure that Medicare saves money from this kind of a change," he added. "Other elements of the program may have a cost increase if people are not using medications in the right way." (New York Times, 1/11/14) Good links regarding teen homelessness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_children http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/teenangst/201101/homeless-teens http://globalgeopolitics.net/wordpress/2011/03/31/u -s-budget-cuts-threaten-handful-of-beds-forhomeless-youth/ http://www.shelterhouse.on.ca/article/youthhomelessness-147.asp http://www.dosomething.org/actnow/tipsandtools/b ackground-11-causes-teen-homelessness (Salon, 1/10/14) http://open.salon.com/blog/stuartbramhall/2014/01/ 10/teen_homelessness_an_american_disgrace Proposed Medicare Drug Change Stirs Access Worries In a move that some fear could compromise care for Medicare recipients, the Obama administration is proposing to remove special protections that guarantee seniors access to a wide selection of three types of drugs. The three classes of drugs — widely used antidepressants, antipsychotics and drugs that suppress the immune system to prevent the rejection of a transplanted organ — have enjoyed special "protected" status since the launch of the Medicare prescription benefit in 2006. That has meant that the private insurance plans that deliver prescription benefits to seniors and disabled beneficiaries must cover "all or substantially all" medications in the class, allowing the broadest possible access. The plans can charge more for costlier drugs, but they can't just close their lists of approved drugs, or formularies, to protected medications. In a proposal published Friday in the Federal Register, the administration called for removing protected status from antidepressants, antipsychotics, and immunosuppressant drugs. The proposal said that status it is no longer needed to guarantee access, would save millions of dollars for taxpayers and beneficiaries alike, and could help deal with the problem of improperly prescribed antipsychotics drugs in nursing homes. But advocates for patients are strongly criticizing the idea, saying it could potentially limit access to critically needed medications for millions of people. "We are disturbed by this," said Andrew Sperling, http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/01/11/us/p olitics/ap-us-medicaredrugs.html?ref=aponline&_r=0 Weather Swings Can Hurt 3 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 headaches, migraines, arthritis, joint pain, and sinus and inner-ear problems. But in an unexpected seasonal twist, Mississippi State University meteorologist Grady Dixon said suicide rates drop during the winter. The peak season for suicides is June, he said, but the reason remains a mystery. "Usually the thing people are most interested in or surprised to hear is that while people have depression in the cold, dark winter months, suicides around the globe, with no exception, most commonly occur during the late spring and early summer," he said. "It's the broken-promises effect. If you are clinically depressed and have seasonal affective disorder, you expect spring to be better. But if you are clinical ill, you probably won't get better in the spring when you expect to feel better. It's not a weather effect but the lack of a weather effect that causes the suicide." January does bring the year's highest mortality rate, likely due to higher rates of infections, including influenza deaths and other weather impacts on people, especially the elderly. The National Weather Service said temperatures will climb to the lower 40s today, then to the low 50s on Saturday before dropping back to the low 40s on Sunday. The weekend will feature drizzle, rain, freezing rain and snow, which won't accumulate, with total precipitation of a half to three-quarters of an inch. Hendricks said this winter's weather extremes are occurring because we're in a transition between el nino and la nina weather patterns, which are nearly yearlong weather trends involving the heating and cooling of the north and northeastern Pacific Ocean. Despite the temperature extremes, with more likely to come, winter highs and lows will average near normal by winter's end. We've also had more than double the normal snowfall for the season, with 30.3 inches through Wednesday, as compared to the normal of 13.5, he said. Temperatures are expected to return to normal by Wednesday. Weather and climate psychologist Alan E. Stewart of the University of Georgia said men and women react differently to severe weather. Women are more cautious than men. Maximizing reproduction requires caution, with a slight tendency for expectant mothers to spend their final trimester during late spring and summer months before giving birth in August or September. Winter weather historically has posed harsh challenges for moms and babies to stay warm, find food and avoid infections. CDC statistics showed that 9 percent of all babies in 2010 were born in August with 7.5 percent born in February. OK, the numbers aren't dramatic, but the trend holds. Men are a different story. "Men take more weather-related risks than women, including driving across roadways that have water flowing, or being outside during thermal extremes, or not taking cover when thunder is heard and lightning is seen, or not sheltering when Physical, Mental Health Biometeorology — the study of weather's impact on living organisms including humans — uses different terminology but concludes that weather itself, but specifically dramatic shifts in weather, can impact physical and even mental health. The good health news? Experiencing such horrible stretches of weather better prepares us for what National Weather Service meteorologist Lee Hendricks said is a strong likelihood of another cold snap this winter. The so-called polar vortex, blamed for the sub-zero temperatures, could send us into another mental and physical vortex before spring. "It's a huge swing physiologically," Jennifer Vanos, a biometeorologist and assistant professor of atmospheric science at Texas Tech University, said about Tuesday's record low of minus 9 degrees Fahrenheit sandwiched by unseasonable highs in the 50s. "People were not prepared. Physiologically, adapting is a tough thing to do when you are used to certain weather day after day." But if another cold snap occurs, "people will be prepared," she said, especially for those 20 and under who never experienced such sub-zero temperatures. "They will know what to do, how to dress, and it won't be as stressful." Long airplane rides usually are necessary for such swings in temperature. It's like flying round trip from Myrtle Beach, S.C., to the Yukon. The Associated Press reported 21 deaths nationwide from the cold snap, most in the Midwest. The normal high locally for early January is 36 degrees with a low of 21. In the week ending Saturday, if the forecasted high of 52 holds true, the region will have experienced a 61-degree swing. Last Sunday alone saw a temperature swing of 57 degrees -- 50 to minus 7, Hendricks said. Along with potential dangers of extremely low temperatures, including hypothermia, frostbite and blood vessel constriction leading to heart attacks, quick shifts in barometric pressure, high or low, represents an unsuspected health villain. Vanos said people are most comfortable with barometric pressure of 30 inches of mercury (inHg). When it quickly rises to 30.3 inHg or higher, or drops to 29.7 or lower, the risk of heart attack increases. High barometric pressure constricts blood vessels, which hinders blood flow, while low pressure expands blood vessels, making it more difficult for the heart to pump blood. The highest prevalence of heart attacks occurs within 24 hours of swings of that magnitude in barometric pressure, she said. "That effect is strongest in the fall and winter," she said. It's not yet known whether the rate of heart attacks increased this week. Jack Boston, senior meteorologist at AccuWeather.com, said barometric pressure rose from 29.77 inHg at 7 a.m. Monday to 30.36 inHg by 7 a.m. Tuesday. Vanos, among others, says changes in barometric pressure also cause 4 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 there's word from the National Weather Service of a storm or tornado," said Stewart. (Austin American Statesman, 1/10/14) at age 11, by their teachers as being diligent, focused, patient, academically successful and strong in social skills. We followed these young people until they were 19 and studied their mental and physical health, focusing on depression, drug use, aggression and criminal behavior. As in past studies, those who were rated positively at age 11 had relatively few of these problems when they were 19. When we looked beneath the surface, though, these apparently resilient young people were not faring well. Compared with others in the study, they were more obese, had higher blood pressure and produced more stress hormones. Remarkably, their health was even worse than peers who, at age 11, had been rated by teachers as aggressive, difficult and isolated. They were at substantial risk for developing diabetes or hypertension down the line. We continued studying these youths as they grew into adults. Perhaps not surprisingly, the lower-income youths who made it to college used fewer drugs and drank less alcohol. To be academically competitive with their classmates, they had to stay focused on their schoolwork. As in the first study, though, their resilience was only skin deep. At age 20, the lowerincome college kids had greater obesity, higher blood pressure and more stress hormones than those who did not make it to college. (Their health was also worse than that of peers in more affluent, educated neighborhoods.) These patterns mesh with other social-science findings, which suggest that upward mobility does not always provide the expected return on investment when it comes to health. If we look at the life expectancy associated with a college education, blacks gain about four fewer years from bachelor’s degrees than do whites. What is it about upward mobility that undermines the health of these young Americans? In our studies, most participants are the first in their families to attend college. They feel tremendous internal pressure to succeed, so as to ensure their parents’ sacrifices have been worthwhile. Many feel socially isolated and disconnected from peers from different backgrounds. They may encounter racism and discrimination. Some young people respond to the pressure by concentrating on character strengths that have served them well, cultivating an even more determined persistence to succeed. This strategy, however, can backfire when it comes to health. Behaving diligently all of the time leaves people feeling exhausted and sapped of willpower. Worn out from having their noses to the grindstone all the time, they may let their health fall by the wayside, neglecting sleep and exercise, and like many of us, overindulging in comfort foods. What can we do to mitigate these negative health effects? To start, schools and colleges that serve lowerincome students could provide health education, screenings and checkups as a part of their http://www.mystatesman.com/news/ap/health/weat her-swings-can-hurt-physical-mental-health/ncjN9/ Can Upward Mobility Cost You Your Health? Americans love a good rags-to-riches story. Even in an age of soaring inequality, we like to think that people can still make it big here if they work hard and stay out of trouble. The socioeconomic reality of most of the last four decades — stagnant wages, soaring income and wealth inequality, and reduced equality of opportunity — have dented, but not destroyed, the appeal of the American dream. Those who do climb the ladder, against the odds, often pay a little-known price: Success at school and in the workplace can exact a toll on the body that may have long-term repercussions for health. Among American children, there are wide socioeconomic gaps on many dimensions of wellbeing: school achievement, mental health, drug use, teenage pregnancy and juvenile incarceration, to name just a few. Despite the risks that lowerincome children face, we also know that a significant minority beat the odds. They perform admirably in school, avoid drugs and go on to college. Psychologists refer to these children as resilient, because they achieve positive outcomes in adverse circumstances. They do so in part by cultivating a kind of determined persistence. They set goals for the future, work diligently toward them, navigate setbacks, stay focused on the long term and resist temptations that might knock them off the ladder to success. Several years ago, we began studying these resilient young people, trying to find out if their success stories also translated into physical health benefits. We reasoned that if disadvantaged children were succeeding academically and emotionally, they might also be protected from health problems that were more common in lower-income youths. As it turned out, the exact opposite was true. These young people were achieving success by all conventional markers: doing well academically, staying out of trouble, making friends and developing a positive sense of self. Underneath, however, their physical health was deteriorating. Our first hints of this pattern came from a study of 489 rural African-American young people in Georgia, whom one of us, Gene Brody, has been tracking for more than 15 years. Most came from families who were working but poor. In 2010, their average family income was about $12,000 a year; about half lived below the poverty line. We found a subgroup of resilient children who, despite these obstacles, were rated, 5 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 curriculum. Second, schools and clinics could offer stress management programs, targeting lowerincome, higher-achieving young people. Finally, we could develop programs to help these young people blow off steam in productive ways, pairing them with mentors who have navigated similar life challenges. Policymakers should do everything they can so that those young people who overcome so much to live the American dream have the health to enjoy the fruits of their efforts. that has engulfed outgoing governor Robert F. McDonnell, will be filed next week. Following a path set by McDonnell (R), lawmakers from both parties have filed measures to restore voting rights for nonviolent felons. The social issues that have dominated past sessions are largely absent from the agenda this year. There are multiple bills from Democrats hoping to repeal the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and roll back the mandatory ultrasound that passed amid great controversy two years ago, but these measures stand little chance in a House dominated by conservatives. At the same time, Republicans aren’t on the offensive. Only one Republican has filed any bills related to abortion or birth control this session: Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William), an aggressive and reliable conservative on social issues. And he’s only got a few in the hopper. While Marshall says he’s not backing down “in the least,” he acknowledged that his party leadership is not interested in joining the fight. “Maybe they think they’re mother hens, protecting their Republicans from I don’t know what,” he said. “Laying down and playing dead; I find that disgusting and obsequious.” One Republican House bill would allow religious expression in public schools, and a bipartisan measure would compensate people who were involuntarily sterilized by the state — both top priorities of the influential Family Foundation. The latter initiative failed last year, with opponents citing a lack of funds. Sen. Thomas A. Garrett Jr. (RGoochland) has taken flak from liberal blogs for a bill that would clarify the state’s anti-sodomy “Crimes Against Nature” law, ruled unconstitutional in 2013 by a federal appeals court. His original bill said only that the law did not apply to consenting adults; he has since amended it to include consenting teenagers. However, Garrett said, “I draw the line at grown-ups having sex with kids.” A former prosecutor, he said he had seen a 37-yearold convicted under that law for propositioning a 13year-old and did not want that man to be able to appeal on the grounds of constitutionality. A bill from freshman Del. Marcus B. Simon (D-Fairfax) would make illegal “revenge porn,” the distribution of revealing photographs of another person without consent and with intent to cause distress. California and New Jersey are the only states in the country with laws targeting the practice. Another bill from state Sen. Henry L. Marsh III (D-Richmond) would ban the celebratory shooting of guns in the air, a dangerous tradition that killed a 7-year-old in Chesterfield County last July Fourth. And a bipartisan effort in the House and Senate is underway to make sure Virginia textbooks note that the Sea of Japan is also called the East Sea, the title Koreans prefer. “It is not an attempt to change U.S. policy or the name of the ocean, that’s above my pay grade,” said Sen. David W. Marsden (D-Fairfax). Gregory E. Miller ([email protected]) and Edith Chen ([email protected]) are professors of psychology and fellows of the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University. Gene H. Brody ([email protected]) is professor of human development and family studies and the director of the Center for Family Research at the University of Georgia. (Dallas Morning News, 1/10/13) http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sundaycommentary/20140110-can-upward-mobility-costyou-your-health.ece Medicaid Expansion, Not Social Issues, Expected To Dominate Va. Legislative Session One issue will dominate Virginia’s legislature this year above most others: the proposed expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The measure carries huge financial implications for hospitals and other health-care providers. But it is also a deeply divisive issue, and its success or failure will signal how effectively incoming governor Terry McAuliffe can work with a Republicandominated legislature. Republicans, meanwhile, are more interested in discussing just about anything else with the governor, whom they have praised for his outreach generally. “We’ve talked about areas where I thought there was common ground,” said House Speaker William J. Howell (R-Stafford). “If I were governor, those are the issues I’d focus on in my first year.” Those issues include education reform, in which Dels. Thomas A. “Tag” Greason (RLoudoun) and K. Robert Krupicka Jr. (D-Alexandria) are both working on overhauling and paring back the state’s Standards of Learning tests. There’s more disagreement over a law passed last year creating a state district to take over failing schools; some lawmakers hope to repeal it, while Greason thinks the first order of business should be to make it work. “Let’s make sure we’re not saddling the commonwealth with an inoperable law,” he said. Howell is planning a special committee to deal with mental health, an issue given new urgency after the suicide of the son of state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (DBath). A bipartisan ethics bill, crafted before the session began and stemming from the gifts scandal 6 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 He just wants the textbooks to reflect the controversy, he said, which is taught on state tests. Similar legislation has died before, but he plans to put a major push behind it this time, along with legislation to help teenagers given sentences of life without parole for crimes that were not deadly. Sen. Richard H. Stuart (R-Westmoreland) wants to ban drilling for oil and gas on the coastal plain east of Interstate 95, saying it’s necessary to protect the state’s groundwater — an environmental bill that will probably attract Democratic support. Lobbyists and lawmakers say legislation to regulate fracking in the state’s Northern Neck is likely to come up as well. But any amount of bipartisan cooperation will be overshadowed by Medicaid, especially if McAuliffe holds to a campaign promise to ignore any budget that does not include the expansion. “I’ve dismissed what he said as being a freshman mistake,” said Sen. Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. (R-James City). Lobbyists in the healthcare industry hold out hope that a deal with Republicans can be made. (Washington Post, 1/10/14) War On Poverty Spurs Political, Academic Battles Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who’s been working to mend fences with his conservative base, has now jumped into the issue of poverty and federal antipoverty programs, proposing drastic changes in the way the government seeks to help the poor. But Rubio’s proposals, timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the start of the War on Poverty, are based on debatable assertions about the cost and success of that war. “Fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson declared a big government war on poverty,” Rubio said in a YouTube news release this week. “Well, since then American taxpayers have spent about $20 trillion on welfare and other government programs that claim to lift people out of poverty.” Still, he said, there are millions of Americans classified as living in poverty, and “in my home state, nearly 1 in 5 Floridians live in poverty. … Isn’t it time to declare big government’s war on poverty a failure?” Experts on both sides of the ideological divide say the claim of $20 trillion in spending is overstated — and many academic researchers are saying that the positive effects of the war on poverty have been understated. “The official poverty measure fails to show or correctly identify that true poverty has fallen noticeably in the U.S. over the past five decades,” said economist James X. Sullivan of Notre Dame University, author of a recent study on how to measure poverty rates. “If you correct for well-known flaws in the official measure, it shows poverty has fallen noticeably. ... Done correctly, it suggests we’re winning the war on poverty.” Rubio’s criticism of the War on Poverty, a series of federal programs aimed at improving the economic prospects of the nation’s poor, has been raised by Republicans for decades. “In 1964 the famous War on Poverty was declared, and a funny thing happened. Poverty, as measured by dependency, stopped shrinking,” said President Ronald Reagan in a 1986 radio address. “I guess you could say poverty won the war.” In 1995, powerful Texas Rep. Bill Archer said the United States “has spent $5.3 trillion on welfare since the War on Poverty began, ... and the Census Bureau tells us we have lost the war.” In July, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the GOP budget guru, told his committee that since LBJ declared war on poverty, “we’ve spent over $15 trillion in that war. So what do we have to show for it? Well, today 46 million people live in poverty. ... For too many families, the American dream is out of reach.” Ryan’s $15 trillion figure came from a study by Michael Tanner of the conservative Cato Institute, who added up expenditures in 126 federal programs he identified as aimed at combating poverty and converted the totals into inflation-adjusted dollars. “How We http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginiapolitics/medicaid-expansion-not-social-issuesexpected-to-dominate-va-legislativesession/2014/01/10/9917de58-798c-11e3-af7f13bf0e9965f6_story.html Telemedicine Holds Great Promise For Children Re “Telemedicine can help solve health care delivery puzzle” (Viewpoints, Dec. 29): Akhilesh Pathipati is exactly correct when he says that telemedicine is the right solution at the right time for much that ails our health care system. Children especially stand to benefit, especially those living in rural and underserved communities. And telemedicine can bring needed health and dental services to children at convenient locations, such as schools. Telemedicine can also reduce travel time and costs, while also reducing absences from school and work to go to appointments. This can be especially important for low-income families. For kids, telemedicine can treat many conditions, from common childhood illnesses, like strep throat and asthma, to conditions requiring specialty care in fields like dermatology, endocrinology, emergency and critical care, behavioral and mental health care, and even dental care. As more children get covered through health care reform telemedicine has a larger role than ever to play. -- Jenny Kattlove, The Children's Partnership, Santa Monica (The Sacramento Bee, 1/10/13) http://www.sacbee.com/2014/01/10/6042914/telem edicine-closing-the-health.html#storylink=cpy 7 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Spend Nearly $1 Trillion a Year Fighting Poverty — and Fail,” is its title. Tanner was asked about arguments that the official statistics overstate poverty and thus understate the success of the war against it. “My argument,” he replied, “is more that you have 126 separate programs that spend this money run by nine Cabinet departments and six independent agencies. That’s a huge incentive for inefficiency.” Tanner’s figure includes $3 trillion of state spending and $12 trillion in federal spending. He notes that the state spending is mostly money that matches federal contributions, including Medicaid, which must be spent according to federal rules. According to an analysis by The Washington Post, if Tanner’s figure of $12 trillion is correct, the anti-poverty spending amounts to slightly less than 12 percent of federal expenditures during the period. Tanner acknowledged his figure includes some spending that doesn’t go just to the poor, even though it’s intended to boost individuals’ economic prospects, including Pell grants for college tuition. A Rubio spokesman said he thought Rubio’s $20 trillion figure came from a Heritage Foundation study. His staff declined to answer other questions about the video and about a speech he made last week outlining his proposals for revamping federal anti-poverty efforts. These proposals include converting anti-poverty programs into grants to the states and replacing the Earned Income Tax Credit with a wage enhancement program in which the government would subsidize the pay of low-wage workers. In fact, $20 trillion is the figure used in a recent study by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, known among conservatives as “the godfather of welfare reform.” “While the material living conditions of the poor have improved in that time, dependence on public assistance has only grown,” Rector wrote. Rector’s figure, however, includes some big expenditures Tanner omitted, including Medicaid spending for long-term and nursing home care — about 30 percent of Medicaid’s $415 billion in 2012. Poor people benefit from this Medicaid program, but so can anyone who lives in a nursing home long enough to become destitute or uses what Tanner calls “accounting tricks,” shifting assets to meet Medicaid’s requirements. That can include keeping a home worth up to $800,000, a car, jewelry, life insurance and retirement accounts, plus assets owned by a spouse, Mark Warshawsky of the American Enterprise Institute wrote recently in the Wall Street Journal. Tanner said he omitted Medicaid long-term care from his figure because “technically the beneficiaries are below the poverty line, ... but it’s not intended as a program for the poor. It’s intended for the elderly.” The hottest argument, however, is over whether government spending has reduced poverty. According to the official poverty rate, the change hasn’t been great — a drop of 4.4 percentage points, from 19.5 percent to 15.1 percent, from 1960 to 2010, according to the study by Sullivan of Notre Dame. But because it counts only income, the official rate doesn’t include the effect of some of the most important anti-poverty programs, Sullivan and other researchers have said. Those include the Earned Income Tax Credit, other kinds of tax credits and in-kind assistance, including food stamps. Further, use of the Consumer Price Index to set the official poverty line yearly overstates the number of poor because the CPI overstates inflation, most economists now say. Allowing for those flaws, Sullivan said, the result is a 26 percentage point drop in poverty during the 1960-2010 period, not 4.4 points. The U.S. Census Bureau is publishing an alternative measure of poverty that corrects some of the errors, said sociologist Christopher Wimer of Columbia University’s Population Research Center. He and colleagues found a 40 percent drop in poverty since just before the beginning of the War on Poverty, but also found that during the Great Recession and previous recessions, War on Poverty programs prevented millions of people from dropping into “deep poverty” — less than 50 percent of the poverty level. Without those programs, Wimer said, the deep poverty level would have been nearly 20 percent of the population in some recession years, instead of remaining flat at about 5 percent since just after the War on Poverty started. (Tampa Tribune, 1/11/14) http://tbo.com/news/politics/war-on-poverty-spurspolitical-academic-battles-20140111/ Krugman: Social Programs Have Helped America's Poor Fifty years have passed since Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty. And a funny thing happened on the way to this anniversary. Suddenly, or so it seems, progressives have stopped apologizing for their efforts on behalf of the poor and have started trumpeting them instead. And conservatives find themselves on the defensive. It wasn't supposed to be this way. For a long time, everyone knew - or, more accurately, "knew" - that the war of poverty had been an abject failure. And they knew why: It was the fault of the poor themselves. But what everyone knew wasn't true, and the public seems to have caught on. The narrative went like this: Anti-poverty programs hadn't actually reduced poverty, because poverty in America was basically a social problem - a problem of broken families, crime and a culture of dependence that was only reinforced by government aid. And because this narrative was so widely accepted, bashing the poor was good politics, enthusiastically embraced by Republicans and some 8 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Democrats, too. Yet this view of poverty, which may have had some truth to it in the 1970s, bears no resemblance to anything that has happened since. For one thing, the war on poverty has, in fact, achieved quite a lot. It's true that the standard measure of poverty hasn't fallen much. But this measure doesn't include the value of crucial public programs like food stamps and the earned-income tax credit. Once these programs are taken into account, the data show a significant decline in poverty, and a much larger decline in extreme poverty. Other evidence also points to a big improvement in the lives of America's poor: Lowerincome Americans are much healthier and betternourished than they were in the 1960s. Furthermore, there is strong evidence that antipoverty programs have long-term benefits, both to their recipients and to the nation as a whole. For example, children who had access to food stamps were healthier and had higher incomes in later life than people who didn't. And if progress against poverty has nonetheless been disappointingly slow which it has - blame rests not with the poor but with a changing labor market, one that no longer offers good wages to ordinary workers. Wages used to rise along with worker productivity, but that linkage ended around 1980. The bottom third of the U.S. workforce has seen little or no rise in inflationadjusted wages since the early 1970s; the bottom third of male workers has experienced a sharp wage decline. This wage stagnation, not social decay, is the reason that poverty has proved so hard to eradicate. Or to put it a different way, the problem of poverty has become part of the broader problem of rising income inequality, of an economy in which all the fruits of growth seem to go to a small elite, leaving everyone else behind. So how should we respond to this reality? The conservative position, essentially, is that we shouldn't respond. Conservatives are committed to the view that government is always the problem, never the solution; they treat every beneficiary of a safety-net program as if he or she were "a Cadillac-driving welfare queen." And why not? After all, for decades their position was a political winner, because middle-class Americans saw "welfare" as something that Those People got but they didn't. But that was then. At this point, the rise of the 1 percent at the expense of everyone else is so obvious that it's no longer possible to shut down any discussion of rising inequality with cries of "class warfare." Meanwhile, hard times have forced many more Americans to turn to safety-net programs. And as conservatives have responded by defining an ever-growing fraction of the population as morally unworthy "takers" - a quarter, a third, 47 percent, whatever - they have made themselves look callous and mean-spirited. You can see the new political dynamics at work in the fight over aid to the unemployed. Republicans are still opposed to extended benefits, despite high long-term unemployment. But they have, revealingly, changed their arguments. Suddenly, it's not about forcing those lazy bums to find jobs; it's about fiscal responsibility. And nobody believes a word of it. Meanwhile, progressives are on offense. They have decided that inequality is a winning political issue. They see war-on-poverty programs like food stamps, Medicaid and the earned-income tax credit as success stories, initiatives that have helped Americans in need - especially during the slump since 2007 - and should be expanded. And if these programs enroll a growing number of Americans, rather than being narrowly targeted on the poor, so what? So guess what: On its 50th birthday, the war on poverty no longer looks like a failure. It looks, instead, like a template for a rising, increasingly confident progressive movement. (Houston Chronicle, 1/10/14) http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Krug man-Social-programs-have-helped-America-s5132203.php ObamaCare Rule Streamlines Medicaid Program Federal officials on Friday issued an ObamaCare regulation intended to make it easier for older and disabled people to access housing benefits under Medicaid. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a division of HHS, issued a final rule that streamlines the approval process for Medicaid's home and community-based programs. While Medicaid does provide health insurance that covers doctor appointments for certain low-income families, it also helps seniors and people with disabilities pay for care in community-based living centers. The rule is more of an administrative fix than anything else. The problem with this portion of Medicaid is that some beneficiaries who were signed up for multiple programs were having to seek an unnecessary number of reapprovals at different intervals, one for each program. This rule streamlines the process, so they only need approval once every five years for all of the programs. The rule also clarifies how much beneficiaries have to pay for the different programs. As part of President Obama's Community Living Initiative, the program creates new affordable and accessible housing opportunities. Those could include "retirement communities" for older people, as well as at-home care from nurses. The rule is expected to cost taxpayers as much as $150 million this year. (The Hill, 1/10/14) 9 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/healthcare/19515 3-obamacare-rule-streamlines-medicaidprogram#ixzz2q6tMhhR9 exchanges. Insurers say that enrollment files sent by the federal portal remain incomplete or incorrect, and significant back-end parts of the system remain to be built. Both of CMS’s leadership announcements Friday were to replace two top officials who left amid much public skewering in the wake of the site’s botched Oct. 1 rollout. Tim Love, a 22-year agency veteran, will serve as chief operating officer and oversee the contracts for the federal Obamacare portal. Love replaces Michelle Snyder, who retired at the end of last year and whose work was scrutinized during congressional hearings on HealthCare.gov. Dave Nelson will serve as chief information officer, replacing Tony Trenkle, who abruptly left in November for a private-sector opportunity. Trenkle was the supervisor of Deputy CIO Henry Chao, who had a leading day-to-day role in managing the development of HealthCare.gov. Nelson, who has been at the agency for a decade, most recently served as acting CIO following Trenkle’s departure. As reported Friday morning by The Washington Post, CMS intends to hire Accenture to replace CGI when its current contract ends. The Post, citing a “person familiar with the matter,” said Accenture and CMS will ink a one-year, $90 million deal. Agency spokesman Aaron Albright wouldn’t comment directly on the Accenture report. “We are working with our contract partners to make a mutually agreed upon transition to ensure that HealthCare.gov continues to operate smoothly for consumers,” Albright said in a late-morning statement. “We continually evaluate our needs and remain focused on ensuring consumers have access to affordable, quality coverage, and more than 1.1 million already have enrolled in a private plan in the federal marketplace.” Accenture spokeswoman Joanne Veto also declined to comment. “We are in discussion with potential clients all the time, but it is not appropriate to discuss contracts we may or may not be pursuing,” she said. CGI’s statement said the switch comes “at a time when HealthCare.gov is performing well, due largely to CGI’s key role during the �tech surge.’ We are proud that more than 400 CGI employees worked around the clock from October through December to deliver a consumer experience that works for a vast majority of Americans.” The statement also noted that CMS has awarded it “nearly $37 million in contracts” since October. At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney said he didn’t have information about the switch and that “contracts at CMS are something that CMS would address.” CGI was hired by CMS in September 2011 to lead construction of the federal enrollment website, which is serving 36 states, and administration officials have been publicly critical of the contractor’s work since the botched Oct. 1 rollout. CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner in a late October congressional hearing singled out CGI as the only contractor that failed to deliver on time Federal Health Site To Get New Contractor CGI Federal will stop its work on the troubled federal health insurance exchange when its contract with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services expires at the end of February, the company said Friday. CGI was the largest contractor working on the complex online enrollment system, which barely functioned when the healthcare.gov website went live at the beginning of October. The company has played a role in the effort to repair the site. Linda Odorisio, a spokeswoman for CGI Federal, a subsidiary of CGI Group of Montreal, rejected suggestions that CGI had effectively been fired by the federal government, and said the company decided not to take up an option to maintain the contract for the next two years beginning in March. "The joint decision comes at a time when healthcare.gov is performing well, due largely to CGI's key role during the 'tech surge,' " Odorisio wrote in an email. A person familiar with the situation told the New York Times that the government will award the maintenance contract, which is worth about $90 million annually, to Accenture, a large consulting firm that often subcontracts projects to CGI. Aaron Albright, a spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, declined to comment on the contract, citing ongoing negotiations. (Tampa Bay Times, 1/11/14) http://www.tampabay.com/news/nation/federalhealth-site-to-get-new-contractor/2160629 CMS Changes Leadership, Health Website Contractor The agency overseeing HealthCare.gov has overhauled its leadership team and dumped the contractor responsible for the troubled enrollment site, signaling a critical shift in how the Obama administration attacks the troubles people have had trying to sign up for health care. News of the twin moves came Friday morning as the House was passing a measure triggered by questions about the website’s security. A statement by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services referred to “a mutually agreed upon transition” between the agency and its “contract partners.” Hours later, the partner in question announced that its work on the site will conclude with its contract end date in February. Although HealthCare.gov is functioning far better since a massive repair effort concluded in late November, problems are still undermining public confidence in the federal and state 10 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 — though contractors had also blamed CMS for poor management of the project. States that tapped CGI to build their own online insurance marketplaces have shown increasing frustration with the firm. Massachusetts, which hired CGI to relaunch its existing exchange website, may sue the firm, state Attorney General Martha Coakley said this week. The Massachusetts exchange has hired Dell and MITRE to fix deep technical problems that have plagued many residents’ online enrollment experiences since October. Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin’s administration has withheld more than $5 million from payments for CGI’s work on the state’s problematic enrollment website. “The contractors we hired to build it have underperformed at every turn,” Shumlin said this week. On Capitol Hill on Friday, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said that the change in contractors “does not change the sad state of this law. The committee continues to have more questions than the administration has answers. Our purpose continues to be about accountability and transparency — two things that have been absent from the administration when it comes to this health care law.” Following the latest news, CGI’s stock was down more than 3 percent Friday afternoon. (Politico, 1/10/14) among the 10 most frequent reasons for a short hospital admission. Medicare officials have urged hospital patients to find out if they’ve been officially admitted. But suppose the answer is no. Then what do you do? Medicare doesn’t require hospitals to tell patients if they are merely being observed, which is supposed to last no more than 48 hours to help the doctor decide if someone is sick enough to be admitted. (Starting on Jan. 19, however, New York State will require hospitals to provide oral and written notification to patients within 24 hours of putting them on observation status. Penalties range as much as $5,000 per violation. ) To increase the likelihood of being formally admitted, “get yourself in the door before midnight,” advised Dr. Ann Sheehy, division head of hospital medicine at the University of Wisconsin Hospital in Madison, Wisc. A new Medicare regulation — the so-called “pumpkin rule” — requires doctors to admit people they anticipate staying for longer than two midnights, but to list those expected to stay for less time as observation patients. Although the rule applies now, Medicare officials won’t enforce it until April 1, having already pushed the deadline back. The American Medical Association and the American Hospital Association have called the pumpkin rule “impossible” to comply with and have urged that enforcement be delayed again until October. “It doesn’t make any sense,” said Dr. Sheehy, who studied how the rule would have affected admissions at her hospital over an 18-month period and published the results in JAMA Internal Medicine. Some patients will be admitted because they came in at the right time of day, not because they have more complicated medical problems.” The twomidnight rule doesn’t change Medicare’s threemidnight rule, the one limiting post-hospital nursing home coverage. Officials at the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services declined comment for this story because of pending litigation seeking to eliminate observation status. If you or a family member land in the hospital as an observation patient and think you should be admitted, it’s better to act sooner than later. “I would talk to anyone who would listen to me,” said Terry Berthelot, a senior attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, which offers a free self-help packet for observation patients. “ Make as much noise as you can, because it’s much easier to change your status while you’re still in the hospital than to go through Medicare’s appeals process later.” Ms. Berthelot suggests asking your regular physician to speak with the doctor treating you in the hospital about why you need to be admitted, based on your medical condition and risk factors. “It’s got to be a medical argument,” said Ms. Berthelot. “You can’t say, �Mom will need rehab after this,’ or �We can’t take her home because no one can stay with her.’” If that doesn’t work, sometimes a strongly worded http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/healthcaregov-contractor-leadership102039.html#ixzz2q6uQZ7GH Fighting �Observation’ Status Every year, thousands of Medicare patients who spend time in the hospital for observation but are not officially admitted find they are not eligible for nursing home coverage after discharge. A Medicare beneficiary must spend three consecutive midnights in the hospital — not counting the day of discharge — as an admitted patient in order to qualify for subsequent nursing-home coverage. If a patient is under observation but not admitted, she will also lose coverage for any medications the hospital provides for pre-existing health problems. Medicare drug plans are not required to reimburse patients for these drug costs. The over-classification of observation status is an increasingly pervasive problem: the number of seniors entering the hospital for observation increased 69 percent over five years, to 1.6 million in 2011. The chance of being admitted varies widely depending on the hospital, the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services has found. Admitted and observation patients often have similar symptoms and receive similar care. Six of the top 10 reasons for observation — chest pain, digestive disorders, fainting, nutritional disorders, irregular heartbeat and circulatory problems — are also 11 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 letter or call from a lawyer describing the patient’s medical needs can be effective. In some cases, help from a professional can make a difference. Shari Polur, an elder-law attorney in Louisville, Ky., recently hired a geriatric care manager to persuade a local hospital to admit her client. Since admission status can change from one day to the next, the manager, who is also a registered nurse, called the hospital every morning to make sure the patient was still officially admitted until she could be transferred to a nursing home. If the situation isn’t resolved while you’re in the hospital and you require follow-up care at a nursing home, you’ll have to pay the bill of often thousands of dollars up front. At that point, Ms. Berthelot suggests, you should file what amounts to a special doubled-barreled appeal with Medicare. It’s not for the faint of heart: the process is long and arduous, and it requires beneficiaries to first receive and pay for the care — often an expensive proposition — before seeking reimbursement. And the legal arguments can be tangled. The Medicare appeals process typically addresses disputes over whether certain treatments or services rendered should have been covered. Observation patients have actually received hospital coverage and services a doctor says is medically necessary — so they don’t really have anything to appeal, said Marc Hartstein, director of Medicare’s hospital and ambulatory policy group, at a recent briefing in Washington. “My limited understanding of this is that the patient cannot appeal a decision not to order or not to do something,” he said. But observation patients may claim that they received treatment usually provided to admitted patients only in a hospital. Therefore, the hospital incorrectly billed Medicare for an outpatient service instead of for inpatient services. The patient should have been admitted and therefore qualifies for nursing home coverage. “It’s absolutely confusing as heck,” said Michael Sgobbo, an elder law attorney in Charleston, S.C., who recently won an appeal on behalf of a 98-year-old woman who will be reclassified as an admitted patient. That means Medicare will pay her nursing home bill of nearly $10,000. Lawyers at the Center for Medicare Advocacy recommend fighting observation care on two fronts. First, follow the appeal instructions in the Medicare summary notice, a quarterly statement of services. Circle the charges on the statement from the hospital and explain that these items were inappropriately billed under Medicare’s Part B as outpatient services. They should have been billed under Medicare’s Part A for hospital services, because the patient received treatment that could only have been provided in a hospital. Mail the statement within 120 days (from the date on the statement) to the address provided for appeals. Second, after challenging the hospital’s observation designation, file a separate appeal to seek reimbursement for the nursing home charges, said Ms. Berthelot. To begin, ask the nursing home to bill Medicare. You should receive a Medicare summary notice indicating that it did not pay the nursing home charges because the patient didn’t have the required three-day hospital stay. Circle those charges, and explain that the beneficiary was hospitalized for three days and received an inpatient level of care. Then send it within 120 days to the address provided for appeals. Be prepared to dig in. If either appeal is denied, you must appeal again to the next level, following the instructions in the denial letters. “Both appeals can take at least a year and are fraught with difficulty,” said Ms. Berthelot. “The reality is that most people can’t get through and those who do, get lucky.” Some observation patients appeal and never get decisions, warned Diane Paulson, senior attorney at Greater Boston Legal Services. Some of her clients’ cases were dismissed because they were not admitted to the hospital — the very point they were challenging. “You can’t appeal if you don’t have a denial,” she said. When that happens, the case falls into “a black hole.” But the chances of winning improve as you continue to appeal, as Nancy and George Renshaw, of Bozrah, Conn., discovered. After spending nearly four years going through the process, a Medicare judge decided last February that Mr. Renshaw’s father should have been admitted to the hospital instead of classified as an observation patient. Medicare finally paid his nursing home bill, and in November the Renshaws received a refund of $4,410. “I was shocked,” said Ms. Renshaw. “I never expected to see a penny of it.” (New York Times, 1/10/14) http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/10/fig hting-observation-status/ Medical Students: Fluent In Science, Illiterate In Health Policy Since its inception more than a century ago, modern medical education has undergone a series of quiet revolutions, stretching and scaling to accommodate advances in biomedical science. Yet this comprehensive expansion in one critical area masks a relative neglect of another. Despite their staggering scope — spanning genetics to geriatrics, and everything in between — medical curricula today largely omit training on health policy. The result? Even as today’s medical students graduate with a deep scientific fluency, they leave all but illiterate when it comes to the health care system. Consider, for example, the findings of a 2009 study in the journal Academic Medicine analyzing survey data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Polling nearly 60,000 graduating medical students, the analysis found that less than half of 12 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 the respondents felt they had an adequate grasp of health economics, managed care or health care systems. Compare this result to the corresponding statistic for clinical care, which clocked in at well over 80 percent. Moreover, in a 2011 New England Journal of Medicine survey of medical deans, almost 60 percent of respondents reported their institution’s curriculum as containing “too little” health policy training. I can bear witness to this disparity firsthand. The curriculum of Stanford Medical School, where I am a deferred first-year student, does not incorporate a single required course on health policy or the health care system across four years and 249 credits of training. And this oversight comes with consequences. To illustrate, recent research in JAMA Internal Medicine found that fewer than half of medical students nationwide understand even the basic components of the Affordable Care Act. On a systemic level, this illiteracy directly impedes our ability to institute meaningful health policy reforms that tackle such thorny issues as quality-based physician payments, comparative effectiveness guidelines or end-of-life care. Without willing and capable physician leaders to guide, implement and sustain such major shifts for the decades to come, reform efforts almost certainly will founder. Consequently, efforts to rein in health care costs and improve patient outcomes must begin by modernizing medical curricula to incorporate health policy training. For example, a national mandate that fundamental knowledge of health systems be a prerequisite for medical licensing would encourage medical schools to incorporate course work on basic principles of health policy and economics. This teaching, moreover, should be nonpartisan and nonideological, focusing instead on the nuts and bolts of health systems — akin to what law or business school students learn about policymaking and institutional governance. This training need not be comprehensive or allencompassing. Just as pre-clinical instruction in the medical sciences provides a basic foundation that is built on in later clinical training, health policy education in medical curricula can offer a baseline understanding that is reinforced in subsequent years. Even ensuring just a rudimentary level of health policy literacy could go a long way. Furthermore, the advent of so-called massive open online courses, or MOOCs, means that financial concerns — the costs of expanding medical curricula to encompass health-care policy — may be unwarranted. Whatever the medium, it is imperative that we install health policy as an integral part of the national medical curricula, lest we continue to churn out a generation of students who are ill-equipped to make sense of the challenges and changes to come. Amid the dynamism of our 21st-century health care system, policy fluency is at least as important as a mastery of biomedical concepts. Rahul Rekhi, a student at Stanford University School of Medicine, is studying as a Marshall Scholar at Oxford University. He served as special assistant to the Maryland secretary of health in 2013. (Dallas Morning News, 1/10/14) http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sundaycommentary/20140110-medical-students-fluent-inscience-illiterate-in-health-policy.ece Rubio Sounds Alarm Of "Obamacare Bailout" U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) today commented on new evidence of the increasing likelihood of a taxpayer-funded bailout of health insurance companies under ObamaCare. The 'evidence' comes as insurance companies make their first material filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding projections for their ObamaCare risk pools, the Herald's Marc Caputo reports. According to Rubio, one company has disclosed that “as a result of the December 2013 federal and state regulatory changes allowing certain individuals to remain in their previously existing off-exchange health plans, the Company now expects the risk mix of members enrolling through the health insurance exchanges to be more adverse than previously expected.” Rubio concluded, “American taxpayers should not be on the hook for bailing out health insurers, especially because ObamaCare is not working the way it was sold. Congress should take an ObamaCare bailout off the table by passing legislation I’ve introduced to repeal the so-called risk corridor provision under the law." Rubio's position -- that Obamacare can't survive without a taxpayer "bailout of insurers" -- is a little misleading, according to Herald senior healthcare reporter Dan Chang. "The risk corridors were built into the ACA legislation, so I don't know if it's fair to call it a 'bailout,' at least not in the sense of TARP, or the auto industry bailout. The word bailout implies an emergency spend for some unforeseen circumstance," Chang said. Since the deadline for the ACA's first enrollment year is March 31, Chang expects the real mix for the insurance companies' risk pools won't become clear until April. The ACA anticipated from the start that insurers could lose money from a higher proportion of sicker policy holders. The risk corridors provided a built-in payment structure to offset those potential losses for three years, to help companies gain their health reform sea legs. The cost was factored into the original ACA budget. A bill Rubio proposed last year called the ObamaCare Taxpayer Bailout Prevention Act would repeal the risk corridors. It's not really preventing a bailout, though. It's defunding the guts of the health reform program. 1/10/14) 13 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 http://miamiherald.typepad.com/health/2014/01/ru bio-sounds-alarm-of-obamacarebailout.html#storylink=cpy at their practicum site, our practicum coordinator assists each graduate in finding proper placement for employment," Lara said. Houston Community College also offers a Human Service Technology program, designed for students interested in the field of human services. The program equips students for employment as technicians in a range of human service facilities, including those seeking to become mental health technicians. "The Human Service Technology Program offers classes in basic counseling, orientation to social services, counseling theories, family interventions, assessment, group counseling and co-occurring disorders," said Richard Rosing, a mental health associate for Human Service Technology at Houston Community College's Coleman College for Health Sciences. "The complete associate degree takes two years, with specialty areas being able to complete in either one semester or one year." (Houston Chronicle, 1/10/14) Mental Health Technicians In Demand San Jacinto College's certificate comprises 33 hours of courses and is intended to take a year to complete -- fall, spring and summer. More and more people are seeking psychiatric services to help manage or solve issues ranging from stress at work or ongoing depression to anxiety disorders and substance abuse. As the demand for psychiatric services continues to grow, so too will the need for qualified mental health technicians. In fact, employment of mental health technicians - also known as psychiatric technicians or psychiatric aides - is expected to increase 15 percent from 2010 to 2020, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The BLS also notes that "there is likely to be an increase in the number of people with cognitive mental diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease. Demand for psychiatric technicians and aides in residential facilities are expected to rise as a result." Those hoping to become mental health technicians need postsecondary education and some degree of on-the-job training before they may start working without direct supervision. Local community colleges, such as San Jacinto College, provide the education and training to pursue a career as a mental health technician. San Jacinto College's mental health services program is designed to train these technicians. The mental health technician training program prepares students to care for mentally impaired or emotionally disturbed individuals following physician's instructions and hospital procedures. "Our program provides a one-year certificate that comprises 33 hours of courses and is intended to take a year to complete - fall, spring and summer. It encompasses eight courses that deal with the various elements and skills a mental health technicians will need," said Alfred Lara, director of San Jacinto College's mental health services program. "These include abnormal psychology, assessment, group therapy, basic nursing skills and other relevant courses culminating to a capstone course of a practicum, where we send students into a psychiatric hospital setting for a semester to put into practice the concepts learned, and get training from experienced mental health technicians and counselors." Lara said San Jacinto College also maintains partnerships with community centers and psychiatric hospitals that allow students to immerse themselves at their facilities and benefit from the additional practicum experience. "Oftentimes, students are hired by these facilities at which they have completed their practicum, and this is the best source for them to be hired. For those not hired on http://www.chron.com/news/article/Mental-healthtechnicians-in-demand-5132102.php Teen Homelessness: An American Disgrace In the US, children under 18 represent one-third of the US homeless population. 2.8 million American children have at least one episode of homelessness every year, while 1.35 million are permanently homeless. Sadly it’s not a new problem. Seattle first became concerned about their homeless teens in the 1990s. In 1999, shortly before moving to New Zealand, I worked in a community clinic with a special outreach program for homeless teenagers. Prior to the 2008 economic meltdown, approximately ten percent of homeless teens had access to state and city-run shelters. Over the last five years, chronic state and city budget deficits have forced most of them to close. US Teen Homelessness Rivals the Third World In third world countries, homeless children are called “street kids.” The US government prefers to call them “unaccompanied minors.” Giving it a fancy name on it doesn’t hide the fact that rate of homeless American children per capita is worse than some third world countries. Among countries who keep a count of homeless children under 18, India has the highest rate of street children per capita, with 1 homeless child per 61 residents. Egypt is next with 1 per 110, then Pakistan (1 per 120), Kenya (1 per 133), Russia (1 per 141), and Congo (1 per 148). The per capita rate of child homelessness in the US is 1 per 245 residents. This is worse than the Philippines (1 per 360), Honduras (1 per 370), Jamaica (1 per 419), Uruguay (1 per 1,000), and Morocco (1 per 1066). Germany, in contrast, has 1 homeless child per 4,100 residents. 14 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Why American Teens Become Homeless costlier drugs, but they can't just close their lists of approved drugs, or formularies, to protected medications. In a proposal published Friday in the Federal Register, the administration called for removing protected status from antidepressants, antipsychotics, and immunosuppressant drugs. The proposal said that status it is no longer needed to guarantee access, would save millions of dollars for taxpayers and beneficiaries alike, and could help deal with the problem of improperly prescribed antipsychotics drugs in nursing homes. But advocates for patients are strongly criticizing the idea, saying it could potentially limit access to critically needed medications for millions of people. "We are disturbed by this," said Andrew Sperling, legislative advocacy director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness. "This is a key protection. It's a cornerstone of what has made the benefit work for people with mental illness." Sperling said that patients with mental health issues often have to try a variety of drugs before they find the right one for their condition. He questioned whether the change would help crack down on the problem of improperly prescribed antipsychotics, saying it amounted to a blunt instrument. The National Kidney Foundation also voiced worries. Legislative policy director Tonya Saffer said transplant patients often depend on combinations of medication, so having the broadest possible choice is crucial. "Covering all immunosuppressant drugs is very important for the patient and very important to protect the transplanted organ from rejection," Saffer said. The proposal could lead to "patients having to go through multiple channels to try and get a drug," which would put patients at risk, she added. In the proposal, the administration said the new policy was developed after careful consultation with a broad range of experts. The three other types of drugs that have protected status — for cancer, HIV/AIDS and preventing seizures — would remain protected. If adopted in the coming months, the new policy could take effect as early as 2015. The administration estimates it could save the taxpayers a total of $720 million by 2019. Beneficiaries may also be able to save. That's because the drug plans can drive a harder bargain for manufacturer discounts when a drug is not protected. "The circumstances that existed when this policy was originally implemented have changed dramatically in the more than seven years the program has been in operation," the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said in its proposal. "We are concerned that requiring essentially open coverage of certain classes and categories of drugs presents both financial disadvantages and patient welfare concerns ... as a result of increased drug prices and overutilization," the proposal added. A leading industry analyst said the proposal would represent a significant change for Medicare's Approximately fifty percent of homeless teenagers wind up on the streets due to conflict with their parents. Another twenty percent are there due to a breakdown of their foster care placement. Others are homeless because their parents are homeless. Of teenagers made homeless by family conflict, forty percent are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual teens whose parents refuse to accept their sexuality (25% of LGBT teens are rejected by their parents). Another large proportion are victims of physical, sexual and/or emotional abuse. Forty percent of homeless teenagers report being beaten. Twenty-five percent report a history of sexual abuse. Forty percent have parents who are mentally ill or who have substance abuse problems. Ten percent have run away because they’re pregnant. Some leave home because of alcohol and drug problems of their own. Many homeless teens work at minimum wage jobs that don’t pay enough for an apartment. However faced with a (true) unemployment rate over 20%, most face long term unemployment. Good links regarding teen homelessness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_children http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/teenangst/201101/homeless-teens http://globalgeopolitics.net/wordpress/2011/03/31/u -s-budget-cuts-threaten-handful-of-beds-forhomeless-youth/ http://www.shelterhouse.on.ca/article/youthhomelessness-147.asp http://www.dosomething.org/actnow/tipsandtools/b ackground-11-causes-teen-homelessness (Salon, 1/10/14) http://open.salon.com/blog/stuartbramhall/2014/01/ 10/teen_homelessness_an_american_disgrace Proposed Medicare Drug Change Stirs Access Worries In a move that some fear could compromise care for Medicare recipients, the Obama administration is proposing to remove special protections that guarantee seniors access to a wide selection of three types of drugs. The three classes of drugs — widely used antidepressants, antipsychotics and drugs that suppress the immune system to prevent the rejection of a transplanted organ — have enjoyed special "protected" status since the launch of the Medicare prescription benefit in 2006. That has meant that the private insurance plans that deliver prescription benefits to seniors and disabled beneficiaries must cover "all or substantially all" medications in the class, allowing the broadest possible access. The plans can charge more for 15 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 prescription benefit, which is highly popular with beneficiaries. "It is a weakening of a patient protection," said Dan Mendelson, CEO of Avalare Health, a market analysis firm. "I'm not sure that Medicare saves money from this kind of a change," he added. "Other elements of the program may have a cost increase if people are not using medications in the right way." (New York Times, 1/11/14) inHg or higher, or drops to 29.7 or lower, the risk of heart attack increases. High barometric pressure constricts blood vessels, which hinders blood flow, while low pressure expands blood vessels, making it more difficult for the heart to pump blood. The highest prevalence of heart attacks occurs within 24 hours of swings of that magnitude in barometric pressure, she said. "That effect is strongest in the fall and winter," she said. It's not yet known whether the rate of heart attacks increased this week. Jack Boston, senior meteorologist at AccuWeather.com, said barometric pressure rose from 29.77 inHg at 7 a.m. Monday to 30.36 inHg by 7 a.m. Tuesday. Vanos, among others, says changes in barometric pressure also cause headaches, migraines, arthritis, joint pain, and sinus and inner-ear problems. But in an unexpected seasonal twist, Mississippi State University meteorologist Grady Dixon said suicide rates drop during the winter. The peak season for suicides is June, he said, but the reason remains a mystery. "Usually the thing people are most interested in or surprised to hear is that while people have depression in the cold, dark winter months, suicides around the globe, with no exception, most commonly occur during the late spring and early summer," he said. "It's the broken-promises effect. If you are clinically depressed and have seasonal affective disorder, you expect spring to be better. But if you are clinical ill, you probably won't get better in the spring when you expect to feel better. It's not a weather effect but the lack of a weather effect that causes the suicide." January does bring the year's highest mortality rate, likely due to higher rates of infections, including influenza deaths and other weather impacts on people, especially the elderly. The National Weather Service said temperatures will climb to the lower 40s today, then to the low 50s on Saturday before dropping back to the low 40s on Sunday. The weekend will feature drizzle, rain, freezing rain and snow, which won't accumulate, with total precipitation of a half to three-quarters of an inch. Hendricks said this winter's weather extremes are occurring because we're in a transition between el nino and la nina weather patterns, which are nearly yearlong weather trends involving the heating and cooling of the north and northeastern Pacific Ocean. Despite the temperature extremes, with more likely to come, winter highs and lows will average near normal by winter's end. We've also had more than double the normal snowfall for the season, with 30.3 inches through Wednesday, as compared to the normal of 13.5, he said. Temperatures are expected to return to normal by Wednesday. Weather and climate psychologist Alan E. Stewart of the University of Georgia said men and women react differently to severe weather. Women are more cautious than men. Maximizing reproduction http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2014/01/11/us/p olitics/ap-us-medicaredrugs.html?ref=aponline&_r=0 Weather Swings Can Hurt Physical, Mental Health Biometeorology — the study of weather's impact on living organisms including humans — uses different terminology but concludes that weather itself, but specifically dramatic shifts in weather, can impact physical and even mental health. The good health news? Experiencing such horrible stretches of weather better prepares us for what National Weather Service meteorologist Lee Hendricks said is a strong likelihood of another cold snap this winter. The so-called polar vortex, blamed for the sub-zero temperatures, could send us into another mental and physical vortex before spring. "It's a huge swing physiologically," Jennifer Vanos, a biometeorologist and assistant professor of atmospheric science at Texas Tech University, said about Tuesday's record low of minus 9 degrees Fahrenheit sandwiched by unseasonable highs in the 50s. "People were not prepared. Physiologically, adapting is a tough thing to do when you are used to certain weather day after day." But if another cold snap occurs, "people will be prepared," she said, especially for those 20 and under who never experienced such sub-zero temperatures. "They will know what to do, how to dress, and it won't be as stressful." Long airplane rides usually are necessary for such swings in temperature. It's like flying round trip from Myrtle Beach, S.C., to the Yukon. The Associated Press reported 21 deaths nationwide from the cold snap, most in the Midwest. The normal high locally for early January is 36 degrees with a low of 21. In the week ending Saturday, if the forecasted high of 52 holds true, the region will have experienced a 61-degree swing. Last Sunday alone saw a temperature swing of 57 degrees -- 50 to minus 7, Hendricks said. Along with potential dangers of extremely low temperatures, including hypothermia, frostbite and blood vessel constriction leading to heart attacks, quick shifts in barometric pressure, high or low, represents an unsuspected health villain. Vanos said people are most comfortable with barometric pressure of 30 inches of mercury (inHg). When it quickly rises to 30.3 16 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 requires caution, with a slight tendency for expectant mothers to spend their final trimester during late spring and summer months before giving birth in August or September. Winter weather historically has posed harsh challenges for moms and babies to stay warm, find food and avoid infections. CDC statistics showed that 9 percent of all babies in 2010 were born in August with 7.5 percent born in February. OK, the numbers aren't dramatic, but the trend holds. Men are a different story. "Men take more weather-related risks than women, including driving across roadways that have water flowing, or being outside during thermal extremes, or not taking cover when thunder is heard and lightning is seen, or not sheltering when there's word from the National Weather Service of a storm or tornado," said Stewart. (Austin American Statesman, 1/10/14) common in lower-income youths. As it turned out, the exact opposite was true. These young people were achieving success by all conventional markers: doing well academically, staying out of trouble, making friends and developing a positive sense of self. Underneath, however, their physical health was deteriorating. Our first hints of this pattern came from a study of 489 rural African-American young people in Georgia, whom one of us, Gene Brody, has been tracking for more than 15 years. Most came from families who were working but poor. In 2010, their average family income was about $12,000 a year; about half lived below the poverty line. We found a subgroup of resilient children who, despite these obstacles, were rated, at age 11, by their teachers as being diligent, focused, patient, academically successful and strong in social skills. We followed these young people until they were 19 and studied their mental and physical health, focusing on depression, drug use, aggression and criminal behavior. As in past studies, those who were rated positively at age 11 had relatively few of these problems when they were 19. When we looked beneath the surface, though, these apparently resilient young people were not faring well. Compared with others in the study, they were more obese, had higher blood pressure and produced more stress hormones. Remarkably, their health was even worse than peers who, at age 11, had been rated by teachers as aggressive, difficult and isolated. They were at substantial risk for developing diabetes or hypertension down the line. We continued studying these youths as they grew into adults. Perhaps not surprisingly, the lower-income youths who made it to college used fewer drugs and drank less alcohol. To be academically competitive with their classmates, they had to stay focused on their schoolwork. As in the first study, though, their resilience was only skin deep. At age 20, the lowerincome college kids had greater obesity, higher blood pressure and more stress hormones than those who did not make it to college. (Their health was also worse than that of peers in more affluent, educated neighborhoods.) These patterns mesh with other social-science findings, which suggest that upward mobility does not always provide the expected return on investment when it comes to health. If we look at the life expectancy associated with a college education, blacks gain about four fewer years from bachelor’s degrees than do whites. What is it about upward mobility that undermines the health of these young Americans? In our studies, most participants are the first in their families to attend college. They feel tremendous internal pressure to succeed, so as to ensure their parents’ sacrifices have been worthwhile. Many feel socially isolated and disconnected from peers from different backgrounds. They may encounter racism http://www.mystatesman.com/news/ap/health/weat her-swings-can-hurt-physical-mental-health/ncjN9/ Can Upward Mobility Cost You Your Health? Americans love a good rags-to-riches story. Even in an age of soaring inequality, we like to think that people can still make it big here if they work hard and stay out of trouble. The socioeconomic reality of most of the last four decades — stagnant wages, soaring income and wealth inequality, and reduced equality of opportunity — have dented, but not destroyed, the appeal of the American dream. Those who do climb the ladder, against the odds, often pay a little-known price: Success at school and in the workplace can exact a toll on the body that may have long-term repercussions for health. Among American children, there are wide socioeconomic gaps on many dimensions of wellbeing: school achievement, mental health, drug use, teenage pregnancy and juvenile incarceration, to name just a few. Despite the risks that lowerincome children face, we also know that a significant minority beat the odds. They perform admirably in school, avoid drugs and go on to college. Psychologists refer to these children as resilient, because they achieve positive outcomes in adverse circumstances. They do so in part by cultivating a kind of determined persistence. They set goals for the future, work diligently toward them, navigate setbacks, stay focused on the long term and resist temptations that might knock them off the ladder to success. Several years ago, we began studying these resilient young people, trying to find out if their success stories also translated into physical health benefits. We reasoned that if disadvantaged children were succeeding academically and emotionally, they might also be protected from health problems that were more 17 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 and discrimination. Some young people respond to the pressure by concentrating on character strengths that have served them well, cultivating an even more determined persistence to succeed. This strategy, however, can backfire when it comes to health. Behaving diligently all of the time leaves people feeling exhausted and sapped of willpower. Worn out from having their noses to the grindstone all the time, they may let their health fall by the wayside, neglecting sleep and exercise, and like many of us, overindulging in comfort foods. What can we do to mitigate these negative health effects? To start, schools and colleges that serve lowerincome students could provide health education, screenings and checkups as a part of their curriculum. Second, schools and clinics could offer stress management programs, targeting lowerincome, higher-achieving young people. Finally, we could develop programs to help these young people blow off steam in productive ways, pairing them with mentors who have navigated similar life challenges. Policymakers should do everything they can so that those young people who overcome so much to live the American dream have the health to enjoy the fruits of their efforts. my first year.” Those issues include education reform, in which Dels. Thomas A. “Tag” Greason (RLoudoun) and K. Robert Krupicka Jr. (D-Alexandria) are both working on overhauling and paring back the state’s Standards of Learning tests. There’s more disagreement over a law passed last year creating a state district to take over failing schools; some lawmakers hope to repeal it, while Greason thinks the first order of business should be to make it work. “Let’s make sure we’re not saddling the commonwealth with an inoperable law,” he said. Howell is planning a special committee to deal with mental health, an issue given new urgency after the suicide of the son of state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (DBath). A bipartisan ethics bill, crafted before the session began and stemming from the gifts scandal that has engulfed outgoing governor Robert F. McDonnell, will be filed next week. Following a path set by McDonnell (R), lawmakers from both parties have filed measures to restore voting rights for nonviolent felons. The social issues that have dominated past sessions are largely absent from the agenda this year. There are multiple bills from Democrats hoping to repeal the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and roll back the mandatory ultrasound that passed amid great controversy two years ago, but these measures stand little chance in a House dominated by conservatives. At the same time, Republicans aren’t on the offensive. Only one Republican has filed any bills related to abortion or birth control this session: Del. Robert G. Marshall (R-Prince William), an aggressive and reliable conservative on social issues. And he’s only got a few in the hopper. While Marshall says he’s not backing down “in the least,” he acknowledged that his party leadership is not interested in joining the fight. “Maybe they think they’re mother hens, protecting their Republicans from I don’t know what,” he said. “Laying down and playing dead; I find that disgusting and obsequious.” One Republican House bill would allow religious expression in public schools, and a bipartisan measure would compensate people who were involuntarily sterilized by the state — both top priorities of the influential Family Foundation. The latter initiative failed last year, with opponents citing a lack of funds. Sen. Thomas A. Garrett Jr. (RGoochland) has taken flak from liberal blogs for a bill that would clarify the state’s anti-sodomy “Crimes Against Nature” law, ruled unconstitutional in 2013 by a federal appeals court. His original bill said only that the law did not apply to consenting adults; he has since amended it to include consenting teenagers. However, Garrett said, “I draw the line at grown-ups having sex with kids.” A former prosecutor, he said he had seen a 37-yearold convicted under that law for propositioning a 13year-old and did not want that man to be able to appeal on the grounds of constitutionality. A bill Gregory E. Miller ([email protected]) and Edith Chen ([email protected]) are professors of psychology and fellows of the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University. Gene H. Brody ([email protected]) is professor of human development and family studies and the director of the Center for Family Research at the University of Georgia. (Dallas Morning News, 1/10/13) http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sundaycommentary/20140110-can-upward-mobility-costyou-your-health.ece Medicaid Expansion, Not Social Issues, Expected To Dominate Va. Legislative Session One issue will dominate Virginia’s legislature this year above most others: the proposed expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The measure carries huge financial implications for hospitals and other health-care providers. But it is also a deeply divisive issue, and its success or failure will signal how effectively incoming governor Terry McAuliffe can work with a Republicandominated legislature. Republicans, meanwhile, are more interested in discussing just about anything else with the governor, whom they have praised for his outreach generally. “We’ve talked about areas where I thought there was common ground,” said House Speaker William J. Howell (R-Stafford). “If I were governor, those are the issues I’d focus on in 18 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 from freshman Del. Marcus B. Simon (D-Fairfax) would make illegal “revenge porn,” the distribution of revealing photographs of another person without consent and with intent to cause distress. California and New Jersey are the only states in the country with laws targeting the practice. Another bill from state Sen. Henry L. Marsh III (D-Richmond) would ban the celebratory shooting of guns in the air, a dangerous tradition that killed a 7-year-old in Chesterfield County last July Fourth. And a bipartisan effort in the House and Senate is underway to make sure Virginia textbooks note that the Sea of Japan is also called the East Sea, the title Koreans prefer. “It is not an attempt to change U.S. policy or the name of the ocean, that’s above my pay grade,” said Sen. David W. Marsden (D-Fairfax). He just wants the textbooks to reflect the controversy, he said, which is taught on state tests. Similar legislation has died before, but he plans to put a major push behind it this time, along with legislation to help teenagers given sentences of life without parole for crimes that were not deadly. Sen. Richard H. Stuart (R-Westmoreland) wants to ban drilling for oil and gas on the coastal plain east of Interstate 95, saying it’s necessary to protect the state’s groundwater — an environmental bill that will probably attract Democratic support. Lobbyists and lawmakers say legislation to regulate fracking in the state’s Northern Neck is likely to come up as well. But any amount of bipartisan cooperation will be overshadowed by Medicaid, especially if McAuliffe holds to a campaign promise to ignore any budget that does not include the expansion. “I’ve dismissed what he said as being a freshman mistake,” said Sen. Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. (R-James City). Lobbyists in the healthcare industry hold out hope that a deal with Republicans can be made. (Washington Post, 1/10/14) while also reducing absences from school and work to go to appointments. This can be especially important for low-income families. For kids, telemedicine can treat many conditions, from common childhood illnesses, like strep throat and asthma, to conditions requiring specialty care in fields like dermatology, endocrinology, emergency and critical care, behavioral and mental health care, and even dental care. As more children get covered through health care reform telemedicine has a larger role than ever to play. -- Jenny Kattlove, The Children's Partnership, Santa Monica (The Sacramento Bee, 1/10/13) http://www.sacbee.com/2014/01/10/6042914/telem edicine-closing-the-health.html#storylink=cpy War On Poverty Spurs Political, Academic Battles Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who’s been working to mend fences with his conservative base, has now jumped into the issue of poverty and federal antipoverty programs, proposing drastic changes in the way the government seeks to help the poor. But Rubio’s proposals, timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the start of the War on Poverty, are based on debatable assertions about the cost and success of that war. “Fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson declared a big government war on poverty,” Rubio said in a YouTube news release this week. “Well, since then American taxpayers have spent about $20 trillion on welfare and other government programs that claim to lift people out of poverty.” Still, he said, there are millions of Americans classified as living in poverty, and “in my home state, nearly 1 in 5 Floridians live in poverty. … Isn’t it time to declare big government’s war on poverty a failure?” Experts on both sides of the ideological divide say the claim of $20 trillion in spending is overstated — and many academic researchers are saying that the positive effects of the war on poverty have been understated. “The official poverty measure fails to show or correctly identify that true poverty has fallen noticeably in the U.S. over the past five decades,” said economist James X. Sullivan of Notre Dame University, author of a recent study on how to measure poverty rates. “If you correct for well-known flaws in the official measure, it shows poverty has fallen noticeably. ... Done correctly, it suggests we’re winning the war on poverty.” Rubio’s criticism of the War on Poverty, a series of federal programs aimed at improving the economic prospects of the nation’s poor, has been raised by Republicans for decades. “In 1964 the famous War on Poverty was declared, and a funny thing happened. Poverty, as measured by dependency, stopped shrinking,” said President Ronald Reagan in a 1986 radio address. “I guess http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginiapolitics/medicaid-expansion-not-social-issuesexpected-to-dominate-va-legislativesession/2014/01/10/9917de58-798c-11e3-af7f13bf0e9965f6_story.html Telemedicine Holds Great Promise For Children Re “Telemedicine can help solve health care delivery puzzle” (Viewpoints, Dec. 29): Akhilesh Pathipati is exactly correct when he says that telemedicine is the right solution at the right time for much that ails our health care system. Children especially stand to benefit, especially those living in rural and underserved communities. And telemedicine can bring needed health and dental services to children at convenient locations, such as schools. Telemedicine can also reduce travel time and costs, 19 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 you could say poverty won the war.” In 1995, powerful Texas Rep. Bill Archer said the United States “has spent $5.3 trillion on welfare since the War on Poverty began, ... and the Census Bureau tells us we have lost the war.” In July, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, the GOP budget guru, told his committee that since LBJ declared war on poverty, “we’ve spent over $15 trillion in that war. So what do we have to show for it? Well, today 46 million people live in poverty. ... For too many families, the American dream is out of reach.” Ryan’s $15 trillion figure came from a study by Michael Tanner of the conservative Cato Institute, who added up expenditures in 126 federal programs he identified as aimed at combating poverty and converted the totals into inflation-adjusted dollars. “How We Spend Nearly $1 Trillion a Year Fighting Poverty — and Fail,” is its title. Tanner was asked about arguments that the official statistics overstate poverty and thus understate the success of the war against it. “My argument,” he replied, “is more that you have 126 separate programs that spend this money run by nine Cabinet departments and six independent agencies. That’s a huge incentive for inefficiency.” Tanner’s figure includes $3 trillion of state spending and $12 trillion in federal spending. He notes that the state spending is mostly money that matches federal contributions, including Medicaid, which must be spent according to federal rules. According to an analysis by The Washington Post, if Tanner’s figure of $12 trillion is correct, the anti-poverty spending amounts to slightly less than 12 percent of federal expenditures during the period. Tanner acknowledged his figure includes some spending that doesn’t go just to the poor, even though it’s intended to boost individuals’ economic prospects, including Pell grants for college tuition. A Rubio spokesman said he thought Rubio’s $20 trillion figure came from a Heritage Foundation study. His staff declined to answer other questions about the video and about a speech he made last week outlining his proposals for revamping federal anti-poverty efforts. These proposals include converting anti-poverty programs into grants to the states and replacing the Earned Income Tax Credit with a wage enhancement program in which the government would subsidize the pay of low-wage workers. In fact, $20 trillion is the figure used in a recent study by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, known among conservatives as “the godfather of welfare reform.” “While the material living conditions of the poor have improved in that time, dependence on public assistance has only grown,” Rector wrote. Rector’s figure, however, includes some big expenditures Tanner omitted, including Medicaid spending for long-term and nursing home care — about 30 percent of Medicaid’s $415 billion in 2012. Poor people benefit from this Medicaid program, but so can anyone who lives in a nursing home long enough to become destitute or uses what Tanner calls “accounting tricks,” shifting assets to meet Medicaid’s requirements. That can include keeping a home worth up to $800,000, a car, jewelry, life insurance and retirement accounts, plus assets owned by a spouse, Mark Warshawsky of the American Enterprise Institute wrote recently in the Wall Street Journal. Tanner said he omitted Medicaid long-term care from his figure because “technically the beneficiaries are below the poverty line, ... but it’s not intended as a program for the poor. It’s intended for the elderly.” The hottest argument, however, is over whether government spending has reduced poverty. According to the official poverty rate, the change hasn’t been great — a drop of 4.4 percentage points, from 19.5 percent to 15.1 percent, from 1960 to 2010, according to the study by Sullivan of Notre Dame. But because it counts only income, the official rate doesn’t include the effect of some of the most important anti-poverty programs, Sullivan and other researchers have said. Those include the Earned Income Tax Credit, other kinds of tax credits and in-kind assistance, including food stamps. Further, use of the Consumer Price Index to set the official poverty line yearly overstates the number of poor because the CPI overstates inflation, most economists now say. Allowing for those flaws, Sullivan said, the result is a 26 percentage point drop in poverty during the 1960-2010 period, not 4.4 points. The U.S. Census Bureau is publishing an alternative measure of poverty that corrects some of the errors, said sociologist Christopher Wimer of Columbia University’s Population Research Center. He and colleagues found a 40 percent drop in poverty since just before the beginning of the War on Poverty, but also found that during the Great Recession and previous recessions, War on Poverty programs prevented millions of people from dropping into “deep poverty” — less than 50 percent of the poverty level. Without those programs, Wimer said, the deep poverty level would have been nearly 20 percent of the population in some recession years, instead of remaining flat at about 5 percent since just after the War on Poverty started. (Tampa Tribune, 1/11/14) http://tbo.com/news/politics/war-on-poverty-spurspolitical-academic-battles-20140111/ Krugman: Social Programs Have Helped America's Poor Fifty years have passed since Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty. And a funny thing happened on the way to this anniversary. Suddenly, or so it seems, progressives have stopped apologizing for their efforts on behalf of the poor 20 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 and have started trumpeting them instead. And conservatives find themselves on the defensive. It wasn't supposed to be this way. For a long time, everyone knew - or, more accurately, "knew" - that the war of poverty had been an abject failure. And they knew why: It was the fault of the poor themselves. But what everyone knew wasn't true, and the public seems to have caught on. The narrative went like this: Anti-poverty programs hadn't actually reduced poverty, because poverty in America was basically a social problem - a problem of broken families, crime and a culture of dependence that was only reinforced by government aid. And because this narrative was so widely accepted, bashing the poor was good politics, enthusiastically embraced by Republicans and some Democrats, too. Yet this view of poverty, which may have had some truth to it in the 1970s, bears no resemblance to anything that has happened since. For one thing, the war on poverty has, in fact, achieved quite a lot. It's true that the standard measure of poverty hasn't fallen much. But this measure doesn't include the value of crucial public programs like food stamps and the earned-income tax credit. Once these programs are taken into account, the data show a significant decline in poverty, and a much larger decline in extreme poverty. Other evidence also points to a big improvement in the lives of America's poor: Lowerincome Americans are much healthier and betternourished than they were in the 1960s. Furthermore, there is strong evidence that antipoverty programs have long-term benefits, both to their recipients and to the nation as a whole. For example, children who had access to food stamps were healthier and had higher incomes in later life than people who didn't. And if progress against poverty has nonetheless been disappointingly slow which it has - blame rests not with the poor but with a changing labor market, one that no longer offers good wages to ordinary workers. Wages used to rise along with worker productivity, but that linkage ended around 1980. The bottom third of the U.S. workforce has seen little or no rise in inflationadjusted wages since the early 1970s; the bottom third of male workers has experienced a sharp wage decline. This wage stagnation, not social decay, is the reason that poverty has proved so hard to eradicate. Or to put it a different way, the problem of poverty has become part of the broader problem of rising income inequality, of an economy in which all the fruits of growth seem to go to a small elite, leaving everyone else behind. So how should we respond to this reality? The conservative position, essentially, is that we shouldn't respond. Conservatives are committed to the view that government is always the problem, never the solution; they treat every beneficiary of a safety-net program as if he or she were "a Cadillac-driving welfare queen." And why not? After all, for decades their position was a political winner, because middle-class Americans saw "welfare" as something that Those People got but they didn't. But that was then. At this point, the rise of the 1 percent at the expense of everyone else is so obvious that it's no longer possible to shut down any discussion of rising inequality with cries of "class warfare." Meanwhile, hard times have forced many more Americans to turn to safety-net programs. And as conservatives have responded by defining an ever-growing fraction of the population as morally unworthy "takers" - a quarter, a third, 47 percent, whatever - they have made themselves look callous and mean-spirited. You can see the new political dynamics at work in the fight over aid to the unemployed. Republicans are still opposed to extended benefits, despite high long-term unemployment. But they have, revealingly, changed their arguments. Suddenly, it's not about forcing those lazy bums to find jobs; it's about fiscal responsibility. And nobody believes a word of it. Meanwhile, progressives are on offense. They have decided that inequality is a winning political issue. They see war-on-poverty programs like food stamps, Medicaid and the earned-income tax credit as success stories, initiatives that have helped Americans in need - especially during the slump since 2007 - and should be expanded. And if these programs enroll a growing number of Americans, rather than being narrowly targeted on the poor, so what? So guess what: On its 50th birthday, the war on poverty no longer looks like a failure. It looks, instead, like a template for a rising, increasingly confident progressive movement. (Houston Chronicle, 1/10/14) http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Krug man-Social-programs-have-helped-America-s5132203.php ObamaCare Rule Streamlines Medicaid Program Federal officials on Friday issued an ObamaCare regulation intended to make it easier for older and disabled people to access housing benefits under Medicaid. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a division of HHS, issued a final rule that streamlines the approval process for Medicaid's home and community-based programs. While Medicaid does provide health insurance that covers doctor appointments for certain low-income families, it also helps seniors and people with disabilities pay for care in community-based living centers. The rule is more of an administrative fix than anything else. The problem with this portion of Medicaid is that some beneficiaries who were signed up for multiple programs were having to seek an 21 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 unnecessary number of reapprovals at different intervals, one for each program. This rule streamlines the process, so they only need approval once every five years for all of the programs. The rule also clarifies how much beneficiaries have to pay for the different programs. As part of President Obama's Community Living Initiative, the program creates new affordable and accessible housing opportunities. Those could include "retirement communities" for older people, as well as at-home care from nurses. The rule is expected to cost taxpayers as much as $150 million this year. (The Hill, 1/10/14) administration attacks the troubles people have had trying to sign up for health care. News of the twin moves came Friday morning as the House was passing a measure triggered by questions about the website’s security. A statement by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services referred to “a mutually agreed upon transition” between the agency and its “contract partners.” Hours later, the partner in question announced that its work on the site will conclude with its contract end date in February. Although HealthCare.gov is functioning far better since a massive repair effort concluded in late November, problems are still undermining public confidence in the federal and state exchanges. Insurers say that enrollment files sent by the federal portal remain incomplete or incorrect, and significant back-end parts of the system remain to be built. Both of CMS’s leadership announcements Friday were to replace two top officials who left amid much public skewering in the wake of the site’s botched Oct. 1 rollout. Tim Love, a 22-year agency veteran, will serve as chief operating officer and oversee the contracts for the federal Obamacare portal. Love replaces Michelle Snyder, who retired at the end of last year and whose work was scrutinized during congressional hearings on HealthCare.gov. Dave Nelson will serve as chief information officer, replacing Tony Trenkle, who abruptly left in November for a private-sector opportunity. Trenkle was the supervisor of Deputy CIO Henry Chao, who had a leading day-to-day role in managing the development of HealthCare.gov. Nelson, who has been at the agency for a decade, most recently served as acting CIO following Trenkle’s departure. As reported Friday morning by The Washington Post, CMS intends to hire Accenture to replace CGI when its current contract ends. The Post, citing a “person familiar with the matter,” said Accenture and CMS will ink a one-year, $90 million deal. Agency spokesman Aaron Albright wouldn’t comment directly on the Accenture report. “We are working with our contract partners to make a mutually agreed upon transition to ensure that HealthCare.gov continues to operate smoothly for consumers,” Albright said in a late-morning statement. “We continually evaluate our needs and remain focused on ensuring consumers have access to affordable, quality coverage, and more than 1.1 million already have enrolled in a private plan in the federal marketplace.” Accenture spokeswoman Joanne Veto also declined to comment. “We are in discussion with potential clients all the time, but it is not appropriate to discuss contracts we may or may not be pursuing,” she said. CGI’s statement said the switch comes “at a time when HealthCare.gov is performing well, due largely to CGI’s key role during the �tech surge.’ We are proud that more than 400 CGI employees worked around the clock from October through December to deliver a consumer http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/healthcare/19515 3-obamacare-rule-streamlines-medicaidprogram#ixzz2q6tMhhR9 Federal Health Site To Get New Contractor CGI Federal will stop its work on the troubled federal health insurance exchange when its contract with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services expires at the end of February, the company said Friday. CGI was the largest contractor working on the complex online enrollment system, which barely functioned when the healthcare.gov website went live at the beginning of October. The company has played a role in the effort to repair the site. Linda Odorisio, a spokeswoman for CGI Federal, a subsidiary of CGI Group of Montreal, rejected suggestions that CGI had effectively been fired by the federal government, and said the company decided not to take up an option to maintain the contract for the next two years beginning in March. "The joint decision comes at a time when healthcare.gov is performing well, due largely to CGI's key role during the 'tech surge,' " Odorisio wrote in an email. A person familiar with the situation told the New York Times that the government will award the maintenance contract, which is worth about $90 million annually, to Accenture, a large consulting firm that often subcontracts projects to CGI. Aaron Albright, a spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, declined to comment on the contract, citing ongoing negotiations. (Tampa Bay Times, 1/11/14) http://www.tampabay.com/news/nation/federalhealth-site-to-get-new-contractor/2160629 CMS Changes Leadership, Health Website Contractor The agency overseeing HealthCare.gov has overhauled its leadership team and dumped the contractor responsible for the troubled enrollment site, signaling a critical shift in how the Obama 22 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 experience that works for a vast majority of Americans.” The statement also noted that CMS has awarded it “nearly $37 million in contracts” since October. At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney said he didn’t have information about the switch and that “contracts at CMS are something that CMS would address.” CGI was hired by CMS in September 2011 to lead construction of the federal enrollment website, which is serving 36 states, and administration officials have been publicly critical of the contractor’s work since the botched Oct. 1 rollout. CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner in a late October congressional hearing singled out CGI as the only contractor that failed to deliver on time — though contractors had also blamed CMS for poor management of the project. States that tapped CGI to build their own online insurance marketplaces have shown increasing frustration with the firm. Massachusetts, which hired CGI to relaunch its existing exchange website, may sue the firm, state Attorney General Martha Coakley said this week. The Massachusetts exchange has hired Dell and MITRE to fix deep technical problems that have plagued many residents’ online enrollment experiences since October. Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin’s administration has withheld more than $5 million from payments for CGI’s work on the state’s problematic enrollment website. “The contractors we hired to build it have underperformed at every turn,” Shumlin said this week. On Capitol Hill on Friday, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said that the change in contractors “does not change the sad state of this law. The committee continues to have more questions than the administration has answers. Our purpose continues to be about accountability and transparency — two things that have been absent from the administration when it comes to this health care law.” Following the latest news, CGI’s stock was down more than 3 percent Friday afternoon. (Politico, 1/10/14) drug plans are not required to reimburse patients for these drug costs. The over-classification of observation status is an increasingly pervasive problem: the number of seniors entering the hospital for observation increased 69 percent over five years, to 1.6 million in 2011. The chance of being admitted varies widely depending on the hospital, the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services has found. Admitted and observation patients often have similar symptoms and receive similar care. Six of the top 10 reasons for observation — chest pain, digestive disorders, fainting, nutritional disorders, irregular heartbeat and circulatory problems — are also among the 10 most frequent reasons for a short hospital admission. Medicare officials have urged hospital patients to find out if they’ve been officially admitted. But suppose the answer is no. Then what do you do? Medicare doesn’t require hospitals to tell patients if they are merely being observed, which is supposed to last no more than 48 hours to help the doctor decide if someone is sick enough to be admitted. (Starting on Jan. 19, however, New York State will require hospitals to provide oral and written notification to patients within 24 hours of putting them on observation status. Penalties range as much as $5,000 per violation. ) To increase the likelihood of being formally admitted, “get yourself in the door before midnight,” advised Dr. Ann Sheehy, division head of hospital medicine at the University of Wisconsin Hospital in Madison, Wisc. A new Medicare regulation — the so-called “pumpkin rule” — requires doctors to admit people they anticipate staying for longer than two midnights, but to list those expected to stay for less time as observation patients. Although the rule applies now, Medicare officials won’t enforce it until April 1, having already pushed the deadline back. The American Medical Association and the American Hospital Association have called the pumpkin rule “impossible” to comply with and have urged that enforcement be delayed again until October. “It doesn’t make any sense,” said Dr. Sheehy, who studied how the rule would have affected admissions at her hospital over an 18-month period and published the results in JAMA Internal Medicine. Some patients will be admitted because they came in at the right time of day, not because they have more complicated medical problems.” The twomidnight rule doesn’t change Medicare’s threemidnight rule, the one limiting post-hospital nursing home coverage. Officials at the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services declined comment for this story because of pending litigation seeking to eliminate observation status. If you or a family member land in the hospital as an observation patient and think you should be admitted, it’s better to act sooner than later. “I would talk to anyone who would listen to me,” said Terry Berthelot, a http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/healthcaregov-contractor-leadership102039.html#ixzz2q6uQZ7GH Fighting �Observation’ Status Every year, thousands of Medicare patients who spend time in the hospital for observation but are not officially admitted find they are not eligible for nursing home coverage after discharge. A Medicare beneficiary must spend three consecutive midnights in the hospital — not counting the day of discharge — as an admitted patient in order to qualify for subsequent nursing-home coverage. If a patient is under observation but not admitted, she will also lose coverage for any medications the hospital provides for pre-existing health problems. Medicare 23 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 senior attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, which offers a free self-help packet for observation patients. “ Make as much noise as you can, because it’s much easier to change your status while you’re still in the hospital than to go through Medicare’s appeals process later.” Ms. Berthelot suggests asking your regular physician to speak with the doctor treating you in the hospital about why you need to be admitted, based on your medical condition and risk factors. “It’s got to be a medical argument,” said Ms. Berthelot. “You can’t say, �Mom will need rehab after this,’ or �We can’t take her home because no one can stay with her.’” If that doesn’t work, sometimes a strongly worded letter or call from a lawyer describing the patient’s medical needs can be effective. In some cases, help from a professional can make a difference. Shari Polur, an elder-law attorney in Louisville, Ky., recently hired a geriatric care manager to persuade a local hospital to admit her client. Since admission status can change from one day to the next, the manager, who is also a registered nurse, called the hospital every morning to make sure the patient was still officially admitted until she could be transferred to a nursing home. If the situation isn’t resolved while you’re in the hospital and you require follow-up care at a nursing home, you’ll have to pay the bill of often thousands of dollars up front. At that point, Ms. Berthelot suggests, you should file what amounts to a special doubled-barreled appeal with Medicare. It’s not for the faint of heart: the process is long and arduous, and it requires beneficiaries to first receive and pay for the care — often an expensive proposition — before seeking reimbursement. And the legal arguments can be tangled. The Medicare appeals process typically addresses disputes over whether certain treatments or services rendered should have been covered. Observation patients have actually received hospital coverage and services a doctor says is medically necessary — so they don’t really have anything to appeal, said Marc Hartstein, director of Medicare’s hospital and ambulatory policy group, at a recent briefing in Washington. “My limited understanding of this is that the patient cannot appeal a decision not to order or not to do something,” he said. But observation patients may claim that they received treatment usually provided to admitted patients only in a hospital. Therefore, the hospital incorrectly billed Medicare for an outpatient service instead of for inpatient services. The patient should have been admitted and therefore qualifies for nursing home coverage. “It’s absolutely confusing as heck,” said Michael Sgobbo, an elder law attorney in Charleston, S.C., who recently won an appeal on behalf of a 98-year-old woman who will be reclassified as an admitted patient. That means Medicare will pay her nursing home bill of nearly $10,000. Lawyers at the Center for Medicare Advocacy recommend fighting observation care on two fronts. First, follow the appeal instructions in the Medicare summary notice, a quarterly statement of services. Circle the charges on the statement from the hospital and explain that these items were inappropriately billed under Medicare’s Part B as outpatient services. They should have been billed under Medicare’s Part A for hospital services, because the patient received treatment that could only have been provided in a hospital. Mail the statement within 120 days (from the date on the statement) to the address provided for appeals. Second, after challenging the hospital’s observation designation, file a separate appeal to seek reimbursement for the nursing home charges, said Ms. Berthelot. To begin, ask the nursing home to bill Medicare. You should receive a Medicare summary notice indicating that it did not pay the nursing home charges because the patient didn’t have the required three-day hospital stay. Circle those charges, and explain that the beneficiary was hospitalized for three days and received an inpatient level of care. Then send it within 120 days to the address provided for appeals. Be prepared to dig in. If either appeal is denied, you must appeal again to the next level, following the instructions in the denial letters. “Both appeals can take at least a year and are fraught with difficulty,” said Ms. Berthelot. “The reality is that most people can’t get through and those who do, get lucky.” Some observation patients appeal and never get decisions, warned Diane Paulson, senior attorney at Greater Boston Legal Services. Some of her clients’ cases were dismissed because they were not admitted to the hospital — the very point they were challenging. “You can’t appeal if you don’t have a denial,” she said. When that happens, the case falls into “a black hole.” But the chances of winning improve as you continue to appeal, as Nancy and George Renshaw, of Bozrah, Conn., discovered. After spending nearly four years going through the process, a Medicare judge decided last February that Mr. Renshaw’s father should have been admitted to the hospital instead of classified as an observation patient. Medicare finally paid his nursing home bill, and in November the Renshaws received a refund of $4,410. “I was shocked,” said Ms. Renshaw. “I never expected to see a penny of it.” (New York Times, 1/10/14) http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/10/fig hting-observation-status/ Medical Students: Fluent In Science, Illiterate In Health Policy Since its inception more than a century ago, modern medical education has undergone a series of quiet revolutions, stretching and scaling to accommodate 24 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 advances in biomedical science. Yet this comprehensive expansion in one critical area masks a relative neglect of another. Despite their staggering scope — spanning genetics to geriatrics, and everything in between — medical curricula today largely omit training on health policy. The result? Even as today’s medical students graduate with a deep scientific fluency, they leave all but illiterate when it comes to the health care system. Consider, for example, the findings of a 2009 study in the journal Academic Medicine analyzing survey data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. Polling nearly 60,000 graduating medical students, the analysis found that less than half of the respondents felt they had an adequate grasp of health economics, managed care or health care systems. Compare this result to the corresponding statistic for clinical care, which clocked in at well over 80 percent. Moreover, in a 2011 New England Journal of Medicine survey of medical deans, almost 60 percent of respondents reported their institution’s curriculum as containing “too little” health policy training. I can bear witness to this disparity firsthand. The curriculum of Stanford Medical School, where I am a deferred first-year student, does not incorporate a single required course on health policy or the health care system across four years and 249 credits of training. And this oversight comes with consequences. To illustrate, recent research in JAMA Internal Medicine found that fewer than half of medical students nationwide understand even the basic components of the Affordable Care Act. On a systemic level, this illiteracy directly impedes our ability to institute meaningful health policy reforms that tackle such thorny issues as quality-based physician payments, comparative effectiveness guidelines or end-of-life care. Without willing and capable physician leaders to guide, implement and sustain such major shifts for the decades to come, reform efforts almost certainly will founder. Consequently, efforts to rein in health care costs and improve patient outcomes must begin by modernizing medical curricula to incorporate health policy training. For example, a national mandate that fundamental knowledge of health systems be a prerequisite for medical licensing would encourage medical schools to incorporate course work on basic principles of health policy and economics. This teaching, moreover, should be nonpartisan and nonideological, focusing instead on the nuts and bolts of health systems — akin to what law or business school students learn about policymaking and institutional governance. This training need not be comprehensive or allencompassing. Just as pre-clinical instruction in the medical sciences provides a basic foundation that is built on in later clinical training, health policy education in medical curricula can offer a baseline understanding that is reinforced in subsequent years. Even ensuring just a rudimentary level of health policy literacy could go a long way. Furthermore, the advent of so-called massive open online courses, or MOOCs, means that financial concerns — the costs of expanding medical curricula to encompass health-care policy — may be unwarranted. Whatever the medium, it is imperative that we install health policy as an integral part of the national medical curricula, lest we continue to churn out a generation of students who are ill-equipped to make sense of the challenges and changes to come. Amid the dynamism of our 21st-century health care system, policy fluency is at least as important as a mastery of biomedical concepts. Rahul Rekhi, a student at Stanford University School of Medicine, is studying as a Marshall Scholar at Oxford University. He served as special assistant to the Maryland secretary of health in 2013. (Dallas Morning News, 1/10/14) http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sundaycommentary/20140110-medical-students-fluent-inscience-illiterate-in-health-policy.ece Rubio Sounds Alarm Of "Obamacare Bailout" U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) today commented on new evidence of the increasing likelihood of a taxpayer-funded bailout of health insurance companies under ObamaCare. The 'evidence' comes as insurance companies make their first material filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding projections for their ObamaCare risk pools, the Herald's Marc Caputo reports. According to Rubio, one company has disclosed that “as a result of the December 2013 federal and state regulatory changes allowing certain individuals to remain in their previously existing off-exchange health plans, the Company now expects the risk mix of members enrolling through the health insurance exchanges to be more adverse than previously expected.” Rubio concluded, “American taxpayers should not be on the hook for bailing out health insurers, especially because ObamaCare is not working the way it was sold. Congress should take an ObamaCare bailout off the table by passing legislation I’ve introduced to repeal the so-called risk corridor provision under the law." Rubio's position -- that Obamacare can't survive without a taxpayer "bailout of insurers" -- is a little misleading, according to Herald senior healthcare reporter Dan Chang. "The risk corridors were built into the ACA legislation, so I don't know if it's fair to call it a 'bailout,' at least not in the sense of TARP, or the auto industry bailout. The word bailout implies an emergency spend for some unforeseen circumstance," Chang said. Since the deadline for the ACA's first enrollment year is March 25 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 31, Chang expects the real mix for the insurance companies' risk pools won't become clear until April. The ACA anticipated from the start that insurers could lose money from a higher proportion of sicker policy holders. The risk corridors provided a built-in payment structure to offset those potential losses for three years, to help companies gain their health reform sea legs. The cost was factored into the original ACA budget. A bill Rubio proposed last year called the ObamaCare Taxpayer Bailout Prevention Act would repeal the risk corridors. It's not really preventing a bailout, though. It's defunding the guts of the health reform program. 1/10/14) option for insuring those in need would be to expand the use of high-deductible health plans in combination with health savings accounts. This approach provides a cost-effective vehicle for insuring against catastrophic medical expenses while simultaneously helping individuals defray the costs of routine medical care. Such coverage protects individuals from losing a lifetime of assets and from the devastating consequence of financial bankruptcy due to unpaid hospital and associated medical bills, a contributor to financial stress for millions of Americans every year. Such coverage means lesscostly insurance policies, since they cover only major expenses and thereby reduce the bureaucracy and expense of smaller claims. And, with high deductibles, the hidden prices of medical care become far more visible, a necessity for containing costs. Price transparency coupled with greater availability of accurate information on health outcomes and provider quality are essential if patients are to choose healthcare services based on value. Combining high-deductible insurance with health savings accounts provides a way to help individuals defray the costs of necessary, but routine, medical expenses. Such savings accounts allow individuals to set aside money tax-free to buy immediate or future medical care. Health savings accounts in combination with high-deductible insurance plans could also provide an excellent method for modernizing Medicaid. States could deposit Medicaid funds into individual health-care accounts owned by low-income recipients. The funds could then be used to purchase routine care and to buy high-deductible health plans. They could also be used to defray deductible costs. Any funds left over at the end of each year would accumulate to help defray medical expenses in future years. Health savings accounts have grown rapidly in the past 10 years, and for good reason. They should now be made available to Medicare recipients as well. This growth could be enhanced — and the growth in health-care costs slowed — if the accounts were made available to the poor and the elderly. Another change Americans should embrace is an increase in the supply of health-care providers. The Affordable Care Act tries to control costs, in considerable part, by wage and price controls. We know from decades of experience that this approach leads to less of whatever you try to control and reduces overall quality. We need more, not less. To modernize the delivery of primary care and increase access to it, reforms must facilitate a wider availability of clinics staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants working in collaboration with physicians. Where they exist, such privatesector clinics provide health care at lower cost, especially for routine and preventive care such as flu shots, blood pressure monitoring and standard tests. The use of such clinics increased tenfold http://miamiherald.typepad.com/health/2014/01/ru bio-sounds-alarm-of-obamacarebailout.html#storylink=cpy It’s Time To Rethink Health Insurance BY GEORGE P. SHULTZ, SCOTT W. ATLAS AND JOHN F. COGAN Special To The Los Angeles Times As the acute problems of the Affordable Care Act become increasingly apparent, it also has become clear that we need new ways of ensuring access to health care for all Americans. We should begin with an examination of health insurance. Insurance is about protecting against risk. In the health arena, the risk at issue is of large and unexpected medical expenses. The proper role of health insurance should be to finance necessary and expensive medical services without the patient incurring devastating financial consequences. Over the last decade, however, Americans have come to expect their health insurance to subsidize the consumption of all medical care. Rather than simply protecting against financial catastrophe, insurance has become a pass-through mechanism to pay for every type of medical service, including routine ones. This shift in expectation has meant that health insurance stands out as entirely different from all other types of insurance. Ask yourself: Would you use automobile insurance to buy gasoline? Would you use homeowner insurance to finance painting your house? This wrongheaded view has played an important role in contributing to rapidly rising health-care costs. Patients with insurance do not perceive themselves as paying for the cost of routine services, nor do their physicians and other health-care providers. The natural result has been a more-is-better approach, with patients and doctors embracing costly health-care services that are often of little value to the patient. Given health care’s crucial role in well-being, it is important to assist individuals who can’t afford even routine medical expenses, but it shouldn’t be done through hidden insurance subsidies. The entire concept of health insurance must be reconsidered. One attractive 26 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 between 2007 and 2009, according to a Rand Corp. study, and it is continuing to grow at 15 percent annually. Meanwhile, major hospitals are beginning to partner with them. Pharmacies and health centers in retail stores — potential neighborhood health centers — should be expanded and transformed into clinics with broader capabilities. Another necessary reform is to increase competition among insurance companies. Currently, insurance can’t be sold across state boundaries. That system sets up archaic barriers to competition and choice. Medical care and the research associated with it have changed the world, not only by transforming previously incurable diseases to treatable ones but by enabling safer and more effective care for millions of Americans. But to fully realize the extraordinary promise of medical science, we must change the way we use and finance health-care services. Insurance is key to protecting individuals and families from the risk of financial devastation and to ensuring access to major medical care. Public financing of the routine and fully anticipated health needs of chronically ill and low-income people is important, but insurance isn’t the proper vehicle for accomplishing that. The first essential step in reforming the health system is to recognize what insurance is and what it is not. Coupling that important understanding with a vital modernization of the health-care delivery system is an essential first step toward a greatly improved health-care system. George P. Shultz was formerly secretary of labor, state and treasury, and director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. John Cogan was deputy director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Scott W. Atlas is a physician. They are senior fellows at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. They wrote this for the Los Angeles Times. (Tampa Tribune, 1/12/14) the most admirable, humane moral advances of the 20th century. The War on Poverty’s increase in Social Security benefits dramatically reduced poverty among the elderly, with few unintended social or behavioral consequences. Nutrition programs have fortified generations of children, while encouraging dependence on ... food. Other efforts, such as the expansion of Aid to Families with Dependent Children, became political shorthand for unintended social and behavioral consequences, leading a Democratic candidate for president to promise an end to “welfare as we know it.” For decades, the federal role in improving education for low-income children was a resounding, embarrassing, scandalous failure. Some of LBJ’s ideas, such as Head Start, still seem so promising that we keep trying to get them right, even when social science finds modest results. Political judgments on the War on Poverty are generally little more than an ideological Rorschach test. But beyond simple pronouncements of failure or success, a few things are clear: The federal government has met some human needs on a vast scale; it also does not know how to conquer poverty. America, at all levels of government, spent about $1 trillion on transfer programs last year, while more than 40 million people remain below the poverty line. If you were making a judgment about the War on Poverty in, say, 1968, it would have seemed an unqualified success. A decline in the poverty rate seemed closely correlated with increasing expenditures. But progress quickly ran into economic and social obstacles that are not addressed by transfers. Advancing technology and globalization began draining the country of decent-paying, lower-skill jobs. Many American educational institutions proved incapable of imparting higher skills — or basic skills for that matter. At the same time, social trends began undermining family structure and community health. (The tie between single-parent households and poverty is an economic, not a moral, assertion. Poor single parents naturally find it harder to hold full-time jobs and invest in the welfare of their children.) This is a type of poverty that LBJ could not foresee: A decline in blue-collar jobs, rooted in global trends, requiring workers to gain skills that schools could not reliably impart, leaving whole communities economically depressed and isolated, while many children were deprived of economically stable and supportive two-parent families, leading to dangerously stalled social mobility and creating divisions of class that are inconsistent with the American ideal. These problems — which reinforce and complicate each other — still require the effort and idealism of the War on Poverty. But the methods will need to be very different. Neither traditional safety net programs nor economic growth alone are sufficient. A new (and hopefully renamed) War on Poverty http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/itstime-to-rethink-health-insurance-20140112/ For A New Fight Against Poverty By Michael Gerson Assessing the outcome of the War on Poverty — announced 50 years ago — has always been complicated by the hopes it initially inspired. After his election in 1964, Lyndon Johnson proclaimed that Americans were living in “the most hopeful times since Christ was born in Bethlehem.” Which raised expectations pretty high — and placed LBJ in the manger. Elsewhere in the same vein, he said, “For the first time in our history, it is possible to conquer poverty.” The actual result — as in most complex human endeavors — is mixed. Programs such as Medicare and Medicaid are woven tightly into the fabric of American life. Both are costly and in need of serious reform — and represent some of 27 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 would require improvements in labor markets — increasing the skills of workers and the rewards of work, and reaching many who are entirely alienated from the workforce. And it would require encouraging the norm of marriage before childbirth and catalyzing the work of community institutions (including religious nonprofits), which give people the skills and values to succeed in a free economy. Note that a comprehensive effort would require ideological flexibility on both sides of the ideological spectrum. For liberals, there is a difference between using social mobility as a unifying national goal and employing economic inequality as a political cudgel. For conservatives, a preference for the work of markets and civil society can’t be used as an excuse for inaction when civil society is beleaguered and overwhelmed (in part) by powerful economic trends. Recent Republican anti-poverty initiatives have been rhetorically promising but substantively thin. Yet given the seriousness of persistent poverty, any president, or aspiring president, must take the stage that LBJ mounted — and still dominates half a century later. (Tampa Tribune, 1/12/14) exchanges are beyond just purchasing private health insurance coverage for higher-income populations: They’re also about Medicaid enrollment for lower-income populations. This is a big step forward in terms of one-stop shopping.” Is mobile a wave of the future in health care like so many other industries? Agarwal: “I’m incredibly bullish on the potential of mobile technologies for helping us achieve the goals that health care has set for itself. Mobile technologies give us a way of really addressing one of the persistent problems in health care, and that is patient activation and engagement. As consumers of health care, we have been completely disengaged from the process of taking care of our own health, and we rely on experts — our doctors — to tell us what to do. “Mobile technologies I think offer the potential to flip that equation, and essentially through tracking, maintaining information, being reminded what you need to do to stay healthy, we can achieve a lot of the quality and cost goals that we’ve set for ourselves. “If we could have a mobile technology that engages consumers and reminds them every once in while, motivates them, puts them in social settings where they can compete — all of those kinds of opportunities, I think, will bring us to a health-care system where patients are watching out for themselves on a daily basis, and then meeting with doctors only when there is a clinical encounter or clinical need that really needs that expert intervention.” Give me one big idea that you think that we can really help change the nature of health care right now. http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/for-anew-fight-against-poverty-20140112/ Information Technology Is Changing Health-Care System With the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, health care was a hot topic in 2013. Rising costs and continued challenges make certain health care will continue to be a big issue in 2014. Recently, Capital Business sat down with experts from the University of Maryland and the Arlington consultancy Evolent Health to talk about health care and the opportunities ahead for information technology to improve efficiency and quality of care. Joining the conversation were Ritu Agarwal, founder and director of the Center for Health Information at the University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business; Karoline Mortensen, assistant professor of health services administration, University of Maryland Public Health; and Shandy Guharoy, vice president for information technology for Evolent Health. Here are excerpts from their conversation with Dan Beyers, editor of Capital Business: Agarwal: “Personalized medicine. It’s the natural progression and advancement of health care. It says that all treatments, all therapies, all health care, all health-care instructions — everything related to the management of a person’s health — is going to be tailored specifically for you, rather than saying these are vast populations and we’re going to use the same kind of treatment for them. “So how do we get to the goal of personalized medicine? One, we have to understand every human being’s genome, and we’ve made remarkable progress with the human genome project on that. Second, we have to understand your behavioral patterns; we have to understand the specific situation contingencies that you live in. All of the data that’s needed to drive personalized medicine is now in the process of being collected, stored and digitized. “We have advanced technologies that will allow us to discover patterns that we’ve never seen before — so at the end of the day, we can really take care of somebody’s health from a personalized perspective. “That’s a very big idea. It’s going to take us two, three, maybe even four decades to get there, but I think all the pieces that are needed for personalized medicine are slowly going into place and I’m very excited about What are some of the issues right now for consumers — what should they be thinking about? Mortensen: “The biggest challenge right now facing consumers is how do you get the information about these exchanges to that population? Recent surveys report that as many as 70 percent of the uninsured responding to these surveys are not familiar with what the exchanges are designed to do. And this is a critical issue because the 28 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 the future.” How do you keep up on the technology, and create architectures that get us to where we need to go in the future to have something like a personalized medical system? Guharoy: “It’s data versus insights. The data is already there; what is the insight from the data? From population health management where you are aggregating the data, you are seeing the trends in the data, you are being able to predict and forecast. And the next part of it is personalization. It’s a step by step. “These are lifestyle changes. Look at how our mobile and our cellphones that we carry with us have changed our lives. The same thing will happen in health care.” (Washington Post, 1/12/14) same. Bear in mind that every budget the G.O.P. has offered since it took over the House in 2010 involves savage cuts in Medicaid, food stamps and other antipoverty programs. Still, can’t Republicans change their approach? The answer, I’m sorry to say, is almost surely no. First of all, they’re deeply committed to the view that efforts to aid the poor are actually perpetuating poverty, by reducing incentives to work. And to be fair, this view isn’t completely wrong. True, it’s total nonsense when applied to unemployment insurance. The notion that unemployment is high because we’re “paying people not to work” is a fallacy (no matter how desperate you make the unemployed, their desperation does nothing to create more jobs) wrapped in a falsehood (very few people are choosing to remain unemployed and keep collecting benefit checks). But our patchwork, uncoordinated system of antipoverty programs does have the effect of penalizing efforts by lower-income households to improve their position: the more they earn, the fewer benefits they can collect. In effect, these households face very high marginal tax rates. A large fraction, in some cases 80 cents or more, of each additional dollar they earn is clawed back by the government. The question is what we could do to reduce these high effective tax rates. We could simply slash benefits; this would reduce the disincentive to work, but only by intensifying the misery of the poor. And the poor would become less productive as well as more miserable; it’s hard to take advantage of a low marginal tax rate when you’re suffering from poor nutrition and inadequate health care. Alternatively, we could reduce the rate at which benefits phase out. In fact, one of the unheralded virtues of Obamacare is that it does just that. That is, it doesn’t just improve the lot of the poor; it improves their incentives, because the subsidies families receive for health care fade out gradually with higher income, instead of simply disappearing for anyone too affluent to receive Medicaid. But improving incentives this way means spending more, not less, on the safety net, and taxes on the affluent have to rise to pay for that spending. And it’s hard to imagine any leading Republican being willing to go down that road — or surviving the inevitable primary challenge if he did. The point is that a party committed to small government and low taxes on the rich is, more or less necessarily, a party committed to hurting, not helping, the poor. Will this ever change? Well, Republicans weren’t always like this. In fact, all of our major antipoverty programs — Medicaid, food stamps, the earned-income tax credit — used to have bipartisan support. And maybe someday moderation will return to the G.O.P. For now, however, Republicans are in a deep sense enemies of America’s poor. And that will remain true no matter how hard the likes of Paul Ryan and Marco http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbu siness/information-technology-is-changing-healthcare-system/2014/01/10/0b66e8c6-7250-11e39389-09ef9944065e_story.html Enemies Of The Poor Suddenly it’s O.K., even mandatory, for politicians with national ambitions to talk about helping the poor. This is easy for Democrats, who can go back to being the party of F.D.R. and L.B.J. It’s much more difficult for Republicans, who are having a hard time shaking their reputation for reverse Robin-Hoodism, for being the party that takes from the poor and gives to the rich. And the reason that reputation is so hard to shake is that it’s justified. It’s not much of an exaggeration to say that right now Republicans are doing all they can to hurt the poor, and they would have inflicted vast additional harm if they had won the 2012 election. Moreover, G.O.P. harshness toward the less fortunate isn’t just a matter of spite (although that’s part of it); it’s deeply rooted in the party’s ideology, which is why recent speeches by leading Republicans declaring that they do too care about the poor have been almost completely devoid of policy specifics. Let’s start with the recent Republican track record. The most important current policy development in America is the rollout of the Affordable Care Act, a k a Obamacare. Most Republican-controlled states are, however, refusing to implement a key part of the act, the expansion of Medicaid, thereby denying health coverage to almost five million low-income Americans. And the amazing thing is that they’re going to great lengths to block aid to the poor even though letting the aid through would cost almost nothing; nearly all the costs of Medicaid expansion would be paid by Washington. Meanwhile, those Republican-controlled states are slashing unemployment benefits, education financing and more. As I said, it’s not much of an exaggeration to say that the G.O.P. is hurting the poor as much as it can. What would Republicans have done if they had won the White House in 2012? Much more of the 29 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Rubio try to convince us otherwise. (New York Times, 1/12/14) campaign issue in 2014; the House plans two antiObamacare votes Friday. But in the states, the Medicaid expansion — a giant, dangling carrot worth billions of federal dollars to states that sign up — has proved attractive to nearly a dozen GOP governors, and a handful more are on the fence. Governors like Rick Perry of Texas and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana remain firmly in the “no way” camp. But Pennsylvania and Tennessee are actively working with the Obama administration to expand Medicaid, although their efforts to squeeze policy concessions on the GOP wish list — like requiring enrollees to pay more — could be a dead end. Indiana and Oklahoma are eyeing alternative versions of expansion and were granted a one-year reprieve by the Obama administration to extend existing state health care programs while they think about it. Virginia, where Democrat Terry McAuliffe is succeeding Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell, is considered a likely candidate to embrace expansion this year. In Maine, Democrats in control of the state Legislature are pressuring Republican Gov. Paul LePage to accept the Medicaid expansion this year, during his reelection effort. New Hampshire, too, where only a Republican-led Senate has blocked expansion, is considered a likely candidate to flip this year. Governors in small, Republicandominated states like Wyoming, Kansas and Utah say they’re keeping an open mind in 2014, despite their hatred for the overall health law. And in every undecided state, an unusual alliance of powerful hospital, business and religious interests has been leaning on Republican leaders to reverse course. In short, the 26 states that have already approved Medicaid expansion are likely to be joined by at least a few more in 2014 — and the “hell no” states could find themselves an increasingly isolated bunch, concentrated in the South. “We really are not taking any state for granted,” said Tim Phillips, president of the conservative Americans for Prosperity, which is fighting expansion efforts around the country. He expects Republicans will distance themselves from expansion the closer the elections get, but says AFP won’t leave it to chance. “We’re going to continue to run a very aggressive grass-roots and paid media campaign,” he said, with ads running in states on a case-by-case basis, as they consider expansion proposals. Already, seven states have approved expansion with the blessing of Republican governors — including Arizona’s Jan Brewer, Ohio’s John Kasich and New Jersey’s Chris Christie. Medicaid is growing quickly under Obamacare, with an estimated 3.9 million people determined eligible for the program in the first three months. Supporters say that if all 50 states expanded Medicaid, another 5 million people would become eligible. In general, Republican-dominated states outside of the South aren’t taking as hard a line against expansion as conservatives would http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/13/opinion/krug man-enemies-of-thepoor.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0 Insurers Complain of Slow Payments; Enrollees Wait News outlets report on consumers struggling to prove they have enrolled in coverage and on insurers wondering when and if they will get paid. The New York Times: Enrollees At Health Exchanges Face Struggle To Prove Coverage. Paul D. Donahue and his wife, Angela, are among more than a million Americans who have signed up for health coverage through the federal insurance exchange. Mr. Donahue has a card in his wallet from his insurer to prove it. But when he tried to use it to get a flu shot and fill prescriptions this week, local pharmacies could not confirm his coverage, so he left without his medications. Similar problems are occurring daily in doctors’ offices and drugstores around the country as consumers try to use insurance coverage that took effect on Jan. 1 under the Affordable Care Act (Pear and Goodnough, 1/10). The Wall Street Journal: Health Insurers Cite Slow Premium Payments For New Plans. Insurers are struggling to get their premium payments from people who signed up for coverage through the health-law marketplaces, leaving many plans with fewer enrollees than expected at the start of the new year. ... "It's been pulling teeth," said Shaun Greene, chief operating officer of Utahbased Arches Health Plan, a startup. As of Thursday, Arches had collected about 60% of premiums for people who signed up for coverage that took effect Jan. 1. He said Arches would urge customers in email and phone calls to pay for at least a few more days, even after the deadline (Mathews and Weaver, 1/10). (Kaiser Health News, 1/13/14) http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/DailyReport.aspx?reportdate=1-13-2014 GOP Governors May Still Go For Medicaid Expansion - And Cash Republicans counting on a year of nonstop Obamacare-bashing may be in for an unwelcome surprise: more red-state governors ditching the political script to take a second look at the law’s huge expansion of Medicaid. The party plans to make Obamacare and its early stumbles a central 30 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 prefer. Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, who three years ago sent back a major $31.5 million federal grant to set up a state-run health insurance exchange, hasn’t shut the door on expansion this year. “Gov. Brownback is still considering whether or not to expand Medicaid,” spokeswoman Sara Belfry wrote in an email. “The governor will consider all bills passed by the Legislature this session.” Kansas’s top hospital trade group signaled that it’s readying a new Medicaid offensive in the coming legislative session. Just before the holidays, the Kansas Hospital Association hired former HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt, who’s advising GOP states on Obamacare implementation, to craft a Medicaid expansion plan that its members could pitch to reluctant state lawmakers. In deep-red Utah, state lawmakers and a special Medicaid commission have met over the past few months to consider conservative approaches to the Medicaid expansion. After winning special concessions from the Obama administration last year for the state’s smallbusiness exchange, Utah policymakers seem poised to once again test the feds’ health care flexibility, say advocates closely tracking the debate. In two legislative hearings in November and December, “it became abundantly clear they’re going to push beyond” reforms Obama administration said it would allow for the Medicaid expansion program, said Jason Stevenson, communications director for the Utah Health Policy Project. Gov. Gary Herbert has remained on the sidelines of the expansion debate so far, but he’s expected to weigh in soon. Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead also isn’t ruling anything out. “At this time Gov. Mead is not recommending that the Legislature go ahead with the optional expansion. He plans to monitor the implementation of the ACA and remains open-minded if improvements are made to address his concerns,” said Mead spokesman Renny MacKay. That’s not an endorsement, but it’s not the kind of flat rejection that governors like Perry have made. Deborah Bachrach, a consultant who works on Medicaid, said even more Republicans might move toward expansion after the primary season. If they escape intraparty challenges or win a primary, they won’t be as scared about the politics of Obamacare, she said. Bachrach also described an intensifying push by hospitals and business coalitions to lean on undecided states, which are missing out on federal dollars every day they shun expansion. She said this effort, combined with the opportunity for states to propose alternative, private-sector-style Medicaid models “lead us to believe that more states will consider (or reconsider) and ultimately approve expansions.” Entrenched political opposition will likely leave the Obama administration without its biggest Medicaid expansion prizes — Florida and Texas, which have a combined 2 million people expected to be eligible for Medicaid expansion. Although Florida’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott supported expansion last year, his GOP-led Legislature rebuffed him, and efforts at compromise appear to have stalemated. Scott, who is seeking reelection, has since made efforts to distance himself from the Medicaid expansion. “I think the politics make the policy more difficult now,” said Don Gaetz, Florida’s Senate president, a Republican. “The politics have gone sour for Obamacare, and that makes it more difficult, I think, to work out something with the federal government to do things their way.” Gaetz said any chance of moving toward the Obama administration’s position slipped away during the law’s miserable rollout in October — and he’s relieved Florida waited to move forward. “We have a newly elected senator who was an infantry captain in Iraq. He reminded me that sometimes it’s good to be the second one in the minefield,” he said. “I think that’s a good way for states to look at Obamacare.” Another set of Republican states began 2014 by reaffirming their commitments to shun Medicaid expansion. Idaho Gov. Butch Otter, for example, said he won’t touch expansion this year. Nor will Republican governors in Alaska and South Dakota, despite bright-red North Dakota’s surprise embrace of the policy last year. “On the issue of Medicaid expansion, we should not jump into the deep end without knowing what’s on the bottom,” Otter said in his annual address to state lawmakers on Monday. Otter, who last year lobbied hard for a state-run exchange, said he’s carefully tracking the expansion experience in conservative states. Mississippi, too, appears unlikely to move in the new year. The state’s governor, Republican Phil Bryant, reiterated his opposition to expansion last week. “We have a group that will not step over the political, Republican line to accept those funds,” said Bobby Moak, the Democratic leader of the Mississippi House. It’s that entrenchment that has some experts doubting whether the Medicaid expansion map will change at all this year, in the shadow of the midterm elections. “As more bad news emerges about costs, coverage, access problems, etc., polarization will prevent movement,” emailed Dennis Smith, a conservative health care consultant who has worked on Medicaid for President George W. Bush, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and The Heritage Foundation. Robert Blendon, a Harvard University health policy professor, predicted states would wait for the outcome of the 2014 elections before committing to expansion because Republican legislators are afraid of primary challenges from the right. However, he added that expansion is more likely where governors have unilateral authority to expand. To others, though, the allure of billions of dollars in federal funding and a sharply reduced uninsured population — as well as the fear that hospitals without enhanced Medicaid funding could 31 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 shut down or shed jobs — will keep expansion in play in the unlikeliest of states. “In general I agree that states like Texas, Louisiana, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi will not change,” said Ray Scheppach, former executive director of the National Governors Association. “I do think it is possible for some of the others as the numbers are overwhelming in terms of the positive economic impacts.” (Politico, 1/10/14) the end of enrollment on March 31 to avoid paying the law's penalty for not having health insurance. A FACTOR OF PRICE The Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, prevents insurers from charging people more if they have a health problem. Age is one of the few factors that can affect the price, with insurers allowed to charge up to three times more for a 64-year-old than someone in their early 20s. But the healthcare costs for a 64-year-old on average are nearly five times as much as a 21-yearold, according to a study of claims from three large insurers Yamamoto conducted for the Society of Actuaries. "The more that the marketplace is able to attract a broad mix of enrollees including the young and healthy ... the more that costs will be sustainable and premiums will be more affordable," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance plans, a trade group for insurers. Other factors may be as crucial, if not more, in determining the stability of the new market, including the health status of enrollees, regardless of their age, and how that lines up with what individual insurers had projected. But those details will only become clearer later in the year based on the medical claims filed by the newly insured, making age the best early proxy about whether the market is sustainable. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees the marketplace for 36 states, has yet to provide any demographic data about enrollees. CMS is expected to release an enrollment report later this month. Data may come sooner from insurers as they discuss their recent financial performance with investors in the next few weeks. Humana, Inc. said on Thursday that the mix of enrollment in its marketplace plans were likely to be "more adverse than previously expected. But healthcare experts say insurers need a better mix of enrollees than seen in the early data. "If a quarter or more of the enrollees are young adults, I would think that's an encouraging sign, particularly for the first half of the open enrollment period," said Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation healthcare think-tank. By the end of March, "if it's lower than that, I think there would be some cause for concern," Levitt said. Levitt and colleagues at Kaiser analyzed a scenario that they deemed "worst case" in which young adults represented 25 percent of enrollees. They found that costs then would be about 2.4 percent higher, but insurers would retain a very slim profit margin. As a result, the Kaiser authors projected the companies would raise premiums by a commensurate amount, but not enough to destabilize the market. Using the same data as Kaiser but different assumptions, Seth Chandler, a law professor at the University of Houston who specializes in insurance, said costs http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B71BCD 21-013D-4466-A8B7-EEF94021A8B8 Obamacare May Get Sick If Young Americans Don't Sign Up Now that more than 2 million people have signed up for private insurance plans created by President Barack Obama’s healthcare law, a crucial next check-up for the new marketplace will be to see how old customers are. Early data from a handful of state exchanges shows the administration needs more young adults to sign up in the next three months to help offset costs from older enrollees and prevent insurers from raising their rates. Critics of Obama's Affordable Care Act say the market won't attract enough young people to keep it financially viable, putting more pressure on government funds to compensate for any insurer losses. Data from seven states and the District of Columbia, which are running their own marketplaces, show that of more than 200,000 enrollees, nearly 22 percent are 18 to 34 years old, according to a Reuters analysis. The administration had hoped that over 38 percent, or 2.7 million, of all enrollees in 2014 would be 18 to 35 years old, based on a Congressional Budget Office estimate that 7 million people would sign up by the end of March. "The whole insurance relationship is counting on them signing up," said Dale Yamamoto, an independent healthcare actuarial consultant. "Otherwise rates will have to increase." The picture from the initial state data is likely to change, since it mostly includes people who enrolled only through November, before a year-end surge of sign-ups for people wanting coverage effective Jan 1. Many experts speculate the early enrollees were more likely to be in urgent need of coverage, and therefore more likely to be older or sicker. A recent survey by The Commonwealth Fund, a healthcare research foundation, found that 41 percent of those who had shopped at the various state marketplaces by the end of December were ages 19 to 34, up from 32 percent from an October survey. One marketplace with current data, the District of Columbia, said on Friday that of the 3,646 enrollees in private plans through Thursday, about 44 percent are young adults. Healthcare experts say many young healthy people may sign up only at 32 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 would be 3.5 percent higher, should only 25 percent of enrollees be young adults. "If we see fewer than 30 percent of the enrollees being in that 18-to-34 age bracket, that's a warning sign that there are problems," Chandler said. "If the demographics come in poorly, insurers are going to lose money." Chandler is a skeptic of the healthcare law and writes a blog called "ACA Death Spiral." Such a spiral is thought to occur if insurers facing higher costs raise premiums, so only very sick people buy coverage, leading to even higher premiums with the pattern continuing until the insurance market either disappears or shrinks to the point that it is not sustainable. The penalty for not buying insurance increases significantly by 2016, which should bring in more young and healthy holdouts over time. Not everyone, however, is significantly concerned about the age of Obamacare enrollees this year. Linda Blumberg, senior fellow at the Urban Institute's Health Policy Center, said that Obamacare's protections for insurers in the first few years means the program has time to get the demographics sorted out. "That all combines to make me much less worried about the mix for this year," Blumberg said. "I don't think we have to get a certain percentage of enrollees to be below age 35 or this thing crumbles." (Reuters, 1/12/14) it one way, the word canceled gets attached to it. If they do it another way, they say they are amending the policy. It sounds more gentle but it’s the same thing,” said Gary Claxton, an expert in private insurance at the Kaiser Family Foundation. “The basic point is, for many people in the small-group market at some point soon their coverage is going to change.” The transformation of the small-group market is just one of the many ripple effects of the Affordable Care Act that will reshape the insurance industry in coming years. With millions of previously uninsured people getting coverage, the insurance industry’s business model is being upended, and that’s leading to changes involving all sorts of products, not just those sold through the online marketplaces to individuals. The impact of cancellations in the small-group market is expected to be less dramatic than in the individual market, partly because a higher percentage of smallbusiness policies provide more generous benefits. Still, the changes being made by the insurance industry are leaving some small-business owners confused and disillusioned about the law — whether it is directly to blame for the changes or not. Stephen Lohman, owner of Allegheny Plant Services, a trucking company in Pittsburgh, said the Aetna PPO plan he offers his 38 employees will be discontinued at the end of this year. He said he has been offered a new Aetna policy with premiums that are 40 percent higher, and that other insurers’ rates are similar. “We were very surprised,” he said, adding that it is “important to me personally” to offer insurance to his employees, but he is not sure he can afford the premium increase. Now that insurers aren’t able to charge more to people with preexisting conditions, companies with sicker workers may see lower premiums, while those with a healthier workforce may see higher premiums. Many small businesses are also discovering that the new plans have more restrictions on access to specific doctors, hospitals and prescription drugs. The reason, said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s main trade group, is that the law requires small businesses to purchase coverage that is more comprehensive than what some buy today, and that drives up costs. Some small businesses are eligible for new tax credits to partially offset the cost of insurance. Also, firms no longer have to worry about the possibility of large premium increases if too many of their workers fall ill. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/12/us-usahealthcare-enrollment-idUSBREA0B07Y20140112 Second Wave Of Health-Insurance Disruption Affects Small Businesses When millions of health-insurance plans were canceled last fall, the Obama administration tried to be reassuring, saying the terminations affected only the small minority of Americans who bought individual policies. But according to industry analysts, insurers and state regulators, the disruption will be far greater, potentially affecting millions of people who receive insurance through small employers by the end of 2014. While some cancellation notices already have gone out, insurers say the bulk of the letters will be sent in October, shortly before the next open-enrollment period begins. The timing — right before the midterm elections — could be difficult for Democrats who are already fending off Republican attacks about the Affordable Care Act and its troubled rollout. Some of the small-business cancellations are occurring because the policies don’t meet the law’s basic coverage requirements. But many are related only indirectly to the law; insurers are trying to move customers to new plans designed to offset the financial and administrative risks associated with the health-care overhaul. As part of that, they are consolidating their plan offerings to maximize profits and streamline how they manage them. “If they do �Ending Discrimination’ An estimated 18 million to 24 million people in the United States have insurance through employers with fewer than 50 workers, and about 40 million have coverage through firms with fewer than 100 workers. The Department of Health and Human Services estimated in 2010 that up to 80 percent of 33 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 small-group plans, defined as having fewer than 100 workers, could be discontinued by the end of 2013. But many small employers bought themselves extra time by renewing policies early through the end of 2014. Jonathan Gruber, a key architect of the health law and a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said the number of people covered by small-group policies that will be discontinued is “not trivial.” “We’re ending discrimination [against people who are sick, and as a result] the people who were previously benefiting may now suffer,” Gruber said. “That’s sad for them, but it does not mean we should continue discrimination.” He said the change for most small businesses will simply be a “labeling issue,” with companies able to switch to similar plans at similar prices with the same carriers, although the plans themselves may have different names. A smaller group will have to pay more for a more generous plan. Gruber said the number of genuine “losers” under the health-care law — those who will have to pay more for the same or inferior coverage — is “very, very small.” In November, President Obama, responding to criticism about widespread cancellation of individual policies, said insurers could extend policies that do not meet the law’s requirements for an additional year, if state regulators agreed. His announcement applied to small-group plans as well. There is substantial turnover in individual and small-group policies every year, even without the health law. But insurers say the change that’s starting to occur is significantly larger than before. In New Jersey, the state’s association of health plans says 650,000 people with small-group coverage have had their plans disrupted. In Colorado, regulators said small-group plans covering 143,000 people are being discontinued in 2014. In New Hampshire, the state’s largest insurer, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, is moving all of those in its small-group plan — 60,000 to 70, 000 people — to plans that are similar to those sold on the marketplace created by the health-care law. These plans have drawn fire from consumers because they include only 16 of the state’s 26 acute-care hospitals. In Pennsylvania, Delaware and West Virginia, Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield is discontinuing all its small-group plans for those who did not renew early, and offering new policies with different coverage and premiums. The company says 99.5 percent of the 5.3 million people it covers through its individual and small-group plans will be affected, but it declined to break out the number under small-group plans for competitive reasons. fewer than 50 employees to purchase new policies through the government-run online marketplaces. The rules go into effect in 2014 in Vermont and 2015 in the District. About 39,300 people in Vermont are being affected, according to state regulators. The District requirement will be extended to employers with up to 100 employees in 2016; it could affect as many as 125,000 people. Regulators took the step to try to ensure that the exchanges — the smallest in the country, by population served — would have enough young, healthy enrollees to offset the cost of older, sicker participants. Judith Kennedy, president of the National Association of Affordable Housing Lenders, based in the District, recently received a notice informing her that the group’s small-group plan was being discontinued. She said she worries about the consequences as both an employer and as a parent. “The notion that the plans on the exchanges may or may not limit providers scares a mom who has lived through chronic illness with her child,” she said. Also facing disruption are people who purchase insurance through professional or trade associations and don’t have any employees. This includes some doctors, lawyers and accountants in solo practice. Under the health law, that type of association plan is not allowed; sole proprietors must purchase coverage on the individual market. Cynthia Rutzick, 49, who has her own law practice in Oak Hill, Va., said that the policy she had been buying for years through the state bar association was already offering the benefits mandated by the health law. But the policy, which cost $1,500 a month for herself, her husband and their two children and included 94 percent of the physicians in her area, was canceled. The new one, which costs $1,600 a month for her and her two children (her husband is going on Medicare next year) includes 82 percent of area physicians. Her broker said plans like her old one don’t exist anymore. “So I had a blue car, but could not go out and buy another blue car,” she said. “I have to buy a red car, and it’s not as good and way more expensive.” (Washington Post, 1/11/14) http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/healthscience/second-wave-of-health-insurancedisruption-affects-smallbusinesses/2014/01/11/dc2f7404-6ffe-11e3-a523fe73f0ff6b8d_story.html After Waging War On Poverty For 50 Years, Let's Not Surrender Fifty years ago Wednesday, President Lyndon B. Johnson delivered what may have been the last genuinely uplifting State of the Union speech we've had. "This administration, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America," he said. Business for Marketplaces In Vermont and the District, regulators are making other changes in the small-group market. They are requiring small businesses and associations with 34 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 "We shall not rest until that war is won. The richest nation on Earth can afford to win it. We cannot afford to lose it." Since LBJ's launch of the War on Poverty, the effort has become a whipping boy on the right and even the left. President Reagan's judgment from 1986 seems to have won the battle for the most repeated crack: "In 1964 the famous War on Poverty was declared and a funny thing happened … I guess you could say, poverty won the war." Reagan's quote remains part of the conservative rap on the War on Poverty today, during its 50th anniversary. Here's Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, writing in the Wall Street Journal: "The country has invested $20.7 trillion in 2011 dollars over the past 50 years. What does America have to show for its investment? Apparently, almost nothing: The official poverty rate persists with little improvement." But like so many of Reagan's apercus, his remark about the War on Poverty was beside the point in its implications, and wrong on the facts. The truth is that the nation's anti-poverty programs, which include LBJ-era initiatives as well as earlier programs like Social Security, have brought the poverty rate down sharply. The measure cited by Rector doesn't show a significant fall in the overall rate because it doesn't count income from anti-poverty programs as real income. There's some sleight-of-hand here: Rector isn't shy about listing all the things that Americans living near or below the poverty line have today that they wouldn't have had in 1964: "a house or apartment that is in good repair," a car and TV, freedom from hunger and malnutrition. But much of that is bought with the help of food stamps, earned income tax credits, and other benefits that he doesn't cite as income. The truth is that the nation's investment in the War on Poverty has yielded huge and lasting gains. That's partially because LBJ's program was not just a plan for financial handouts. It also encompassed a broad approach encompassing "better schools, and better health, and better homes, and better training, and better job opportunities," as he put it in his address on Jan. 8, 1964. LBJ's campaign brought us Head Start (in 1965) as well as Medicare and Medicaid. He understood that political and social empowerment were indispensable factors in economic betterment, so he pushed for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The successful results can be seen from a poverty statistic called the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which the Census Bureau introduced in 2010, and which researchers at Columbia University used to recalculate the poverty rate going back to the 1960s. The measure incorporates expenses that aren't included in the standard poverty stat, as well as income and benefits from government programs. Instead of showing a poverty rate mired within a range of about 12% to 15% of all households over the last 50 years, the supplemental measure shows that the poverty rate has actually fallen from more than 25% in 1967 to about 16% today. Without poverty-fighting tax breaks and other transfers, the poverty rate would be close to 30% today. The effect of the War on Poverty is especially pronounced on children and the elderly. The child poverty rate has fallen from nearly 30% to less than 20%, the Columbia researchers found. For the elderly, it has come down from more than 45% to 15%. The biggest factor in the latter figure, of course, is Social Security; the degree to which Social Security keeps millions of seniors out of poverty should be a reproach to legislators on both sides of the aisle who think these crucial benefits should be cut to preserve tax breaks for the rich. One disquieting trend does emerge from these figures, however: after falling fairly consistently for some four decades, the poverty rate began to creep up after 2008. It's not surprising that the crash and recession that year drove poverty up, but what's disturbing is that it has kept going up. The reason plainly is that the nation's anti-poverty and antirecession programs haven't been fully up to the task of combating the effects of long-term unemployment or the systematic redirection of income from the working class to the shareholding class — income inequality. That's what's overlooked by Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who last week tried to seize the anti-poverty high ground for his party with a speech proposing a host of new measures. "Our modern-day economy has wiped out many of the low-skill jobs that once provided millions with a middle-class living," Rubio said. "Those that have not been outsourced or replaced by technology pay wages that fail to keep pace with the cost of living." Rubio's diagnosis is incomplete. He left out all the still-existing jobs that once paid a middle-class wage and offered middleclass benefits, but don't do so any longer. He left out the effect of corporate policies like that of Boeing, which just squeezed its unionized rank-andfile manufacturing workers with big cuts in pension and healthcare benefits — and came this close to hammering them on wages too — while showering its shareholders with an enormous increase in dividends and some $17 billion in stock buybacks, and awarding its chief executive a 20% raise. While talking up the economic virtues of marriage, Rubio forgot to mention the role of a fair distribution of the profits of productivity in fostering economic mobility. What's dangerous about the claim that anti-poverty spending has been a waste is that it morphs easily into an excuse for doing less of it, or refashioning successful programs so they're cheaper and less effective. Among Rubio's big ideas is to turn federal anti-poverty programs over to the states "so they can design and fund creative initiatives that address the factors behind inequality 35 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 of opportunity." This idea of the states as laboratories of innovative government is one of the most treasured notions of politicians, but the few states where the reputation is deserved (including California) are outnumbered by those where state control of federal dollars will perpetuate inequality, inefficiency and stupidity. One need look no further than the failure of 25 states to take up the government's offer of free Medicaid expansion to give their citizens access to health insurance. This dereliction has left some 5 million Americans uncovered — and it's hardly a coincidence that several of those states already rank at the bottom of the heap in public health programs. If they're laboratories, they're being run by mad scientists. These are some of the same states, by the way, that are systematically cutting back on voting rights. Rubio proposes making these block grants to the states "revenue neutral," which sounds like delivering assistance to some recipients means taking it away from others. Economist Jared Bernstein also warns that it means those programs couldn't expand in times of need, like recessions. He points out that of three major safety net programs — food stamps, unemployment insurance and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) — the only one that didn't grow to meet the challenge of the recession was the last, which is the only one block-granted to the states. People trying to be fairminded about Rubio's platform have given him credit for at least taking a stab at showing empathy for the poor. But he's outgunned by members of his own party who think the answer to grinding poverty is for the poor to notch in their belts in the name of government austerity. They include people like our favorite hypocrite, Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale), who instructed people on food stamps that they should accept a "modest" retraction of $20 billion in the program, though his own family collected more than $5 million in crop subsidies since 1995. The worst flaw in any diagnosis of anti-poverty policy that focuses on the amount of money spent is that it treats poverty as a phase rather than as a condition. Enhancements to income are essential parts of any relief program, but as LBJ perceived, social mobility is the key. Poverty may yet win the war, proving Reagan right; but if that happens it's because American society has handed over victory by default. Programs addressing that factor have really taken it in the gut during this last recession. The sequester, which still remains in effect, has hollowed out Head Start programs across the country and deprived thousands of families of adequate public housing. Turning control of anti-poverty programs to the states may satisfy some fantasy of grassroots political resourcefulness, but when the states face budget crunches they invariably hack away at public education, public housing, public health. (LA Times. 1/12/14) http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik20140112,0,1032268.column#ixzz2qIyeNYEJ Va. Doesn’t Need Another Mental Health Task By Pete Earley Virginians should be embarrassed and angry that a newly appointed state mental health task force convened Tuesday in Richmond. It is the 16th task force asked to investigate the state’s mental health system. Are Virginia legislators so dense that they need yet another expert panel to tell them what’s wrong? Four major studies, from 1997 through 2000, in Virginia each identified the same problems and made similar recommendations. Yet the system remains a mess. Why? Outgoing governor Robert F. McDonnell (R) appointed the newest panel after the November stabbing of state Sen. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath) by his son, Austin, who then killed himself. A local mental health official said afterward that Austin had not been treated because no psychiatric hospital bed was available locally. That may have shocked the governor, but it wasn’t a surprise to those of us with family members who need mental health care. Virginia’s inspector general warned in a May 2011 report that 200 people were turned away from hospitals during one 12-month period because of a lack of beds, even though the patients were considered a danger to themselves or others. The practice had become so widespread hospital officials coined a term for it: “streeting.” The mental health task force that I served on issued its findings after the Virginia Tech shootings in 2007 that left 33 people dead, including the shooter, who had been deemed dangerous but hadn’t received treatment. Our recommendations led to sweeping legal changes and an additional $42 million in mental health funding spread over a two-year period. Problem solved. Or so we thought. Since 2006, I’ve visited more than a hundred treatment programs in 48 states and three countries, and I’ve found that the problems in Virginia and nationally are not the result of ignorance. Mental health professionals know how to help most people with serious disorders. Four things are missing in Virginia. Unfortunately, it’s unlikely the new task force will focus on any of them.  36 Virginia is missing a leader powerful enough to force state and local agencies to work as a team. Bexar County, Tex., (which surrounds San Antonio) went from needing to build a new jail to having a 1,000-jail bed surplus and saving an estimated $9 million annually in jail costs and inappropriate emergency room admissions. What happened? A local judge, prompted by an innovative mental health advocate, forced law enforcement and the E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 judiciary to stop jailing nonviolent mentally ill individuals and arm-twisted housing officials into providing decent housing.  Mental health services in Virginia are managed by 40 Community Services Boards (CSBs), and that patchwork is often blamed for problems with the system. While cumbersome, the boards are not the problem. Regardless of how a CSB is operated, it cannot require police chiefs to implement specialized training for their officers or demand that a judge create a mental health court, even though both have proved to reduce violent incidents, save tax dollars and help the mentally ill get treatment.  Virginians must stop thinking that mental health is solely a problem for the CSBs and state Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services. Mental health cuts a wide swath. Housing, veterans’ assistance, drug and alcohol services, transportation and employment all play a role in helping someone recover. Sadly, so does law enforcement and the judiciary. It takes leadership to bring these divergent agencies together.  legislator told me, “check that department’s priorities and you’ll find its best-funded programs are aimed at helping the intellectually disabled. Not mental illness.” Why? Because many parents of children with intellectual disabilities are well organized and are used to fighting for their children. They call their local representative, show up at town meetings and vote. Parents with mentally ill kids in jail, homeless or in hospitals often are ashamed to speak out and demand improvements. The only time anyone cares about mental illness is after a tragedy. We don’t need another task force. We need a leader with enough clout to bring everyone to the table, get them the money they need to do their jobs and direct them to create a true system, not a fractured one being held together by Band-Aids that we apply each time there’s a tragedy. Pete Earley is the author of “Crazy: A Father’s Search Through America’s Mental Health Madness.” (Washington Post, 1/10/13) http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/vadoesnt-need-another-mental-healthtask/2014/01/10/3fffaa14-78bd-11e3-8963b4b654bcc9b2_story.html Good treatment requires adequate financing. After the Virginia Tech shootings, the legislature approved the $42 million in new money, but within three years had instituted across-the-board budget cuts that reduced mental health spending to below what was being spent before the shootings. Successful mental health programs are often costly to launch but ultimately save tax dollars, as much as $22 saved for each $1 spent, according to a Texas study carried out by the Perryman Group. Few politicians want to invest in programs that offer far-off results, but that’s where we should be putting our tax dollars, not in quick, one-time fixes.  Virginians must look at the big picture. After the Virginia Tech shootings, our task force lowered the criteria for involuntarily committing someone into a hospital. While a positive step, this has proved ineffective because there are not enough hospital beds. Meanwhile, 80 people in state hospitals are ready to go home but can’t leave because there is no affordable housing in their communities. It costs $590 per day to keep those patients in a hospital. It would cost $120 per day for them to live in a community setting. You can’t fix one tire and expect a car to run if the other three are flat.  Mental health must be an ongoing priority. While Virginia’s Department of Behavioral Health and Development Services “may pay lip service to serious mental illness,” a top Health Care Signups: More Older Americans So Far Young adults from 18 to 34 are only 24 percent of total enrollment, the administration said Monday in its first signup figures broken down for age, gender and other details. With the HealthCare.gov website now working, the figures cover the more than 2 million Americans who had signed up for government-subsidized private insurance through the end of December in new federal and state markets. Enrolling young and healthy people is important because they generally pay more into the system than they take out, subsidizing older adults. While 24 percent is not a bad start, say independent experts, it should be closer to 40 percent to help keep premiums down. Adults ages 55-64 were the most heavily represented in the signups, accounting for 33 percent of the total. Overall, the premiums paid by people in that demographic don’t fully cover their medical expenses. Some are in the waiting room for Medicare; that coverage starts at age 65. The administration and its allies remain confident they’ll be able to get young adults interested. Many experts expected older, sicker people to be more heavily represented in the early numbers. Younger people might procrastinate, waiting until the March 31 enrollment deadline is near, weighing whether they want to risk tax penalties for remaining uninsured. “The dynamic of younger people is that they are going to get educated, they are going to 37 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 get informed, and they are going to enroll as we get closer to that deadline,” said Aaron Smith, founder of Young Invincibles, an advocacy group for young adults. Insurers, nonprofit groups and advocates are moving ahead with marketing campaigns that were put on hold when the federal website that serves 36 states was struggling. Administration officials said that in the coming weeks they plan to increase outreach to young people in 25 communities located in states served by the federal website. That effort includes a national youth enrollment day on Feb. 15 and targeted outreach by sororities and fraternities, as well as Voto Latino, which focuses on Hispanic youth. But even if the age mix remains tilted toward older adults, “it’s nothing of the sort that would trigger instability in the system,” said Larry Levitt, an insurance expert with the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. Premiums would go up next year for the overhaul, along with taxpayer costs per enrollee, but not enough to push the system into a “death spiral” in which rising premiums discourage healthy people from signing up. Still, he said, “it underscores a need to heighten outreach efforts to young people.” Considering that the federal health care website was down most of the time in October, administration officials said they were pleased that the percentage of young adults was as high as it was. “We think that more and more young people are going to sign up as time goes by,” said Gary Cohen, head of the Health and Human Services Department’s office in charge of Obama’s push to cover the uninsured. With Monday’s numbers, a fuller picture has started to emerge of who’s signing up. Some of the highlights: — available only to certain groups of people, including those under 30. — A few states accounted for a huge share of the enrollment. California alone had 23 percent of the signups. California, New York, Florida, Texas and North Carolina accounted for nearly half the total. Some questions remained unanswered. For example, the administration is unable to say how of many of those enrolling for coverage had been previously uninsured. Some might have been among the more than 4.7 million insured people whose previous policies were canceled because they didn’t meet the law’s standards. In Miami, 19-yearold college student Stacy Sylvain was one of the last-minute online signups as 2013 drew to a close. In about an hour, the part-time waitress signed up for a plan with a $158 monthly premium, with the feds kicking in $48. She has a $2,500 deductible. Sylvain said she had no trouble navigating the website. “Many people have a preconceived notion that young people are healthy and don’t need to go to the doctor,” said Sylvain, who suffered a minor injury when she fell and hit her head during an indoor soccer class in 2012. “Not having to worry about being uninsured and the what-ifs has made an incredible impact on my life.” (Washington Post, 1/14/14) http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/healthcare-signups-more-older-americans-sofar/2014/01/14/38fa705e-7cf6-11e3-97d3b9925ce2c57b_story.html Older Pool Of Health Care Enrollees Stirs Fears On Costs The administration continues to play catch-up. Originally, officials hoped to sign up more than 3.3 million people through the end of 2013, nearly halfway to the goal of 7 million enrollments by the end of March. Instead, enrollment as of Dec. 31 was not quite 2.2 million. — Fifty-four percent of those who signed up were women, a slightly higher proportion of females than in the population. — Nearly four out of five who signed up got financial help with their premiums. — The most popular coverage option was a socalled silver plan, which covers about 70 percent of expected medical costs. Three out of five people picked silver. One in five picked a lower-cost bronze plan. Only 13 percent picked gold, which most closely compares to the typical employer plan. Another 7 percent went for top-tier platinum plans, and about 1 percent picked skimpy “catastrophic” plans People signing up for health insurance through the Affordable Care Act’s federal and state marketplaces tend to be older and potentially less healthy, officials said Monday, a demographic mix that could threaten the law’s economic underpinnings and cause premiums to rise in the future if the pattern persists. Questions about the law’s financial viability are likely to become the next line of attack from its critics, as lawmakers gear up for the midterm elections this fall. Republicans quickly seized on the government’s progress report on Monday as evidence that the health insurance law would not work. But administration officials expressed optimism that more young people would sign up in the months ahead, calling the latest enrollment numbers “solid, solid news” for the health care law. They said that interest in obtaining insurance through the marketplaces was increasing sharply across all age groups and that youth outreach efforts would become more aggressive as the March 31 open enrollment deadline approached. 38 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 selecting plans were previously uninsured or how many have paid premiums. People are required to pay their share before coverage takes effect. Officials also did not know the race or ethnic origin of those who signed up. The age breakdown was the most highly anticipated data being released because of what it could say about the health of those who will be insured. Under the law, insurers can no longer deny coverage or charge higher premiums because of a person’s medical history or pre-existing conditions. As a result, White House and health policy experts have repeatedly said that insurers need to sign up large numbers of younger people to balance the financial risks of covering older Americans who require more medical care. Larry Levitt, a senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, has said that “the mix of enrollment is much more important than the total number.” “If you assume that sicker individuals are likely to come in first, then a smaller pool is likely to be a sicker pool,” Mr. Levitt said. “The best guarantee of a diverse pool is a big pool, because that means you are probably reaching younger and healthier people.” Mr. Levitt said that people enrolling early included some with the greatest needs: people who had been locked out of the individual insurance market because of serious illnesses and those coming from federal and state programs for people with pre-existing conditions. The report from the administration showed that older Americans accounted for a large share of those choosing health plans in a handful of states, including West Virginia and Wisconsin, where 66 percent were age 45 to 64. In Maine, 64 percent were in that age bracket, and in Arkansas their share was 63 percent. Robert Laszewski, a consultant who works closely with insurers, said, “You need healthy people of all ages,” and so far, he said, “the program is not ramping up fast enough to guarantee a good balance of healthy and sick people, which you need to sustain the program.” Robert E. Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group, said “it’s too early to know” if the enrollment of younger and healthier people was adequate to keep premiums stable in coming years. Insurers will need to see enrollment numbers for the full six-month period, he said. Many people who bought insurance on their own have received notices saying their policies were being canceled or discontinued because the policies did not comply with coverage requirements of the new health care law. Those expecting high medical bills had the strongest motivation to overcome the obstacles to buying insurance on the federal exchange. Caroline F. Pearson, a vice president of Avalere Health, a research and consulting company, said that “early enrollment is skewed toward older individuals.” She added: “Sicker, older folks tend to sign up first because they are more motivated. Graphic Health Exchange Enrollment Picked Up in December Nearly 2.2 million people picked a health insurance plan through the exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act through Dec. 28. “We’re pleased to see such a strong response and heavy demand,” said Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services. “Among young adults, the momentum was particularly strong.” Of those who signed up in the first three months, administration officials said, 55 percent are age 45 to 64. Only 24 percent of those choosing a health insurance plan are 18 to 34, a group that is usually healthier and needs fewer costly medical services. People 55 to 64 — the range just below the age at which people qualify for Medicare — represented the largest group, at 33 percent. The latest figures about enrollment add pressure on the Obama administration after a disastrous rollout of the HealthCare.gov website in October. Senior officials said they understood the stakes and were working to increase sign-ups. The White House recently hired Marlon Marshall, the deputy national field director for Mr. Obama’s 2012 presidential campaign, to run a campaign-style effort aimed at increasing sign-ups, especially among young people. Brendan Buck, a spokesman for the House speaker, John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, predicted that the White House would fail to meet its goals and said that insurance premiums would rise. “There’s no way to spin it: youth enrollment has been a bust so far,” Mr. Buck said. “When they see that Obamacare offers high costs for limited access to doctors — if the enrollment goes through at all — it’s no surprise that young people aren’t rushing to sign up.” The demographic information, which had not been broadly available until Monday, also offers the first concrete evidence about whether the national health care experiment will work the way it has in Massachusetts, where a government marketplace also offers insurance to people who do not receive it through their employers. Officials said they were optimistic because the pattern of sign-ups among young people looked similar to the one they had seen in that state, which had a surge in signups as the deadline approached. Overall, officials said that 2.2 million people had signed up by Dec. 28 for health insurance through HealthCare.gov and the state-based websites. Administration officials have previously said they hope to see seven million people enrolled in private health plans through the federal and state exchanges by March 31. Of those who signed up, about 54 percent are female and 46 percent are male. Nearly 80 percent of those who selected a plan qualified for federal subsidies to reduce their premiums, officials said. Federal officials said they did not know how many people 39 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 They are likely to have health care costs early in the year.” Anne Filipic, the president of Enroll America, a nonprofit group trying to expand coverage, said, “We know from our research that when uninsured consumers learn about the financial help that is available to them, they are eager to enroll.” Health plans in the marketplace are separated into four categories — bronze, silver, gold and platinum — indicating the generosity of coverage, or the share of costs paid by insurance for an average enrollee. Of people choosing plans so far, 60 percent selected silver plans and 20 percent signed up for bronze plans. Thirteen percent chose gold plans, and 7 percent platinum coverage. In December, for the first time since the marketplaces opened, the number of people selecting plans in the federal exchange exceeded the number signing up through state exchanges. For the first half of the enrollment period, through December, the federal exchange, which serves 36 states with about two-thirds of the nation’s population, accounted for 56 percent of those selecting plans. The other 44 percent were in state exchanges. (New York Times, 1/13/14) policymakers see three-year programs as a way to produce physicians, particularly primary-care doctors, faster as the new health-care law funnels millions of previously uninsured patients into the medical system. Enormous student loans are cited as one reason some newly minted doctors choose lucrative specialties such as radiology or dermatology, which pay twice as much as pediatrics or family medicine. But debt and the shortage of primary-care doctors are not the only factors fueling interest in accelerated programs. Some influential experts are raising questions about the length of medical school in part because much of the fourth year is devoted to electives and applying for a residency, a process that typically takes months. (Similar questions are being raised about the third year of law school.) In a piece published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2012, University of Pennsylvania Vice Provost Ezekiel Emanuel and Stanford economist Victor Fuchs proposed that a year of medical school could be eliminated “without adversely affecting academic performance.” The overall time it takes to train physicians, they wrote, is an example of waste in medical education and could be shortened without affecting patient care or eroding clinical skills; students could be assessed on “core competencies rather than on time served.” A 2010 report by the Carnegie Foundation recommended that fasttracking be considered. So far, fewer than a dozen of the nation’s 124 medical schools are offering or actively considering three-year programs, which typically involve the elimination of electives, attendance at summer classes and the provisional guarantee of a residency — offered because threeyear graduates might be at a disadvantage compared with other applicants. NYU launched its program in September with Hill and 15 other students chosen from a pool of 50 applicants — nearly a third of the medical school’s 160-member class. Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in Lubbock graduated its first three-year class in 2013; its nine students are training in family medicine. Fifteen more students started this fall. In September, Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons launched a “fast track MD” for candidates who already hold doctorates in biology; there were 40 applicants for four slots. Despite the growing popularity of such programs, critics question the wisdom of jettisoning the fourth year of medical school, which they say plays a crucial role in preparing doctors for residency and subsequent practice. Some note that the three-year track was offered by a few dozen medical schools in the late 1970s but subsequently abandoned, largely because of student burnout from trying to cram too much into three years. Supporters of the three-year option say that contemporary medical school programs are different from 1970s curricula, which http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/14/us/healthcare-plans-attracting-more-older-less-healthypeople.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0 Should Medical School Be Shortened To Three Years? Some Programs Try Fast Tracking. For Travis Hill, it was an offer too good to refuse. Last year when the 30-year-old neuroscientist was admitted to a new program at New York University that would allow him to complete medical school in only three years and guarantee him a spot in its neurosurgery residency, he seized it. Not only would Hill save about $70,000 — the cost of tuition and living expenses for the fourth year of medical school — he would also shave a year off the training that will consume the next decade of his life. “I’m not interested in being in school forever,” said Hill, who earned a PhD from the University of California at Davis in June 2013 and started med school in Manhattan a few weeks later. “Just knowing where you’re going to be for residency is huge.” So is Hill’s student loan debt: about $200,000, dating back to his undergraduate days at the University of Massachusetts. And he won’t begin practicing until he is 40. The chance to finish medical school early is attracting increased attention from students burdened with six-figure education loans: The median debt for medical school graduates in 2013 was $175,000, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. This year, the combined cost of tuition and fees for a first-year medical student ranges from just over $12,000 to more than $82,000. Some medical school administrators and 40 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 relied more heavily on rote memorization, and that the new programs have been designed to minimize burnout. “This has been tried before, and it was a miserable failure,” said Stanley Goldfarb, associate dean for curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, who co-authored an essay opposing three-year programs in a recent New England Journal of Medicine. “Since the 1970s things have gotten so much more complex in medicine,” he said. The more relaxed fourth year, he said, gives students the chance to pick the field that best suits them and to carefully evaluate residencies. More than three-fourths of students, he said, enter medical school uncertain about their eventual specialty. Goldfarb said he favors enhancing the fourth year, not eliminating it. Medical students have mixed feelings about threeyear programs, said Nida Degesys, president of the Reston-based American Medical Student Association. While many are eager to reduce their debt, they are also concerned about missing opportunities; fourthyear electives can include ophthalmology, critical care and emergency medicine. “I personally changed my mind” during med school, Degesys said. “In the first year I thought I was going to do OB-GYN, but I later found that emergency medicine is truly the right fit for me.” For more than a century, medical schools have largely designed their programs around a template: two years of preclinical or classroom work in basic medical science, followed by two years of clinical rotations, mostly in hospitals. After med school, students continue their training in residencies lasting from three to seven years, which increasingly is followed by a fellowship of one year or more. “There have always been some individuals who wondered about the length of medical school,” said John Prescott, former dean of the medical school at West Virginia University and chief academic officer at the Association of American Medical Colleges. To speed the production of doctors, medical training during World War II was shortened to three years with no ill effect, he said. Prescott calls the current threeyear programs “well-designed experiments” that may provide models about how to prepare students “in the most cost-effective way.” But he doubts they will supplant the conventional four-year track for most students. Steven B. Abramson, vice dean of NYU’s medical school, agrees, but he said he expects three-year programs to multiply over the next five years. NYU’s accelerated program, he said, is best suited for highly qualified students who are typically older, more mature and certain of their choice of specialty. Because three-year students take the same core courses as their classmates, they will be equally well prepared, he said. And Abramson noted the proliferation of dual-degree programs: students who earn an MD along with a graduate degree in science, business administration or public health. “The core content we deliver is rigorous, comprehensive and very well monitored,” he said. To stay in the three-year program, students must remain in the upper half of the class; they retain the option of switching to the four-year track if they find it too taxing. First-year students are also assigned mentors in their intended residency. While students at NYU can designate a variety of specialties, the three-year Family Medicine Accelerated Track at Texas Tech is limited to those who intend to pursue that specialty. “There weren’t enough primary-care doctors before the Affordable Care Act,” said Texas Tech medical school dean Steven Berk, who trained as a family physician. “There are lots of towns in Texas with 25,000 people and no doctor. And it’s the primary-care physicians who find the small breast mass or control patients’ blood pressure. They are essential to the functioning of the health-care system.” Many students who chose the three-year course have committed to primary care based on their previous work experience. “We have students who have been PAs, EMTs and RNs,” he said, referring to physician assistants, emergency medical technicians and registered nurses. Texas Tech students are awarded a $15,000 full tuition scholarship to cover the first year. When they graduate, their average debt for tuition and living expenses totals about $60,000, Berk said. Like the NYU program, students have the option of switching to the four-year track — none has so far — and are granted a residency spot when they enter med school. Fears that they will not perform as well as their four-year counterparts have not been validated, Berk said. Scores on licensing exams are equivalent, and burnout has not been a problem. Charles Willnauer, 30, a graduate of Texas Tech’s first three-year class, said the accelerated program worked well for him. The promise of a residency in family medicine, a specialty that “fits with my values and goals,” was enticing, as was the lower price tag. “A lot of people have to apply to 30 or more residency programs,” said Willnauer, now a first-year resident. “That’s a very large cost and a lot of time.” It was also a bonus in other ways. Married and the father of two toddlers born while he was in medical school, Willnauer, age 30, said, “I bought a house and knew I wouldn’t have to uproot my family.” (Washington Post, 1/13/14) http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/healthscience/medical-school-donefaster/2014/01/13/4b6d9e54-5c40-11e3-be07006c776266ed_story.html A Solution That Now Looks Crazy �American Psychosis’ Attacks Mental Health Care 41 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 “How the Federal Government Destroyed the Mental Illness Treatment System”: That subtitle is the opening shot across the bow in this jeremiad of a book by the psychiatrist Dr. E. Fuller Torrey. It could just as well have read: “How a group of wellintentioned, starry-eyed idealists made a hash of mental health care.” You could hardly blame them for trying, though. The care of people with serious mental illness was long a national disgrace. By the 1950s, slightly more than half a million psychiatric patients resided in overcrowded and underfunded state mental hospitals, often under appalling conditions. Enter a group of high-minded psychiatrists with a vision to “create a brave new world, a mentally healthy America,” in Dr. Torrey’s words. Armed with little more than optimism, they helped start the National Institute of Mental Health and set in motion an ambitious agenda for the next half-century: closing the state mental hospitals, initiating a federal takeover of the mental health system, and creating a nationwide network of community mental health centers. well with outpatient treatment. How wrong they proved to be. The sorry tale of what happened to the half-million Americans who were deinstitutionalized over the past 50 years is the subject of this unsparing and lively takedown of American psychiatry by Dr. Torrey, a longtime critic of national mental health policy and the founder of the Treatment Advocacy Center. Deinstitutionalization itself was not the problem. The discharge of hundreds of thousands of mental patients from state hospitals was a broadly humane measure, made possible by the effectiveness of new antipsychotic medicines like Thorazine. The egregious error was the failure to provide treatment to patients after they left the hospital. The idea that community mental health centers could supplant state mental hospitals was little more than a fantasy. The N.I.M.H.’s own data showed that these centers were largely treating not people with severe mental illness, but those with “social maladjustment or no mental disorder” — better known as the worried well. Tragically, vast numbers of deinstitutionalized patients ended up in jails and prisons, in nursing homes or homeless on our streets. Some law-enforcement agencies have become de facto mental health systems, and at least one-third of homeless people have serious mental illness. The capacity of some of these individuals for violence, of course, has received lurid and sensational focus in the media, and Dr. Torrey does not shy away from recounting one horror story after another. It’s true that effective treatment for mental illness would probably decrease violence in the community. But because only 4 percent of violence in the United States can be attributed to people with mental illness, even giving all of them the best psychiatric treatment would have a very small effect on violence over all. Late in the book, Dr. Torrey finally gets around to putting the risk in perspective, but by then the force of all his anecdotes has only served to exaggerate it. Curiously, he does not explore the possibility that better psychiatric treatment might well reduce the risk of suicide: A vast majority of people who commit suicide, in contrast to homicide, do have a diagnosable and treatable psychiatric illness. Dr. Torrey’s solutions for our broken mental health care system are mostly thoughtful, though not everyone will like them. Aside from increasing the number of public psychiatric hospitals, he would lower the bar for involuntary treatment. “The freedom to be insane is a cruel hoax,” he writes, “perpetrated on those who cannot think clearly by those who will not think clearly.” After the mass shootings of the past decade or so, the public may well agree with him. But the risk of lowering the threshold to involuntary treatment could be to discourage people with mental illness from seeking help in the first place. Few will disagree with his advice that we should AMERICAN PSYCHOSIS How the Federal Government Destroyed the Mental Illness Treatment System. By E. FullerTorrey, M.D. Oxford University Press. 224 pages. $27.95. Reform was well underway when President John F. Kennedy endorsed this new era in mental health in a 1963 speech, calling for a “bold new approach” in which “reliance on the cold mercy of custodial isolation will be supplanted by the open warmth of community concern and capability.” Those were heady days in American psychiatry, when psychoanalysis and the mental hygiene movement held sway and promised to cure all manner of ills by early intervention and improving the social environment. In hindsight, the therapeutic zeal of these professionals was impressively naïve: They were certain that severely mentally ill patients in state hospitals — many living there for decades — would magically adjust to the community and do 42 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 focus our resources on the most problematic patients — the estimated 10 percent who are repeatedly hospitalized, imprisoned, or made homeless. This wise and unflinching book is an object lesson in good intentions gone awry on a grand scale. It should be widely read. (New York Times, 1/13/14) none at all. "No state is providing high-end services in all of their schools," said Sharon Stephan, codirector of the Center for School Mental Health, a national organization based at the University of Maryland that provides training for schools and mental health providers. Baltimore and Chicago have robust screening and treatment programs. Teachers in one South Florida school district screen children as young as kindergarten by filling out a short questionnaire, while students in Minnesota answer anonymous surveys about drug use and depression. In Olympia, Wash., 21,000 students were screened for substance abuse and mental health issues in 2010, but that dropped to only 7,500 in 2012 due to lack of funding. Mental health issues typically start during adolescence. If left untreated, they can lead to substance abuse, school drop outs and difficulty maintaining steady jobs and relationships. Yet many people are not diagnosed until later in life when they don't have access to services because they don't have health insurance or their insurance doesn't cover it. The U.S. Surgeon General reports that 10 percent of children and adolescents suffer from serious emotional and mental disorders that significantly affect their daily lives. However, offering mental health screening in schools can raise other complex issues. Some warn that mass screenings will over-diagnose students and stigmatize them with a life-long label. "People have to be very cautious when they are talking cavalierly about screening these kids. How do people feel if they are over-identify or underidentify? ... The consequences to that are big," said Linda Juszczak, president of the School-Based Health Alliance, a group that advocates for school clinics. Some also say mass screenings could uncover mental health problems that schools lack resources to treat. "Once we screen and assess and discover the need, I think it's our responsibility to have the resources in place to service every one of those needs that are uncovered," said Denise Wheatley-Rowe, of Behavioral Health System Baltimore. The organization developed a system that has gained national recognition using a team of school officials and community mental health experts to target students most in need. The program has grown from four schools to more than 100 in the past 25 years. The team identifies children who may need help based on factors like whether they have a parent in prison or who struggles with substance abuse. Before children enter middle and high school, the team scans data for those struggling academically and behaviorally, including those with high truancy or suspension rates, and then offers individual counseling or family therapy based on the student's need. Matthew Palma, 10, attended play sessions as a kindergartener as part of Primary Project, which screens 3,000 kindergarten and first-graders in Palm http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/14/health/americ an-psychosis-attacks-mental-healthcare.html?ref=views Controversy Plagues Mental Health Screenings At Schools After his father was diagnosed with cancer, a 15year-old Champaign, Ill., teen started skipping school, erupting in angry outbursts, yelling at teachers and punching holes in walls or retreating to his room paralyzed by an overwhelming sadness. When the teen's assistant principal approached him a few months ago about seeking help for mental illness, the student initially declined, saying he didn't need it. However, eventually he did seek treatment. Diagnosed with major depressive disorder, he joined group therapy sessions at his school. As stories about increasing school violence dominate headlines, experts say many teens are struggling with untreated mental illness. However, even though federal health officials recommended universal mental health screenings for students nearly a decade ago, they still aren't required. An Associated Press review of policies around the nation shows screenings vary widely not only from state to state, but within each school district. There's no consistency on whether the schools screen, what age they screen and what they screen for. "We have (schools) screening for all kinds of rare infectious diseases and then we don't screen for common behavioral disorders that are costly to the individual, the family and society in terms of health care utilization, crime cost and high risk of death ... it doesn't make any sense from a public health perspective," said Mike Dennis, of Chestnut Health Systems in Normal, Ill. He teaches clinicians in 49 states how to assess and treat patients with mental illness and substance abuse. Although the 15-year-old Illinois student was not diagnosed through a school program, in his school-based group therapy he's learning practical tips to identify his triggers and calm them before emotions spin out of control. "I think it is a good idea because a lot of people think they don't need help but they actually do," said the teen, who is not being identified by The Associated Press because he is a minor. The federal government does not keep track of school mental health screening, so it's all but impossible to say how many schools do or don't offer it. The offerings vary from intensive services to virtually 43 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Beach County each year through a one-page assessment completed by teachers. About 650 are referred for play sessions. Children with less severe issues, such as trouble expressing themselves or making friends, attend play therapy weekly for three months. Children with more serious issues are referred for other services. The program, which costs $560,000 a year, is in 12 schools — about 10 percent of schools in the district — but program leaders say they get daily requests to expand. Matthew's mother, Susan, says his confidence improved dramatically and the now fifth grader isn't afraid to talk to adults or raise his hand in class. (Lakeland Ledger, 1/13/14) know they would qualify for Medicaid. Martinez estimates seven out of ten of the uninsured patients she sees can now get coverage, if those patients follow up and apply. Hospitals are motivated to sign patients up. For those who qualify for subsidized, private insurance, the reimbursement rates are welcome revenue at a time when hospitals are facing Medicare cuts. As for Medicaid, 26 states and the District of Columbia have opened the program up to most poor adults, and that means if an uninsured patient, like Angela, is found eligible, hospitals can get paid retroactively for medical treatments going as far back as three months. “I think the emergency department waiting room is one of those places where you have low-hanging fruit,” says Renee Hsai, an associate professor of emergency medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. “They’re not the sickest of the sick because at least someone, the triage nurse, has deemed them stable enough to wait. And if they’re waiting, they might as well be filling out some application form, or at least learning about the process.” The president and CEO of O’Connor Hospital, Jim Dover, doesn’t expect to get a whole lot more money if more people are signed up for Medicaid. California has one of the lowest reimbursement rates in the nation. Even so, he sees it as a worthy goal. Dover says he wants to get patients insured so they don’t have to come to the ER for common problems. “Let me use this metaphor: A person is coming down the river, and they’re drowning, and you jump in and pull them out. And then they come down again, and you pull them out. Next. Two. Three. Four. Five. At some point, you have to go up the river and take care of the spot where they’re all falling in.” But few in the crowd staring blankly at the TVs in the emergency department waiting room, and parents corralling sick and grumpy children, seem in the mood to sign up for health insurance. Angela Felan emerged from seeing the doctor clutching a stack of papers. The doctor told her she had a worrisome ear infection and needed antibiotics. When she came to the emergency department a few days ago, the discharge nurse didn’t mention anything about new insurance option. But at the end of this visit, she says, “someone said they would give me a financial packet, and I could call the number on that and someone would go over financial options with me.” Calling later sounded good to Felan. She had spent enough time in the ER and was ready to rest. “You just want to go home and just relax and not deal with anything �cause your head is pounding and you just don’t feel good.” (Kaiser Health News, 1/14/14) http://www.theledger.com/article/20140113/NEWS/ 140119673/-1/NEWS99?p=all&tc=pgall#gsc.tab=0 Emergency Rooms Are Front Line For Enrolling New Obamacare Customers Angela Felan is sitting in the emergency department waiting room at O’Connor Hospital for the second time in a week. A blue surgical mask covers her nose and mouth, and her hoodie sweatshirt is pulled snug over her head. She first came into the emergency room a few days ago with what she thought was bronchitis. The doctor prescribed an inhaler that cost her $56. She works part-time in retail and hasn’t had insurance for at least a decade because she can't afford it. “And unfortunately, even not having insurance is just as expensive,” she says. Felan, 31, has heard of the state’s insurance exchange – called Covered California – but she worries coverage will still be pricey. She’s unsure if she will qualify for subsidies for private insurance because of her low income, or even Medicaid. “As far as today goes, I’m expecting another large bill from the hospital,” Felan says. “Previously, when I would come in uninsured, I would get like a $200 or $300 bill for just one visit.” Some 5,000 uninsured people come into O’Connor Hospital’s emergency department each year, and now it is Araceli Martinez’s job to help them find coverage. In an office just down the hall from the ER, Martinez runs the Health Benefits Resource Center which has beefed up staffing and hours, with funding from Covered California, in response to the Affordable Care Act. Martinez says prior to 2014, uninsured patients had few options to pay off hefty hospital bills or enroll in health coverage. Now when they come in through the emergency room and are faced with a bill, “they’re saying at that time, �Well, maybe I can afford [some coverage].’” Still, most patients remain thoroughly befuddled about the law. Half of uninsured adults who could get policies now through the health insurance marketplaces have never tried to buy insurance on their own, and, in California, nearly one out of two poor adults don’t http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2014/Janu ary/14/Signing-Up-For-Obamacare-In-The-ER.aspx 44 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 the monthly premium but the lower the copays and deductibles. Nearly A Quarter Of Health Marketplace Enrollees Are Young Adults Nearly a quarter of the 2.2 million people who have enrolled in health coverage in the health law's insurance marketplaces are young adults — the population that's hardest to reach and yet most vital for the financial stability of the new exchanges, the Obama administration announced Monday. While federal officials say they are pleased with the early turnout, they want to increase the proportion of young adults buying plans before open enrollment ends March 31. Almost 40 percent of the potential market for the exchanges is people 18 to 34 years old. Based on the Congressional Budget Office estimate that 7 million people would enroll this year, that would be 2.7 million young adults. According to the government figures released Monday, 24 percent of those enrolling in the marketplaces through Dec. 28 were adults ages 18 to 34. Though no one expected young adults to be first in line signing up for coverage this fall, trouble with healthcare.gov during October and November has increased the challenge of reaching them. "There's no question because of the technological challenge, that outreach to that population was put on hold and folks coming to the website in October and November were those who were super-motivated," said Sabrina Corlette, research professor at the Health Policy Institute at Georgetown University. Corlette noted that experts always expected most young people to wait until late in the enrollment period to enroll. "I do not see anything about the age breakdown figures that strikes me to get super excited about or super depressed about," she said. Getting enough young adults to sign up for coverage is critical to keeping the marketplaces financially viable by subsidizing the older and sicker people who are gaining coverage because insurers can no longer turn people away for pre-existing illnesses or charge them higher rates. If too many sick people buy insurance, it could lead to higher rates in future years that could eventually compromise the market. The health law's individual mandate was put in place largely to make sure young adults signed up. The details about young adults came in a briefing from top Health and Human Services officials and from an HHS report that for the first time provided details about enrollees' age and plan choice on a state by state basis. Some states individually had released data. The officials announced: -- About 60 percent of people buying policies on the marketplaces chose a silver plan, 20 percent bought bronze, 13 percent bought gold and 7 percent bought platinum. Policies run from platinum as the most expensive, followed by gold, silver and bronze, the lowest tier. The higher the metal tier, the higher  Only about 1 percent of people chose a catastrophic plan which requires enrollees to pay much of their medical costs up to a certain amount. Catastrophic plans are available for people under age 30, those with a financial hardship or those who have had their insurance policy canceled.  About 80 percent of those buying a plan qualified for a financial subsidy. Women were more likely to purchase plans on the exchange with only 46 percent of enrollees being male. Administration officials say they hope to enroll more men.  The top five states for enrollment are California (498,794), Florida (158,030), New York (156,902), Texas (118,532) and North Carolina (107,778). Young adults are the most likely group to lack coverage — 19 million people between 18 and 34 are uninsured. Most say they do not buy policies because they can’t afford it, says Aaron Smith, founder and executive director of nonprofit group Young Invincibles, a proponent of the health law. "The 24 percent figure suggests we are on the right track," he said. About 18 million of the 19 million will qualify for subsidies to buy private coverage or for Medicaid, he said. Because of concerns about sicker consumers overwhelming the risk pool, much attention has been centered on young adults. But Cori Uccello, senior health policy fellow at American Academy of Actuaries, cautioned that age distribution is only important as a rough barometer of health status of people signing up for coverage. "It’s not just the distribution of age, but the health status at every age and what is their experience (in using insurance)," she said. She added that the age distribution of those buying coverage only matters if it's much different than what insurers based their assumptions on in setting premiums. "Among young adults, momentum is particularly strong," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in the telephone briefing with reporters. In addition to young adults buying health plans, about 3 million have gained coverage because of a provision in the law that allow them to stay under their parents' policy until age 26, she said. The data about young people released Monday mirror what some state marketplaces have already reported. There had been concerns that states relying on the federal exchange would have less consumer outreach and would have a lower proportion of younger people signing up. So far, there’s not a big difference. Among the 14 state exchanges, about 25 percent of enrollees are between 18 and 34 compared to 23 percent for the 45 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 36 states in the federal exchange. The percentage of young people enrolling ranges from 17 percent in West Virginia and Arizona to 44 percent in the District of Columbia. The individual state proportions matter because each state is a different insurance market that has its own pricing. The low level in Arizona is “a little surprising because we’ve been doing enrollment at community colleges and we have had a good response,” said David Aguirre, health care marketplace coordinator for the Greater Phoenix Urban League. But since so many of the students live out of state, they may be reluctant to enroll in Arizona’s exchange, which is administered by the federal government, he said. Now that the second semester of college has started for many students, Aguirre said his staff is giving it another try. He expects more younger people will enroll by March 31. “We are pushing every day and we are out there bugging them to make sure they understand,” he said. Smith of the Young Invincibles said that the disparity of rates among states shows those doing outreach will see a larger share of young people sign up. No data was released about people enrolling in individual plans outside the marketplaces. Those numbers could, of course, impact insurers’ risk pools. HHS officials said that some of the differences reflect differences in the average age of state populations. They noted that West Virginia and Arizona have higher percentages of older people than some other states. California, which accounts for nearly 500,000 people who have chosen a health plan, had 25 percent enrollment among young adults. HHS spokeswoman Julie Bataille said the administration would widen its outreach efforts in the next few months, which is expected to include television advertising during the Olympic Games in February. “There has been a lot of attention to the mix of individuals signing up for coverage so at the end of the day we have a balanced insurance pool,” said Mike Hash, who directs the HHS’ Office of Health Reform. “The trend is suggestive of an appropriate mix in the marketplace. We are only halfway through and we expect an increase in the proportion of young adults as we go forward.” A recent survey by The Commonwealth Fund, a nonpartisan research group, found that 41 percent of those who had shopped on state marketplaces were ages 19 to 34. A study in November by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KHN is an editorially independent program of the foundation), downplayed concerns about so called "death spiral" if not enough young people enrolled. Under a worst-case scenario in which just 25 percent of enrollees are age 18 to 34, then insurers would have to raise premiums by just 2.4 percent in 2015. (Kaiser Health News, 1/13/14) Insurance Sign-Ups Skew Older, Spurring Cost Concerns Halfway through the six-month enrollment period for private insurance under the health care law, just one in four adult enrollees are between ages 18 and 34, the crucial demographic group whose participation rates are key to keeping monthly premiums affordable. Administration officials say they are confident that a greater proportion of young people will enroll by the end of March. The New York Times: Older Pool of Health Care Enrollees Stirs Fears on Costs, People signing up for health insurance through the Affordable Care Act’s federal and state marketplaces tend to be older and potentially less healthy, officials said Monday, a demographic mix that could threaten the law’s economic underpinnings and cause premiums to rise in the future if the pattern persists (Shear and Pear, 1/13). The Washington Post: Health-Insurance Sign-Ups By Young Adults Are Off Pace Seen As Key To New Law’s Success. Young adults account for slightly less than onefourth of the Americans who signed up for health plans during the initial three months of federal and state insurance marketplaces — fewer so far than the government has said will be needed to make the economics of the new exchanges work. The figures, part of a monthly progress report on the marketplaces that was issued Monday, offer the first glimpse into whether the health plans available under the Affordable Care Act are becoming provinces of the old and sick or are managing to attract young, healthy people who have not previously considered insurance worthwhile (Goldstein and Somashkehar, 1/13). The Wall Street Journal: Health Sign-Ups Skew Older, Raising Fears Over Costs. One-third of health plan enrollees in new insurance marketplaces are 55 or older, the Obama administration said Monday, a figure that insurers said makes the pool older than they would need to sustain their coverage at current premiums. Administration officials said they are pushing to enroll more young people before a March 31 deadline for most people to get coverage for this year, and some cushions built into the law mean it won't necessarily face trouble right away even if the 2014 pool of enrollees skews older (Radnofsky and Weaver, 1/13). The Associated Press: Health Care Signups: More Older Americans So Far. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2014/Janu ary/13/HHS-marketplace-enrollment-data.aspx 46 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Younger people went for President Barack Obama at election time, but will they buy his health insurance? New government figures show it's an older, costlier crowd that's signing up so far for health insurance under Obama's health care law. Enrollments are lower for the healthy, younger Americans who will be needed to keep premiums from rising (AlonsoZaldivar, 1/14). Halfway through the six-month enrollment period for private marketplace health insurance, just one in four new adult enrollees are between ages 18 and 34, the crucial demographic group whose participation rates are key to keeping monthly premiums affordable under Obamacare. In the first release of extensive demographic data about the new enrollee population, the Obama administration said Monday that 55 percent, or roughly 1.2 million of the nearly 2.2 million people who’ve selected a federal or state marketplace plan, are generally older adults, ranging in age from 45 to 64. About 517,000, or 24 percent, of the new enrollees were young adults ages 18 to 34 (Pugh and Kumar, 1/13). USA Today: Most Insurance Enrollees Older Than 45, Records Show. More than half of the almost 2.2 million people who bought health insurance on federal and state exchanges in the past three months are older than 45, records released Monday show. If that trend holds, it could skew the health insurance market as older policyholders that use more health care are not balanced by younger policyholders who tend to use less health care. In effect, the younger policyholders subsidize older ones (Kennedy, 1/13). Marketplace: Obamacare Stats Show Young Folks Are Signing Up. Just under a quarter of Obamacare sign-ups so far have been in the critical 18-to-35-year-old age range, the Obama administration revealed Monday, the first time officials have given demographic data about health plan enrollees. The administration had set a goal of around 38 percent to 40 percent of the enrollees in that age bracket by the time the sign-up season ends March 31 (Cheney and Millman, 1/14). Today, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that nearly 2 million people enrolled for health insurance through the federal and state exchanges in December. That includes a dramatic increase in the number of young people signing up. That number of so-called 'young invincibles' is higher than some had predicted. And in a conference call today, HHS officials said that about one in four of all the consumers on the exchanges are between the ages of 18-34. Ideally, you want to see a higher rate, about 40 percent, of exchange customers in that age range. The data raises a bunch of questions (Gorenstein, 1/13). CBS News: Obamacare Sign-Ups Among Young Adults Off To Slow Start. The Fiscal Times: Four New Mysteries in the Obamacare Enrollment Numbers. About one-quarter of those who signed up for Obamacare by the end of 2013 were between the ages of 18 and 34, the Obama administration reported Monday, falling below what experts have called the ideal proportion of young adults in the new health insurance marketplace. However, administration officials said they are comfortable with the proportion of young enrollees so far, and they expect Obamacare enrollment in the key demographic group to accelerate in the second half of the six-month open enrollment period (Condon, 1/13). The White House is still lagging to meet selfimposed enrollment targets. And young people are not signing up at the pace the White House needs, no matter how CMS claims that they’re on track to meet their goals. Now that we know the December data, here are four mysteries in the Obamacare numbers (Francis, 1/14). Politico: Young Adults Make Up One-Fourth Of Obamacare Enrollees. The Fiscal Times: White House Claims It Will Reach Obamacare Goal Nearly a quarter of the 2.2 million Americans who have signed up for Obamacare so far are young people, ages 18-34, the demographic most important to the success of the president’s healthcare law. It’s not clear yet, however, how many have actually paid their premiums. A new White House report released Monday shows some 489,460 Americans ages 18-34 have signed up for health insurance through the state and federal exchanges since Obamacare's launch on Oct 1. Though White House officials say they are encouraged by the new numbers, they are well below the administration’s goal of enrolling 2.7 million young Americans which are needed to Fox News: Insurers Raise Cost Concerns After ObamaCare Demographic Data Released. Insurers have raised concerns that too few young people are signing up for health insurance through the ObamaCare exchanges after newly released statistics showed that less than a quarter of people who have enrolled are between the ages of 18 and 34 (1/14). McClatchy: Young Adult Enrollment In Health Care Marketplaces Lags. 47 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 subsidize the cost of older, sicker Americans (Ehley, 1/13). a plan, the federal government will give the subsidies directly to the states, instead of to individuals and families. The states are supposed to pool the money and then use the financial leverage to push insurers to offer less expensive coverage. A number of states, including New York and Washington, are eager to create such programs, but they can’t until the Obama administration issues the regulations that will govern them. “We all thought we were going to be able to start in 2014 and then we waited for the rules, and we waited and waited and waited,” said Varon, who sits on a state board that will develop Washington’s Basic Health Program when the rules are finally written. Some now fear states won’t be able to launch the programs before 2016. CQ HealthBeat: HHS Optimistic About Exchange Sign-Ups Among Young, But Enrollment Still Key Federal officials reported Monday that nearly 2.2 million Americans through Dec. 28 selected health plans from federal and state insurance exchanges. The officials said they are pleased with the sign-up rate by the key demographic group of young Americans, even though so far the percentage of young adults is lower than what the Obama administration has said will be needed by the time that open enrollment ends on March 31 (Reichard, 1/13). (Kaiser Health News, 1/14/13) http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/DailyReport.aspx?reportdate=1-14-2014 A Computational Labyrinth For now, low-income Americans who aren’t eligible for Medicaid must rely on the financial help that is available to them on the health insurance exchanges. Determining how much that amounts to is a computational labyrinth. According to the ACA, a family of three whose annual income is at 133 percent of the federal poverty level (an annual income of $24,352), should have to pay no more than 3 percent of their household income in annual premiums, or $731. In that case, the federal government would pay the insurance company the difference between $731 and the actual premium. The percentage an individual or family is expected to pay rises at higher income levels, up to 400 percent of poverty. At that income level, paying up to 9.5 percent of household income on health insurance is considered affordable. So, a family of three making $73,240 would receive a subsidy to cover premium amounts above $6,958. People making between 133 and 250 percent of the poverty level also can get help with their out-of-pocket medical expenses, such as co-payments for visits to the doctor, providing they purchase at least a “Silver” plan on the exchange. The exchanges offer up to four different tiers of health insurance plans: “Bronze,” “Silver,” “Gold” and “Platinum.” Bronze plans have the cheapest premiums, but leave policyholders with the highest co-payments and deductibles. Platinum plans have the highest premiums but the lowest co-pays and deductibles. Under the Silver plans, people making more than 250 percent of the poverty level can expect to contribute an average of 30 percent for their medical costs, with their insurance company paying the rest. But those with incomes below 250 percent of the poverty level can get federal assistance with their out-of-pocket expenses. At 133 percent of the poverty level, an individual or family could contribute as little as 6 percent to the cost of their medical bills with the insurance company and the federal government picking up the rest. Those cost- Affording the Affordable Care Act The promise of the Affordable Care Act is right there in its title: Affordable. Yet, anti-poverty agencies across the country fear that even with the federal financial assistance available under the law, health insurance will remain unaffordable for significant numbers of low-income Americans. “For those with very low wages trying to raise kids, after paying for housing, electricity, food, transportation, and child care, asking people to pay another $50 or $100 a month, that’s just out of reach,” said Sireesha Manne, a staff attorney at the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is designed to make insurance affordable for Americans with low and moderate incomes— particularly since it requires all Americans to have health insurance starting this year, or face financial penalties. The law expands Medicaid eligibility (in the states that have agreed to do so) to the poorest Americans—those making up to 133 percent of the federal poverty line. But it also provides financial assistance for those making up to 400 percent of the poverty level to help them buy private insurance on the new state health exchanges. Still, the financial help isn’t enough for some. “Even with the subsidies, some people simply won’t be able to manage to pay their health insurance premiums consistently with all the other costs facing them,” said Janet Varon, executive director of the Northwest Health Law Advocates in Seattle which works on health access issues. Financial Leverage The authors of the ACA anticipated this problem. To address it, the law allows states to create a separate insurance program, called the Basic Health Program, for people who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid and too little to afford insurance on the state exchanges, even with federal aid. Under such 48 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 saving breaks, however, are only available for those selecting Silver plans, apparently to entice people away from Bronze plans with their high deductibles and co-pays. seems months away, if not longer. In the meantime, she predicts that policymakers will be hearing about legions of Americans who still can’t afford health care—no matter the title of the Affordable Care Act. (Stateline, 1/14/14) Defining “Affordable” Obamacare’s Narrow Networks Are Going To Make People Furious — But They Might Control Costs Despite all of this assistance, health insurance still may not be “affordable” for some. Affordability, like beauty, is a matter of opinion. “What it means for something to be affordable or not affordable is totally debatable,” said Sherry Glied, dean of New York University’s Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service. “It isn’t like there’s a fixed definition of affordability.” That’s particularly true in the U.S., where the cost of living varies so strikingly. “What’s poor in Mississippi is different from what’s poor in New York state,” said Elisabeth Benjamin, an executive with the Community Service Society of New York. “People have so little disposable income in New York City and other urban areas, but the law doesn’t do geographic indexing.” Using cost of living data on the Albuquerque area from the Economic Policy Institute, Kelsey Heilman, a former staff attorney with the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty, showed that a single mother of two making 200 percent of the poverty level would have virtually no money left for health care premiums or health care expenses after paying for housing, food, transportation and other necessities. That mother, Heilman said, might decide to go with the cheaper Bronze plan, but then she would forgo the costsharing help the federal government makes available for Silver plan policyholders. As a result, she might pay as much as 40 percent of her medical expenses out of pocket, instead of the 13 percent she would have to pay with a Silver plan. That difference could amount to more than $3,000 a year. Those who decide to forgo insurance can ask for hardship exemptions from the financial penalty. But getting medical care is likely to become increasingly difficult for them because the federal government is cutting its payments to hospitals that provide charitable care to the poor. Other possible solutions to the affordability problem have also surfaced. Massachusetts, which enacted its own health care reforms in 2006, won federal permission to use Medicaid dollars to provide premium and cost-sharing assistance for those with incomes below 300 percent of the poverty level who purchased private insurance on the Massachusetts exchange. Other states could apply for permission to do the same, but it is a months-long process. States also might seek to raise eligibility for Medicaid above the 133 percent threshold. Manne, with the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty, said some businesses and hospitals have talked about voluntarily undertaking sponsorships to help those unable to pay premiums or meet out-ofpocket obligations. But, Manne said, broad relief Welcome to Health Reform Watch, Sarah Kliff’s regular look at how the Affordable Care Act is changing the American health-care system — and being changed by it. You can reach Sarah with questions, comments and suggestions here. Check back every Monday, Wednesday and Friday afternoon for the latest edition or sign up here to receive it straight from your inbox. Read previous columns here. "Surprise! Kentucky health exchange networks may exclude your hospital," reads one recent headline in the Louisville Courier Journal. Or, as Time magazine puts it, "Keeping your doctor under Obamacare is no easy feat." Behind these stories lurks a policy idea that's central to Obamacare's approach to controlling costs, but anathema to many health-care consumers: "Narrow networks." Just the name itself, a narrow network, sounds like a miserable, restrictive health plan that you would just as well avoid. But health-care experts love narrow networks, pointing out that they underpin some of the country's most successful health plans. So what's a narrow network? It's best to start with some definitions: Narrow networks are health insurance plans that place limits on the doctors and hospitals available to their subscribers. They tend to do this in two ways, the first -- and most obvious -- by simply not paying for trips to doctors that aren't in their restricted network. The second version, a bit more nuanced, typically has health insurance plans charging higher co-payments to go see a doctor who isn't in the "top tier." In this case, you can go out-of-network -- but will have to pay a higher price in order to do so. Why shouldn't I be able to see any doctor I want? Less choice in a health plan typically means lower premiums. First, the insurance plan can decide to only sign contracts with the hospitals that charge lower prices. There is huge, huge variation in health-care prices; an appendectomy, for example, can cost anywhere between $1,529 and $186,955. By only signing contracts with providers who are more in the $1,529-range -- and, ideally, who also have pretty good outcomes on their appendectomies -insurance plans can lower the price of providing health care without compromising quality. Second, insurance plans that work with a smaller handful of providers would have more leverage to demand even lower prices from these hospitals and doctors. They're essentially promising to buy in bulk from a 49 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 small set of physicians, and can therefore reduce the cost they pay for each visit. That, then, allows them to offer lower premiums to the people buying health insurance. Did Obamacare invent narrow networks? No, Obamacare is accelerating a preexisting trend. Narrow network plans have become increasingly popular in recent years, growing from 15 percent of the insurance plans that employers offered in 2007 to 23 percent in 2012. Many exchange carriers are offering limited provider networks," Timothy Jost, a supporter of the health law, writes in a recent edition of Health Affairs. "Consumers will like the low premiums but will be unhappy to learn that their doctors are not available and shocked to discover charges from out-ofnetwork specialists when they go to in-network hospitals." Are narrow network plans worse for patients? The growth of narrow network plans, as Jost points out, isn't one that tends to be favorably viewed by patients. When they're told certain doctors are off limits, subscribers are predictably frustrated. But whether narrow networks are actually bad for patients' health -- whether losing access to the most expensive hospital also means losing access to the best hospital -- is a totally different question, and one that's difficult to answer. The patients' worry tends to be losing access to the best doctors, especially when the networks getting cut out are the most expensive. It makes sense, intuitively, that the most expensive hospitals are probably the best -- if not, why would they charge so much money? Alas, the health-care system is anything but intuitive and, most research suggests, there is very little connection between how much we pay for health care and the quality of the provider. "Evidence of the direction of association between health care cost and quality is inconsistent," Peter Hussey, Samuel Wertheimer and Ateev Mehrotra wrote in a recent RAND literature review. "Most studies have found that the association between cost and quality is small to moderate, regardless of whether the direction is positive or negative." In other words: It's completely possible that cutting out an expensive hospital cuts out a top-notch provider. And, it's equally possible that cutting out an expensive hospital eliminates a provider who charges excessive fees without delivering really great As you can see in this graph from the Kaiser Family Foundation, narrow networks were taking hold well before the Affordable Care Act, as employers looked to tamp down on premiums growth. But most observers also agree that the health-care law helped accelerate the growth of these plans. So what's Obamacare doing here, exactly? The move toward narrow networks in Obamacare is a function of the way the law sets up competition between insurers on the exchanges. Insurers can no longer compete by trying to be the best at only covering healthy people, or by endlessly lowering benefits and raising deductibles. So limiting provider choice emerged as one of the few levers that health plans had to hold down premiums. And a lot of them did: approximately 70 percent of the exchange plans are either narrow or ultra-narrow plans, according to a study by McKinsey and Co. The consulting firm defined "narrow" as having at least 30 percent of the 20 largest hospitals in the geographic region not participating in the plan. 50 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 medical care. "Narrow networks are not some cruel attempt to limit patient choice foisted upon us by the insurance industry," David Dranove and Craig Garthwaite, two professors at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Business, write. "Instead, these plans may provide our best opportunity for harnessing market forces to lower prices. Even high priced providers know they stand a good chance of being in broad networks. But insurers offering narrow networks can be picky about which providers they select." And, in some cases, the narrowness of a network can be a big boon: Doctors get to know their smaller group of patients very well. As Bill Eggbeer and Dudley Morris point out in a recent BDC Advisors’ white paper, Kaiser Permanente is arguably the country's largest narrow network provider, although it rarely gets described that way. Kaiser limits patients' choices to the doctors it employs -- but also gives each and every one of those doctors access to a patient's medical record. In this narrow network there's space for managing a patient's care across different visits. The health plan has "approximately 9 million members and is achieving high marks for cost efficiency and patient satisfaction," they write. It also limits patients' choice severely, just to Kaiser Permanente facilities, which all use the same electronic medical records. When your choice of hospitals gets limited to those with high quality ratings then, all of a sudden, a limited network doesn't seem so bad at all. That's not to say this is the case with all exchange plans; it most likely is not. Rather, a narrow network isn't inherently a bad health insurance policy. It all depends on the quality of providers that end up in the narrow network, and how well they work together to deliver health care. (Washington Post, 1/13/14) 2010 Affordable Care Act seeks to get health insurance to the 15 percent of Americans who don’t have it in several ways: with online health marketplaces called exchanges, by expanding Medicaid and by changing insurance laws so that companies cannot refuse to cover certain people or stop their coverage once it gets expensive. To sign people up, the Obama administration recruited and trained so-called navigators, assistants to help people choose which plans would be best for them among the dozens of choices in some states. And community health centers launched their own efforts, because many of their clients fall into the groups most in need of health insurance. But after the Supreme Court gave them the option, many states decided not to expand Medicaid — even though the federal government will pay for the entire cost until 2017. Around 20 have decided against it. In addition, states such as Missouri, Montana, Texas and Florida have passed law restricting what navigators and others can ask and say in helping people enroll in health care. They're all states that have refused to expand Medicaid or to operate exchanges, forcing the federal government to step in and do it. The Missouri law requires the navigators to pass an exam and pay a fee before they can be licensed by the state. Texas is requiring extra training and testing for navigators, while Florida forbids navigators from working in state offices. Supporters of the laws say it's important to ensure that people working with private information — names, addresses, Social Security numbers and income details — be properly trained and vetted. The Obama administration calls it "bullying." "This is a blatant attempt to add cumbersome requirements to the navigator program and deter groups from working to inform Americans about their new health insurance options and help them enroll in coverage,” U.S. Health and Human Services department spokesman Fabien Levy said in September after Texas passed its law. Some of the laws were passed to address issues raised by licensed insurance agents and brokers, Rosenbaum says. But it has affected efforts to help people sign up. “The big smoking gun as far as I am concerned is assisting in selecting a health plan,” Rosenbaum told NBC News. “There is a highly significant difference between the restrictive states and the non-restrictive states in community enrollment assisters who are actually helping people figure out the health plans.” Don McBride of ACCESS Family Care in Neosho, Mo., says he’s seen it. “We have been handicapped,” McBride told NBC News. “But with everything that is going on, I think we are making the best of it.” “We haven’t been able to reach as many people,” agreed Kally Taul, outreach coordinator and a navigator at the clinic system. But McBride, Taul and others say they are not simply being hobbled by state laws. It’s more http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/w p/2014/01/13/obamacares-narrow-networks-aregoing-to-make-people-furious-but-they-mightcontrol-costs/ State Efforts To Block Obamacare Are Working, Study Finds States whose governments are hostile to Obamacare are hindering efforts to get people signed up for health insurance, according to a study released Tuesday. Laws restricting outreach and enrollment efforts have handicapped community health centers that are a key component of plans to get health insurance to millions of Americans who lack it, researchers at George Washington University found. “This is the first study to attempt to measure the impact of restrictive state policies,” said Sara Rosenbaum, who led the team at GW’s Department of Health Policy that did the study. “The navigator laws are having a real effect.” The 51 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 complex than that, they say. “It’s not the funding. The main thing is the negative publicity,” Taul said. Bad publicity had made people mistrustful, McBride agreed. “They call it �Obamacare’ and it’s like the atom bomb,” he said. “It is definitely going to take some time to build trust.” Rosenbaum’s team surveyed 606 out of the nation’s 1,198 federally qualified community health centers. They compared the answers from health centers in states that have embraced health reform to those that have been less welcoming and found that community health centers in restrictive states had smaller enrollment staffs and workers there expected more of the patients they assisted to remain uninsured. At least 19 states have passed laws that limit what navigators or other assisters may say and do, or that add hours of training and licensing requirements on top of what the federal governments asks. “Health centers in restrictive states reported approximately half the staffing capacity maintained by health centers in full implementation states,” the report reads. “Of particular significance in measuring the impact of navigator restrictions is the fact that health centers in restrictive states were significantly less likely to assist with plan enrollment,” it adds. This can hurt because the people signing up at health centers are those who are the least likely to understand health insurance in the first place, Rosenbaum says. “The significantly lower rate of plan enrollment assistance suggests that the regulatory burdens created by navigator laws are affecting not only the work of certified navigators but community outreach and enrollment efforts more generally,” the report concludes. “When you change the policy environment and put the brakes on things, it really trickles down to the community,” Rosenbaum said. The survey was done last year and it's too soon to say whether actual enrollments were affected. The Obama administration said Monday that 2.2 million people have signed up for private health insurance on the exchanges, and more than 3 million more have newly qualified for Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance plan for the low-income. (NBC News, 1/14/14) http://www.nbcnews.com/health/state-effortsblock-obamacare-are-working-study-finds2D11922402 Monday night, neutralized almost all of the 134 policy provisions that House Republicans had hoped to include, with negotiators opting for cooperation over confrontation after the 16-day government shutdown in October. Measures to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases and reverse clean water regulations did not survive the final negotiations. Republicans also relented on their efforts to strip financing to carry out the Affordable Care Act. “Obamacare lives another day,” said Senator Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, the chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. The compromises may be difficult to accept for conservative Republicans, many of whom campaigned in 2010 vowing never to vote on a phone-book-size bill they have not had time to read. And because many of them will balk, the bill will have to have bipartisan support to pass. Republican and Democratic leaders said they believed they would easily get majorities in the House and Senate, but not without loud protests from both the right and the left. Republicans do get to point to some conservative victories. The bill would cut $1 billion from the Affordable Care Act’s Prevention and Public Health Fund, which Republicans have long targeted, fearing the administration would use it to bolster the law’s online insurance exchanges. The legislation also would impose new requirements for the Internal Revenue Service in reporting its activities to the public and Congress after the agency’s scrutiny of Tea Party groups’ applications for nonprofit status. The $11.3 billion appropriated for the I.R.S. is down $503 million from the level enacted in 2013. No money would be given to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s high-speed rail projects, or to Mr. Obama’s preschool development grants program. And some new regulations supported by liberals would be blocked, including a standard for energyefficient light bulbs and livestock and poultry controls. Conservatives also succeeded in prohibiting the Obama administration from transferring inmates to the United States from the military prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Otherwise, the bill’s winners and losers seem to follow no patterns. The National Institutes of Health, long a congressional favorite, would get $29.9 billion, down $714 million from the level approved by Congress for 2013. Still, the N.I.H. would end up with $1 billion more than it did last year after the across-the-board spending cuts, known as sequestration, severely curtailed its research grants. In contrast, Head Start, which also suffered last year, would see a $612 million increase, enough to restore the sequestration cuts. The military budget would total $572.6 billion, $20 billion less than House Republicans wanted. The bill also explicitly prohibits the Postal Service from cutting Saturday mail delivery or closing rural post House And Senate Negotiators Agree On Spending Bill House and Senate negotiators reached accord on a trillion-dollar spending plan that will finance the government through September, reversing some cuts to military veterans’ pensions that were included in a broader budget agreement last month and defeating efforts to rein in President Obama’s health care law. The hefty bill, filed in the House on 52 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 offices. Despite the concern over security after the 2012 attack on the United States Mission in Benghazi, Libya, the spending bill earmarks less to embassy security, construction and maintenance than it allotted for fiscal 2013 — $2.67 billion, down by $224 million. Specific areas of the country would benefit from provisions. They include $128 million for an expanded border crossing station at San Ysidro, Calif., between San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico. But the final bill allocates less than the $226 million for the project that had been requested by the Obama administration. The spending bill’s costs were set in a deal last month by Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin and Senator Patty Murray of Washington, leaders of the Budget Committees. But the final bill restores part of that accord’s most controversial spending cut — a one-percentage-point reduction in cost-of-living adjustments to the pensions of working-age military veterans. Under the bill, that cut will not apply to disabled veterans. Lawmakers in both parties have pledged to eliminate the reduction. The final plan would raise spending on programs at Congress’s annual discretion by $25 billion over the limit originally set by the House, but it cuts spending by $25 billion from the limit approved by the Senate. (New York Times, 1/13/14) But in a blow to the District, it provides only partial funding to continue constructing buildings for the Department of Homeland Security’s campus in Anacostia. The White House and leaders of both parties praised the measure, which would fund federal agencies for the remainder of the fiscal year and end the lingering threat of a government shutdown when the current funding bill expires at midnight Wednesday. “The bipartisan appropriations bill represents a positive step forward for the nation and our economy,” White House budget director Sylvia Mathews Burwell said in a statement. The spending bill puts flesh on the bones of a bipartisan budget deal struck in December, when Republicans and Democrats agreed to partially repeal the sequester, heading off a roughly $20 billion cut set to hit the Pentagon on Wednesday and restoring funding to domestic agencies, which had already absorbed sequester reductions. Despite the increases, the bill would leave agency budgets tens of billions of dollars lower than Obama had requested and congressional Democrats had sought. That represents a victory for congressional Republicans, who, after three years of fevered battles over the budget, have succeeded in rolling back agency appropriations to a level on par with the final years of the George W. Bush administration, before spending skyrocketed in an effort to combat the recession. Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, said he expects a majority of lawmakers in both parties to support the measure. “Everybody can find something to complain about — legitimately so,” Cole said. “But from the Republican standpoint, gosh, this is $164 billion less than Bush’s last discretionary budget, so that’s pretty good progress in cutting spending.” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/14/us/politics/ho use-and-senate-negotiators-agree-on-spendingbill.html?emc=edit_tnt_20140113&tntemail0=y&_r= 0 Lawmakers Unveil Massive $1.1 Trillion Spending Bill In Bipartisan Compromise Congressional negotiators unveiled a $1.1 trillion funding bill late Monday that would ease sharp spending cuts known as the sequester while providing fresh cash for new priorities, including President Obama’s push to expand early-childhood education. The 1,582-page bill would fully restore cuts to Head Start, partially restore cuts to medical research and job training programs, and finance new programs to combat sexual assault in the military. It would also give all federal workers a 1 percent raise. 53 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Many Democrats agreed. “Compared to the sequester, this is obviously a big improvement. But compared to investments we should be making, it falls far short,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee. The measure proves, he said, that “this notion that the federal government is on a spending binge is just nonsense.” With the deadline for a government shutdown fast approaching Wednesday night, House and Senate leaders were preparing a temporary bill to keep the government open through Saturday. That would give lawmakers the rest of the week to review the massive new measure, which proposes funding and policy changes that would reach into every corner of the federal government. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) met through the weekend to put the finishing touches on the package. The pair released a joint statement late Monday, along with a photo showing them smiling happily and shaking hands. “As with any compromise, not everyone will like everything in this bill,” the statement said. “But in this divided government a critical bill such as this simply cannot reflect the wants of only one party.” Given barely a month to complete work on the package, Mikulski and Rogers were able to overcome early partisan disputes over funding for the Affordable Care Act, Obama’s signature legislative achievement, and payments due to the International Monetary Fund, a frequent target of conservatives. To sweeten the package, they agreed to include a provision that would exempt disabled veterans from a modest pension reduction for military retireesenacted last month to help cover the cost of the sequester repeal. All told, the bill would provide $1.012 trillion to the Pentagon and other federal agencies. An additional $92 billion would be set aside for overseas operations, including military activity in Afghanistan and assistance for the growing flow of refugees fleeing the war in Syria. The bill also authorizes $6.55 billion for domestic disaster relief. The measure authorizes a 1 percent pay increase for civilian federal workers and U.S. military personnel. But in response to several examples of excess spending by federal agencies, the bill would put in place new limits on certain conferences, official travel and employee awards. The National Institutes of Health would receive $29.9 billion, $1 billion more than under the sequester but $714 million less than the agency was due to receive last year before the sequester hit last March. Carrie Wolinetz, president of United for Medical Research, a consortium of patient, provider and research organizations, said the proposal “won’t adequately reverse the damage done by last year’s budget sequester and ensure the nation’s biomedical research enterprise makes continued progress in lifesaving research and development.” The Department of Education would get $70.6 billion, including full restoration of Head Start funding. And while Republicans refused to finance Obama’s push for universal pre-kindergarten classes, they granted his request to expand Head Start partnerships that benefit toddlers and infants. The Department of Homeland Security would face a reduction in funding of about $336 million, with most of the cuts at the scandal-ridden Transportation Security Administration. In a victory for Republicans who have sought for years to boost the use of private security contractors, the agreement increases funding for private security screeners and caps the TSA’s overall screening personnel at 46,000. The agreement is riddled with dozens of controversial policy riders. One would bar funding to enforce a law that requires incandescent light bulbs to meet new efficiency standards. The measure would continue a ban on transferring terrorism detainees at the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to sites in the United States. It would also withhold additional funding for the government of Afghanistan until the country agrees to a new bilateral security agreement. And the measure would ban foreign aid for Libya until Secretary of State John F. Kerry “confirms Libyan cooperation” with ongoing investigations into the Sept. 11, 2012, attack at the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi. The measure would also provide new congressional backing for Obama’s strategy of continuing aid to Egypt, despite a law that forbids U.S. military aid to governments that have taken power by military coup, as Egypt’s interim military-backed government did in July. Several issues regarding gun control are also included in the bill. The legislation restricts the Justice and Homeland Security departments from establishing programs similar to the “Fast and Furious” gun-tracking effort. In response to allegations that the administration has been stockpiling ammunition for use by federal agents, the measure also requires Homeland Security to provide detailed reports on its purchase and use of ammunition. The measure also continues a ban on the use of federal funding to perform most abortions, including abortions in the District and for federal prisoners. But Republicans agreed to jettison other contentious proposals, including a ban on new federal regulations for greenhouse gases and the “global gag rule,” which sought to prohibit U.S. funding for organizations that give women information about abortion. (Washington Post, 1/14/14) http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy /members-of-congress-to-unveil-massive-spendingbill-in-bipartisancompromise/2014/01/13/71db3a8c-7c9e-11e39556-4a4bf7bcbd84_stor 54 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 the estimated seven million who would sign up overall for 2014. The accompanying chart shows the exchanges aren't hitting that goal. Just 24 percent of those who have chosen a plan were between 18 and 34. By contrast, the largest share of enrollees -- one third -- are between 55 and 64. (There's a caveat here: The administration could claim that its definition of young and healthy covered everyone under 35, including the 6 percent of exchange enrollees who are under 18. That would still leave it short of its stated goal, as well as looking a touch eager to persuade the naysayers.) Everyone Can Celebrate New Obamacare Numbers Today the federal government released the most comprehensive data yet about who signed up for Obamacare through Dec. 28. There's reason to cheer for both the law's supporters and its detractors. Let's start with the good news for Obamacare fans. President Barack Obama's administration predicted -- or, well, prayed -- that enrollment in the law's state insurance exchanges, which was initially anemic, would accelerate toward the end of 2013, as the deadline approached for getting coverage by this month. As you can see from the accompanying charts, that prediction came true: More than 2 million people had chosen exchange plans by Dec. 28, almost a five-fold increase over the number enrolled a month earlier. The number of people who were deemed eligible for Medicaid also increased, but not at the same rate as private coverage. As you can see from the right-hand side of the chart, that's significantly different from the age breakdown of the uninsured population, which skews much more heavily toward the young. So one of two things is happening here. Either the old and sick are self-selecting into Obamacare, which spells trouble for insurers (and, by extension, the government, which backstops insurers against higher-than-expected risks). Or young people without insurance are taking their sweet time signing up but will do so before the March 31 deadline. The administration is obviously hoping for the latter. Today's numbers don't settle the question of whether the administration will hit its goals for enrollment in the exchanges, measured either in raw numbers or demographic breakdown. But they show that those goals are within reach. (Bloomberg, 1/13/14) The accompanying chart also shows that federally run exchanges, which initially performed worse than those operated by the states, are now enrolling people at a quicker rate than state exchanges. That's a validation of sorts for the Department of Health and Human Services, as it supports the notion that it's learning from its early mistakes. There's still plenty of work to do. For starters, in some states the number of women enrolling in Obamacare coverage exceeds the number of men, out of all proportion with demographics. But that doesn't mean the law isn't working; it means the administration needs to find better ways to persuade men to sign up for coverage. Now, the good news for detractors. The government said last year that to get the right balance between healthy and sick people on the exchanges -- and, by extension, to produce affordable premiums -- it needed 2.7 million people between 18 and 34 to sign up for coverage. That's about 40 percent of http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0113/everyone-can-celebrate-new-obamacarenumbers.html R&D Funding Is the Best Medicine American innovation, badly damaged last year by federal budget tightening and the across-the-board cuts known as sequestration, appears to be getting partial relief with the bipartisan budget deals struck 55 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 last month and Monday night. The progress is praiseworthy, but it will not counteract the decadeslong decline in federal funding for research and development that is so essential to our economic future and critical to accelerating treatments for today’s major health care challenges, including Alzheimer’s, diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Federal R&D expenditures plummeted by 16.3 percent, in constant dollars, between fiscal years 2010 and 2013, and the nation’s federal investment in science as a share of the economy currently stands at roughly 0.82 percent — the lowest point in 50 years. This recent decline comes at a time when other countries are ramping up their own investments in science and innovation. For instance, Chinese investment in R&D from all sources has increased by more than 400 percent over the past decade, while South Korea’s has more than doubled. America still outpaces those countries in total dollars invested in R&D: In 2011 (the most recent year for which there are reliable numbers), the United States invested $414 billion, compared with China’s $208.2 billion and South Korea’s $59.9 billion. But U.S. growth has been much slower than many of its peers’, and as a share of the economy we invest only slightly more in R&D than we did in the year 2000. Private companies contributed $249 billion toward the nation’s total 2011 R&D investment, but industry cannot do it alone. Governments worldwide must provide adequate support — especially for basic science, which promises big payoffs but requires the longerterm, sustainable funding that can be impractical for the private sector. Basic science aims to expand our knowledge broadly — opening doors to innovation, jobs and economic prosperity — but breakthroughs are often unpredictable and come from unlikely sources. Investigations of coral’s microstructure, for instance, eventually yielded special ceramics now commonly used in bone grafts and prosthetic eyes. Studies of jellyfish gave rise to better methods for diagnosing and treating cancer. In the global marketplace, rapidly turning ideas into products requires an open approach to innovation: Increasingly, corporate scientists must collaborate with university researchers and even competitors. This is why 13 pharmaceutical companies last year teamed up with the U.S., British and United Arab Emirates governments, as well as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, to help eradicate 10 neglected tropical diseases. U.S.-based public-private partnerships are pursuing new treatments for conditions ranging from cancer and diabetes to Crohn’s disease. Such efforts are critical in the biomedical field, as 67 million Americans deal with high blood pressure, 13 million live with cancer, 5 million suffer from Alzheimer’s disease and the number diagnosed with diabetes more than tripled between 1980 1/13/14) and 2011. (Politico Magazine, http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/01/re search-and-development-funding-is-the-bestmedicine-102122.html#ixzz2qOnKVvg5 Dealing With It A year ago the nation was caught up in a deeply emotional and contentious debate about gun control in the wake of a mass shooting of first-graders in Newtown, Conn. Although that debate withered away without expanded background checks or other significant - and sensible - measures at the national level, a related discussion continues and, we're happy to say, seems to be getting results. That discussion has to do with fixing a mental health system that, in theory, could have headed off such tragedies as Newtown, the 2011 attack on then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and last year's Washington Navy Yard rampage. Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia increased funding for mental health after the Newtown shootings, according to a report released last month by the National Alliance on Mental Illness. The NAMI report noted that Texas boosted mental health funding by $259 million, the largest increase in state history. In a state that ranked 49th in the nation for mental health funding, that's a significant development. Texas also passed a law requiring teachers and students to undergo training in how to recognize and respond to symptoms of suicide or mental illness. Meanwhile, the White House last month promised $100 million to improve mental health facilities and community centers. And last week the White House proposed a new regulation clarifying the circumstances that would bar a person with mental problems from purchasing or possessing a firearm. Last week's new regulation, issued by the Department of Justice, would expand the criteria for barring firearms sales and possessions to people ordered by a judge to undergo outpatient mental health care. Under current law, only people deemed mentally "defective" or involuntarily committed to an inpatient mental health facility can be denied a firearm. According to mental health experts, the gap between inpatient and outpatient care has been a significant loophole allowing dangerous persons to gain access to guns. It's not always easy to determine who should not have guns, although it's easy to see how the system has at times broken down. In 2007, for example, Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho was able to buy two handguns he used to kill 32 people, even though a judge had ordered him into outpatient care. Under Virginia law at the time, outpatient care wasn't a sufficient reason to submit a person's name to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background 56 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Check System, or NICS. It's important to note that the vast majority of people dealing with mental health issues are not prone to violence, and efforts to identify those who might be a danger should not add to the stigma of mental illness. Fortunately, professionals have more tools than ever to make that determination. "This nation has moved forward in knowledge of what it takes to help, but has moved backwards in getting that help done. And where there is no help there is no hope," said U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pa., in a recent CNN interview. Murphy, who spent three decades as a psychologist before being elected to Congress, has introduced legislation to increase funding for mental health initiatives. Fortunately, he's not the only elected official who has arrived at the same conclusion about the importance of dealing with mental health issues. (Houston Chronicle, 1/14/14) Seated handshakes: The photo of Mikulski and House Appropriations Committee chairman Hal Rogers, R-Kentucky, sealing the deal is a double win: a more natural-looking, lawmakers-at-work shot than the traditional standing handshake. And it masks the significant height difference between the two powerful lawmakers. Obamacare: (And see below.) No gain in funds, but no loss of funds, either. Given the razor-sharp opposition to the health care law, a spending bill that doesn't get snagged in the Obamacare debate (and vice versa) could be considered a win. Appropriations committees: Think of it as a reality game show that no one would enjoy. The chairmen and staffs of the House and Senate appropriations committees had less than a month to agree on 12 detailed spending bills and fold them into one 1,582-page document that both parties could sign. http://www.chron.com/opinion/editorials/article/Dea ling-with-it-5143343.php Losers EPA: The deal restores some of the funds cut by sequester to the Environmental Protection Agency, but not all. In a summary of the measure, Republicans boasted that with this bill, they have cut the EPA's funding by 20% since 2010. Winners And Losers In Congress' $1 Trillion Spending Deal You could read the entire 1,582-page, $1 trillion omnibus spending plan announced in Congress Monday night. Or you can check out our handy cheat sheet of some of the key winners and losers in the plan. IRS: The tax agency's funding has been cut to 2009 levels, according to the Republican House Appropriations Committee. And just to send a more direct message, this appropriations bill states that the agency cannot use its funds to target citizens or groups based on their ideology. Winners Little kids: Big winners. Funding for the Head Start and early Head Start programs would jump by $1 billion. That's $1 billion more than last year's low point after budget cuts. TSA: You have millions of passengers to screen everyday and now Congress has capped the number of employees you can hire. If passed, the deal would set a limit of 46,000 TSA screeners and require the TSA to find a way to make half of the traveling public eligible for "expedited" screening by the end of this year. The mentally ill: Social-worker-turned-SenateAppropriations-Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, DMaryland, has long pushed for mental health programs. This year she got them an additional $173 million dollars more than their funding level with last year's budget cuts. Russia: Two reasons. 1. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Illinois, told CNN the deal fully funds a U.S. missile defense system in Romania, which the Russians do not like. 2. The measure makes it harder for the United States to buy weapons from Russia, including some controversial helicopters. To get around the ban, the omnibus requires the Pentagon to reveal the number of anti-aircraft missiles the Russian weapons agency has sold to Syria's Bashar al-Assad. Disabled veterans and surviving families: No longer would a planned cut in pensions hit "medically" discharged military retirees or military spouses or children who depend on military pensions. Federal workers and active military: A 1% pay raise would come to both groups of furlough- and sequester survivors. Obamacare: (And see above.) If the Obama administration needs more funds to implement the health care law, it isn't going to get them from Congress. The bill doesn't add any funding and also blocks the administration from dipping into a prevention fund as a backup pool of money. G-men: The FBI stands to gain $700 million+ over the funding it got following last year's budget cuts. Social Security Administration: The agency gets a hefty $651 million increase to help it make up for budget cuts in the past. 57 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Generals and admirals: Flag and general officers in the military would see a cut in their staff expense budgets under this plan. states going full-bore for the law and the states that want no part of it,” said Jonathan Oberlander, a health policy expert and professor at the University of North Carolina. The report, which reflects the sign-up rush in December, shows that Medicaid expansion is the most obvious dividing line under the health law. But the trend doesn’t always break cleanly between red and blue states. Although nearly all Democrat-led states extended the program, several large states headed by Republican governors also did, including Ohio, Michigan and New Jersey. About half the states, including most across the South, declined any expansion in 2014. Obamacare provides private-plan subsidies to those who earn between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level, but not for the lowestincome Americans, whom the law assumed would all be eligible for Medicaid. In states that didn’t expand the program to include that population, there is a yawning “coverage gap,” and those who earn less than the poverty level have no new options. Someone in North Carolina making $25,000 can qualify for a subsidy, for instance, while a person there who earns $7,000 gets no assistance. “There’s a huge gap in the Obamacare safety net because of the Supreme Court decision,” Oberlander said. Nationwide, about 4.8 million people fall into the gap, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. In Texas alone, which currently has one of the least generous Medicaid programs, it includes more than 1 million people, and in Florida, more than 750,000 people, Kaiser estimates. “Community health centers are beside themselves in places like Florida and Texas where people are coming in and they can’t offer them anything,” said Dan Hawkins, policy director at the National Association of Community Health Centers, which represents providers of health care to low-income people. The government has bolstered the centers’ funding in the last year, distributing about $156 million to double the number of staff positions — to more than 7,500 — to help with enrollment. In December, HHS distributed another $58 million, this time favoring centers in states with only federal-run exchanges “because it was understood that they were not getting much help from state agencies to find and enroll people,” Hawkins said. The new, concrete numbers could provide an opportunity for Democrats. The unpopular federal health law has been a terrible political headache, one that turned into a full-blown migraine with the unmitigated disaster of the enrollment website’s rollout in October. But in states where leaders, usually Republican, have refused to go along, the hundreds of thousands of people who remain uninsured because of that decision could become a rallying point for Obamacare supporters. Evidence of ongoing consumer interest in coverage through the Affordable Care Act could bolster arguments that The president of Afghanistan: The bill specifically prohibits any of its funds from going to "the direct personal benefit of the president of Afghanistan." Portrait artists: The bill bans government officials from spending money to have a portrait made. Jerry Brown: No funds for you. The California governor hoped to get some federal funds for his dream of a $60 billion high-speed rail line between L.A. and San Francisco. But Republicans successfully blocked the idea in this deal. (CNN, 1/14/14) http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/14/politics/budgetwinners-losers/index.html?hpt=po_c2 State Fights Creating 2 Obamacares Determining who has health insurance under Obamacare is almost as simple as figuring out which political party runs a state. Republican-led states like Texas that have refused Obamacare every step of the way have left hundreds of thousands of people without health care, while Democrat-led states like Kentucky that have embraced key portions of the law have seen a dramatic expansion in people signed up for private health plans and expanded Medicaid coverage. A report released Monday by the Obama administration painted the starkest picture yet about the state-by-state politics of the Affordable Care Act. With some notable exceptions, the enrollment numbers reveal what could become two health care systems driven and divided by politics — one that offers low- and moderate-income people greater access and another that doesn’t. Kentucky, which has embraced Obamacare, and Louisiana, which has not, are telling examples of these two scenarios. Although a larger percentage of Louisiana residents are uninsured, only about half as many people signed up for private plans — 17,500, compared to 33,000 in the Bluegrass State. Both states have about 4.5 million residents. And the figures are even more skewed when it comes to expanding the Medicaid program, which the Supreme Court made voluntary in its landmark 2012 ruling that otherwise upheld the law. Kentucky accepted federal funding to extend the insurance program for the poor to everyone up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, and more than 100,000 of its residents have qualified for Medicaid since Obamacare launched Oct. 1. Louisiana turned down the expansion offer, and its Medicaid-eligible population has increased since then by fewer than 5,000 — a twentyfold difference. “In the short run, you’re likely to see some fairly significant differences between the 58 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Republicans should get out of the way. “That is why it has been especially appalling to see Texas elected officials promote misinformation about what the ACA does — from shutting down the government to placing regulatory burdens on the state’s navigators,” Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) wrote in an email. His state has the second largest number of signups on the federal exchange, showing, he said, that Texans are “hungry” for the coverage. “I am hopeful that the reality of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act for Americans will soon overtake the right-wing propaganda machine that has been set up to disparage” the law. The differences between Obamacare cooperation and opposition states go beyond Medicaid, however. About 20 states either built their own exchanges or are running exchanges in partnership with the federal government, giving them access to hundreds of millions of dollars in outreach money that dwarfs what is being spent in states that rejected such help. That also appears to be making a difference in some states. “We have run TV, print, billboards, bus ads, social media and digital, advertising on Hulu and Pandora, on ESPN, BET, all those that the young kids watch,” said Carrie Banahan, executive director for Kynect, Kentucky’s exchange. “That has complemented the direct outreach that the exchange has done as well — going to community events, sporting events, and the state fair.” Nonprofit organizations, led by Enroll America, have banded together to try to fill the outreach void in states without a federally financed marketing campaign, and Obama administration officials, especially Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, have been stumping in those states’ major media markets. But it’s a far cry from a well-funded centralized marketing campaign, experts say. Some exceptions are evident in the data released Monday. While the Medicaid numbers tend to be reliably larger in states that expanded that program, there are surprises in how many people have signed up for private plans in certain places. North Carolina and Georgia, both nonexpansion states, provide another interesting illustration. Despite North Carolina’s lack of funding or state buy-in for outreach or advertising, nearly 108,000 people there enrolled in private plans through December. Georgia, which has about the same population of just under 10 million and a higher uninsured rate, enrolled only 58,000. And even though Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s administration forbade state health facilities from hosting the health law’s navigators to help people sign up, more than 158,000 Floridians enrolled for plans, slightly more than the number who signed up in New York — an original Obamacare enthusiast. The states have roughly the same population, although Florida has about 1 million more uninsured people than New York. Some of the most pro-Obamacare states have turned in disappointing numbers so far, especially in their own exchange signups. Oregon, an early adopter that was expected to be a national leader, debuted an exchange that performed worse than even HealthCare.gov in its first two months. Enrollment in Maryland and Minnesota has been lackluster as well, due in part to troubled exchange technology. Meanwhile, California leads the pack, with 500,000 private plan sign-ups — nearly a quarter of the 2.2 million people who have enrolled nationwide. (Politico, 1/14/14) http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=84DE7F 75-2D4C-45FD-AA0A-FDBC356537A1 Medical Debt Will Persist Despite Health Law Millions of Americans will get health insurance through the Affordable Care Act that will protect them from potentially ruinous medical expenses, but a new USA TODAY analysis shows the health plans they can choose still leave them vulnerable to thousands in deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs each year. Medical insurance deductibles for plans on the federal exchange covering 34 states average $3,000, and those for the least expensive, bronze-level plans average $5,082, according to the USA TODAY analysis of deductible data for HealthCare.gov. Those costs, according to a recent study, may still be more than many people can afford. The USA TODAY analysis also found the lowest out-of-pocket limits on HealthCare.gov plans were $4,350 for individuals on bronze plans and $8,700 for families, although these were not the norm and are likely paired with high premiums. Even relatively modest cost sharing can prove unaffordable because expenses are often unexpected, and most Americans have less than $3,000 to cover such costs, according to a new Kaiser Family Foundation report on medical debt among the insured concludes. The new health care law requires consumers' portions of health care expenses — known as cost sharing — to be capped at $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families. Many plans have lower limits on out-of-pocket costs than the federal limit, but the plans increasingly also have separate deductibles for prescription drugs. And expenses for drugs that aren't covered by plans or for out-of-network physicians aren't applied against limits. That makes it more likely consumers, especially those with chronic health conditions such as asthma or high blood pressure, will be hitting these out-of-pocket maximums, says Matt Eyles, executive vice president at consulting firm Avalere Health. "The ACA is an important safety net, but it doesn't necessarily solve the problem of high upfront medical expenses for those who don't have ability to pay for them," Eyles says. Kaiser analyzed 59 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey data and did case studies of 23 people with medical debt, which is the leading cause of bankruptcy in the U.S. It found cost sharing for covered services that were in-network providers and facilities was the leading contributor to debt for those interviewed. CDC's 2012 National Health Interview Survey showed 34% of people in higher-deductible health plans had difficulty paying medical bills compared with 24% of people in lower-deductible health plans. "It starts with the cost sharing that they're not really prepared to pay and are not in a position to budget for," says Karen Pollitz, a Kaiser Family Foundation senior fellow who co-authored the study with the Georgetown Health Policy Institute. "Then there are the multiplying factors where it's the mom and the infant and it's crossing plan years and people start doing drastic things" to pay the debt. Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Joanne Peters said the situation is still far better than it was before the ACA. "The new marketplace is night and day from what consumers faced in the individual market before the health care law, where they could see unlimited out-of-pocket expenses for plans with limited benefits and high deductibles, if they (could) even get coverage without being denied for a pre-existing condition," Peters said in an e-mail. The 40% portion of medical bills borne by those with bronze plans may also shock many consumers when the bills start rolling in. Consumers with incomes below 250% of the federal poverty level ($28,725 for an individual) have lower cost-sharing limits if they buy silver plans on the exchanges. But families of four with incomes above 400% of poverty ($94,200) are ineligible for financial assistance and unlikely to have enough cash on hand to pay even the deductible for many plans, the Kaiser study showed. These families tend to have about $12,000 in liquid assets, Kaiser says, but when other consumer debt is taken into consideration, most have net liquid assets of $5,200 or less. Premiums can add significantly to health care costs: An earlier USA TODAY analysis of premiums on the HealthCare.gov site found more than half of counties lacked a plan that would meet the federal affordability test for a couple making about $62,000 a year, or just over the amount eligible for subsidies. A third didn't have a plan deemed affordable for an individual above 400% of the poverty level or about $47,000, meaning the premium cost more than about 8% of annual income. John Roll, a former transportation consultant from Southern California, has an outstanding medical bill of $88,000 from neurological tests that followed brain surgery in 2009. That bill went to a collections agency. Making matters worse, Roll has an urgent operation coming up this year to remove a hematoma near his liver. He can't work and his wife is unemployed, but at least having that bill capped at under $6,500 makes it possible that they could pay it out of retirement savings, he says. "I'm hugely relieved," Roll says of the ACA caps. "In 2011, we were talking about a strategic divorce so we wouldn't have to get sucked under by the medical bills." Cathy and Scott Carson of Truckee, near Reno, say medical debt will be unavoidable for them. They are waiting to hear whether they can get a hardship exemption so they don't have to buy a new plan to replace the one that got canceled last year because it didn't meet the ACA requirements. The cheapest one they can find includes a $5,000 deductible for each of them and costs $729 a month, Cathy Scott says that's more than they can afford on their combined $80,000 annual income, which is patched together through seasonal and contract work. But she hardly likes the option of going without insurance either. Either way, "Debt is only an accident or serious illness away," she says. Any unexpected health cost at a doctor's office — where upfront payment is generally required — would have to be paid for by credit card, she says, and it could take years to pay if off. While deductibles are increasing in amount, they are increasingly applied even before copayments start. So while preventive care is covered in full under ACA, many plans will charge the full cost of visits for injuries or ailments until the deductible is met. This is going to create some sticker shock for consumers used to paying small co-pays for these, says Nancy Thompson, senior vice president at CBIZ Benefits and Insurance Services. Deductibles for employer-provided plans have increased in the last five years, but are far below the averages on HealthCare.gov. The average deductible was $1,135 a year in 2013, according to a study Kaiser released in August. While that was largely unchanged from 2012, it was up considerably from the average of $735 in 2008. For at least another year, employers can basically double workers' out-of-pocket costs by having a separate drug deductible if an outside company manages the company's drug benefits. Cathy Scott is relieved that ACA has taken effect, but hopes "over time changes will be made to make it affordable and equitable to all." (USA Today, 1/15/14) http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/ 01/14/affordable-care-act-medical-debt/4362603/ 3 Predictions On How Docs Will Treat You Under Obamacare The Obamacare rollout has reached its third month, with some 2.2 million people signing up for plans, marking the continued reinvention of the American health care system. Barring a radical change, Obamacare is here to stay, at least until 2016. But 60 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 the end product of this reinvention has yet to be determined, and is a matter of fierce debate. The White House contends that Obamacare will reduce the number of uninsured, reign in health care costs, cut the deficit and improve the quality of health care. Opponents of the law argue that it’s simply another costly entitlement program that won’t control costs and will lower quality of care all while incurring hundreds of billions in new costs. To get an idea of what the act of receiving health care will be like in the next five to 10 years with Obamacare as the law of the land, we reached out to experts who fell into one of three camps. One predicts disaster, another predicts success, and another doesn’t believe the Affordable Health Care Act will change much of anything. treat Medicare patient will accelerate the trend towards concierge medicine, where they fire 80 percent of their patients and charge the remaining 20 percent - roughly 300 to 500 patients - retainer fees,” he said. Herrick added that this would increase the number of ER visits, making that experience more burdensome. “Medicare and Medicaid patients already make up nearly two-thirds of ER visits,” he said. “This will get worse as seniors and Medicaid enrollees experience increased obstacles to care.” The Pragmatist: Tom Miller, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said that he doesn’t expect Obamacare to be the driver of changes to health care delivery. “The doom and gloom folks say this is a slow march toward single payer,” he said. “The flip side is that we have the magic formula. It’s neither one of those extreme scenarios.” Miller added that he does not believe that Obamacare will grow as quickly as many of its backers claim. “Will it be more pervasive and expansive than originally envisioned? It’s not going to happen. It’s not going to expand more broadly and dominate the health care system,” he said. Instead, Miller said he believes demand driven by patients for alterations to the way health care is delivered will be the true driver of change. “Care evolves. It is going to less mass produced, just like we’ve seen in the pharma sector,” he said. “Blockbuster drugs are rarely occurring anymore. We’re matching treatments to an individual.” He said the real barometer for Obamacare’s success is how the program is administered and evolved. That human factor will ultimately decide its success. “There are smart people who can do things better,” Miller said, “but there are a lot of dumb ones who can screw things up.” (Fiscal Times, 1/15/14) The Optimist. Shana Alex Lavarreda, director of Health Insurance Studies at the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, said that the act of visiting a doctor or the emergency room wouldn’t fundamentally change. However, the way medicine is managed will fundamentally change. “People will need to do so much less because under the Accountable Care Organizations that will be in much wider existence, the dispersion of best practices for preventive care, and increased care management for those with chronic conditions,” Lavarreda said in an email. Lavarreda also said that Obamacare would help people to better manage their health, improving management of more serious conditions. “More appropriate care outside of the hospital or doctor's office will lead to more efficient care when one is needed.” Finally, she said she believed that remote medicine would become more common. “Telemedicine will increase, allowing the health system to both increase productivity and to reach patients in remote areas,” Lavarreda said. The Pessimist: Devon M. Herrick, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas in less optimistic about the benefits from Obamacare. He predicts a patient experience much more unpleasant than the one we have today. “You’re right to question whether the Affordable Care Act will indeed be affordable over the long run. The ACA does nothing to reduce spending. It will have the opposite effect,” he said. “There aren’t enough doctors to treat all the new enrollees. The ones most likely to suffer are those whose insurers pay the lowest reimbursements. Medicaid pays, on average, only about half what private insurers pay for the same service. Medicare pays only about 80 percent of what private insurers pay,” Herrick added. “Keep in mind the ACA calls for Medicare physician fees to be cut below Medicaid fees. If that happens, seniors and Medicaid enrollees will have even a harder time finding doctors who will treat them.” This would fundamentally alter how people receive treatment, he said. “Doctors who http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/01/15/ 3-Predictions-How-Docs-Will-Treat-You-UnderObamacare New Report from Bipartisan Commission Suggests Sweeping, StateDriven Health Care Reforms A group of former governors, policy leaders, advocates, and insurance company executives released a lengthy set of recommendations to curb future health care spending, with a particular focus on the role of states in driving reform. The State Health Care Cost Containment Commission was convened by the University of Virginia’s Miller Center and co-chaired by former governors Mike Leavitt (RUT) and Bill Ritter (D-CO). The report cites higher costs; uncoordinated care systems that provide little incentive for consumers to seek lower-cost, highquality care; market concentration among providers, 61 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 and the expensive nature of end-of-life care as principal drivers of runaway costs. Given states' role in funding and operating Medicaid, oversight of the private insurance market, and ability to implement policies that promote healthy lifestyles and market transparency, the commission argued that states are uniquely positioned to implement these systemic reforms. Accordingly, many of the recommendations involve state-level actions, including:       Define and Collect Data to Create a Profile of Health Care in the State Establish Statewide Baselines and Goals for Health Care Spending, Quality, and Other Measures as Appropriate Use Existing Health Care Spending Programs to Accelerate the Trend Toward Coordinated, Risk-Based Care Encourage Consumer Selection of High-Value Care Based on Cost and Quality Data, and Promote Market Competition Reform Health Care Regulations to Promote System Efficiency Help Promote Better Population Health and Personal Responsibility in Health Care (Lexology, 1/10/14) http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4b9 ab68c-6600-4937-96141f7faa6afb3c&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfe ed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body++Federal+secti  Plans. Healthy Michigan provides coverage through the state’s existing network of Medicaid managed care plans. Michigan did not seek to use premium assistance to purchase qualified health plan coverage through the Marketplace.  Benefits. Under the ACA, covered benefits for newly-eligible adults in Medicaid (the Alternative Benefit Plan), are based on ACAdefined Essential Health Benefits with certain additional requirements, including early periodic screening, diagnosis and treatment (EPSDT) for 19- and 20-year-olds and non-emergency transportation. Healthy Michigan will provide the full scope of benefits covered under the Alternative Benefit Plan.  Premiums. Healthy Michigan enrollees with incomes from 100% to 133% of the FPL will be required to pay a monthly premium of 2% of income—the same amount they would have been required to pay had they purchased coverage through the Marketplace with premium tax credits. However, Medicaid coverage cannot be denied if an enrollee fails to pay premiums.  Cost Sharing. All Healthy Michigan enrollees will be required to make cost-sharing payments in amounts consistent with federal Medicaid law. Healthy Michigan enrollees will make contributions to an account maintained by their health plans based on their prior six months of utilization. Providers will notify enrollees of copayment amounts when delivering the service, but enrollees will be billed for such copayments on a quarterly basis, rather than at the point of service. Enrollees cannot be denied coverage or services if they fail to make cost-sharing contributions.  Healthy Behavior Incentives. Healthy Michigan enrollees may have their cost-sharing and premium obligations reduced if they adopt specified healthy behaviors. Michigan must submit for CMS approval a draft protocol outlining the healthy behavior incentives. The state must demonstrate that the healthy behaviors are data driven and that it engaged stakeholders when developing the healthy behaviors. CMS Approves Michigan’s Amendment To Its Waiver Implementing ACA Medicaid Expansion Through “Healthy Michigan” On December 30, 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) approved Michigan’s request to amend an existing waiver to implement the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion effective April 1, 2014 through the “Healthy Michigan” program. Under Healthy Michigan, coverage for the expansion adults will be provided through Medicaid managed care plans already under contract with the state. Michigan will provide the full range of services required for expansion adults, unlike Iowa where the recently approved waiver authorized a one-year waiver of non-emergency medical transportation. Adults in Michigan with incomes between 100% and 133% of the federal poverty level (FPL) will have a premium obligation equal to 2% of income. All expansion adults will have-cost sharing obligations and be eligible for healthy behavior incentives. The key features of the Healthy Michigan program include:  Commonalities and Differences Michigan and Iowa Programs between the The Healthy Michigan program shares several common features with Iowa’s expansion waiver, approved by CMS on December 10, 2013. Under both states’ waivers, enrollees with incomes from 100% to 133% of the FPL are required to make premium contributions of up to 2% of income, but Eligibility. All individuals in the new adult group are eligible for Healthy Michigan. 62 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 coverage may not be denied based on failure to pay. Additionally, both waivers use financial rewards to encourage enrollees to engage in healthy behaviors. In Michigan, individuals engaging in healthy behaviors can have their premium and costsharing reduced, while in Iowa, healthy behaviors can reduce premium requirements. There are, however, some important differences between the two programs. Iowa uses premium assistance to purchase qualified health plans for Medicaid enrollees, while Michigan provides coverage through its traditional network of Medicaid managed care plans. Also, Iowa uses premiums but no significant cost-sharing, while Michigan uses both premiums and cost-sharing. Notably, because the Michigan expansion will not go into effect before April 2014, Michigan must establish protocols to transition to Medicaid individuals with incomes between 100% and 133% of the FPL who enroll in QHPs during Marketplace open enrollment. Michigan also must submit for approval protocols detailing the operations of the cost-sharing accounts and healthy behavior incentives, including: (i) standards and evidence-based rules to ensure that accounts are debited and credited accurately and (ii) a strategy for noticing and educating providers and enrollees on program rules. Michigan must submit these protocols at least 90 days prior to implementation of the cost-sharing accounts or healthy behavior incentives. In addition, the implementation plan must include a phased approach, beginning with beneficiaries with incomes above 100% of the FPL. To view a chart comparing key features of current state waivers applicable to expansion adults, click here. (Lexology, 1/6/14) that it was the insurance company of New York City’s public hospital system; to a typical shopper on New York’s health exchange, it looks no different from big-name companies, like Empire or United. But to the Health and Hospitals Corporation, the city’s public hospital agency, it is not merely another insurance plan. The corporation created MetroPlus, and sees it as a powerful opportunity to attract a different class of patients — somewhat higherincome, more educated and more stable — to a system whose historic mission has been to serve the poor, and whose finances have been straining. Robyn Chapman, an artist, signed up with MetroPlus as well. The hospital system is hoping to attract more affluent patients. “It’s a potential significant source of additional revenue,” said Alan Aviles, the corporation’s president. While “we won’t necessarily have concierge services; there won’t be a piano in the atrium,” he said he hoped the new customers would find that his hospitals were underrated. Around the country, a number of public health systems and charity hospitals serving large numbers of poor patients see the health exchanges, created by the states under the act, as a way to widen their customer base. In Los Angeles, L.A. Care, a publicly run health plan, has enrolled about 8,000 people so far via the California exchange. The Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, which has roots in organized labor and the auto industry, has signed up about 4,000 people in its exchange plans. The University of Arizona Health Plans have attracted only 250 people, said James Stover, their chief executive. But he said they were still trying to sign up young people who were part of the university system, as well as uninsured people on the cusp of Medicaid eligibility, who are partly responsible for the system’s $100 million a year in uncompensated care. “It makes a lot of sense from a mission standpoint to go into the marketplace and try to find coverage for these individuals,” Mr. Stover said. By Dec. 24, the deadline for receiving coverage on Jan. 1, MetroPlus, one of 10 companies selling exchange plans in New York City, had enrolled 18,397 members, about 32 percent of all those who signed up citywide. Enrollment hit 22,000 last week, the corporation said, and it hopes to reach 40,000 by the end of 2014. Currently, only 7 percent of the 1.4 million people treated by the city’s public hospitals each year have private insurance, according to the Greater New York Hospital Association. Another 58 percent are on Medicaid or Medicare, and 35 percent are uninsured; half of those are illegal immigrants, who cannot get coverage under the new law. That patient mix fosters a common belief that the public hospitals are a last resort, or as one Yelp reviewer described Woodhull Medical and Mental Health Center in Brooklyn: “If you were writing for a TV drama about the downtrodden castoffs of society, you could not http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d72 b6d43-1923-47bd-9e2e41d25dee5d8e&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsf eed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body++Other+states+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+ subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Dail y+Newsfeed+2014-01-15&utm_term= Public Hospitals Hope To Attract More Upscale Patients Under Affordable Care Act Todd Obolsky lives in a studio apartment in Manhattan, drives a leased Toyota Corolla and occasionally splurges on experimental cuisine in the East Village. When the Affordable Care Act allowed him to buy insurance for the first time in years, he was so price-sensitive that $30 a month made a difference in which plan he picked. So the obvious choice was MetroPlus. It offered the best deal at the coverage level he was looking for — about $400 a month for a gold plan, the second-highest of the four levels. “That’s like as high as I can possibly go without living on rice,” he said. He never noticed 63 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 have conceived of a more appropriate place.” In the Medicare system’s Hospital Compare ratings, the city’s public hospitals typically score lower in patient satisfaction than private ones. But they compare well on medical measures, like whether they follow protocols for heart attack, pneumonia and surgery patients. For years, the hospitals corporation has tried to polish its image by contracting with private hospitals and medical schools to staff the public hospitals; for example, many Bellevue doctors come from NYU Langone Medical Center next door. And by attracting more affluent and choosy customers, the corporation hopes, it can also attract doctors into the MetroPlus networks who would not normally associate with public hospitals. MetroPlus was created in 1985 as a managed-care plan for Medicaid recipients. While there is no guarantee that offering MetroPlus on the health exchange will be profitable, the corporation projects that the exchange plans will bring $120 million a year in revenue to a system now running a $250 million annual deficit. By this week, 66 percent of its customers were enrolled in the silver plan, suggesting that they had low to moderate incomes and expected to qualify for subsidies. But 10 percent enrolled in gold and 18 percent in platinum, suggesting higher incomes, which surprised MetroPlus officials. As Mr. Obolsky discovered, MetroPlus offers the lowest premiums on the New York exchange for the top three standardized plans: $359 a month for silver, $396 a month for gold and $443 a month for platinum. One major reason for the low prices is that MetroPlus will cover patients only at the city’s 11 public hospitals and four private ones — Beth Israel’s two campuses in Manhattan and Brooklyn, St. Luke’s-Roosevelt in Manhattan, and Lutheran in Brooklyn. Except in an emergency, plan members will not be covered at some of the more prestigious hospitals like Mount Sinai and NYU Langone. Mr. Aviles said that to keep its premiums down, MetroPlus had to offer relatively low reimbursement rates for hospitals. Several hospitals said they were still negotiating with MetroPlus and might join the network. Mr. Obolsky, 48, a consultant, said he was happy to hear that St. Luke’s-Roosevelt was on the plan, because its campuses were near him on the Upper West Side. Robyn Chapman, an artist who pieces together a living making and selling comic books, working as a legal assistant and cat sitting, signed up for a silver MetroPlus plan. Her first bill was for $119.42 a month after tax credits. She had not realized that MetroPlus was run by the city hospital system. But that would not have stopped her, she said, because she was looking mainly for price. She was familiar with one city hospital — Woodhull in Brooklyn — because she had used its clinics for routine medical care at $20 a visit. She said the waiting times there were very long, many patients seemed desperate and some nurses and doctors were “a bit cold, maybe even a little rude.” She might try a different hospital, but otherwise she said: “I can’t complain. I’m honestly very grateful.” Mark P. Scherzer, a consumer lawyer and counsel to New Yorkers for Accessible Health Coverage, said he expected MetroPlus would “still be sort of a poorer person’s plan,” with lower prices and lower quality. Mr. Aviles conceded that for some people, public hospitals would never be acceptable, regardless of how well they delivered care. “There’s always a headwind in terms of how many hospitals there are in New York City and how many have designer labels,” he said. “In the same way that if you’re affluent and buying a pair of jeans, you may be willing to spend $200 for those jeans because they have a designer label.” (New York Times, 1/15/14) http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/nyregion/publi c-hospitals-hope-to-attract-more-upscale-patientsunder-affordable-careact.html?hpw&rref=nyregion&_r=0 What A Shocker! Young People Like Obamacare: New HHS Numbers Show Those Under The Age Of 35 Care About Getting Coverage. First it was, we think we are invincible. Then it was that the penalty was too low, or that we would be turned off by website glitches. After the Department of Health and Human Services released its initial age breakdown enrollment data Monday, it is time to finally put the pessimism to rest. Young people are enrolling in health care coverage under the Affordable Care Act, and for good reason — being covered is essential to their economic security. On Monday, the Department of Health & Human Services announced that 30% of Obamacare's 2.2 million private insurance enrollees are under the age of 35. More specifically 24% of enrollees are between the ages of 18- and 34-yearsold. In other words, the exchanges have a percentage of young adult enrollees that is comparable to their proportion of the overall population. All the evidence suggests that youth enrollment will only go up as we get closer to the deadline. We are ecstatic to see young people enrolling at such a fast clip this early on in the enrollment process — but we're not surprised. Polls have consistently shown that this generation wants coverage. To give some context, the average income for an uninsured 25-year-old is about $17,800. In the post-ACA world, that same individual can get a silver plan for about $63 a month, with a reduced deductible, thanks to new tax credits and cost sharing subsidies. In fact, the vast majority of young adults will have plans available for under $100 a month. Those making 64 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 below about $16,000 a year could even qualify for free coverage under Medicaid. These new options create a new day in health care for young people. We are confident that young adult enrollment rates will continue to surge — as was the case in December — in the months ahead. A recent survey by the Commonwealth Fund found that 41% of federal and state health insurance marketplace visitors were between the ages of 19 and 34, suggesting that many young adults might still be checking out their options. Moreover, we saw a similar enrollment pattern in Massachusetts with their health care reform law. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, enrollments among the non-chronically ill population — a younger population — increased over 175% before the Massachusetts mandate kicked in. This makes sense — those who have been discriminated against due to a medical condition were always expected to be first to gain coverage once the Marketplaces open. We anticipate seeing a similar surge in the rate of young adult enrollments ahead of March 31st deadline to get covered and avoid the penalty. Outreach campaigns will also ramp up over the next couple of months, accelerating enrollment rates among the younger population. In addition, many young people are learning what a premium is or what a deductible is for the first time, which is why it will take them more time to select the plan that best suits their needs, and why educations campaigns are critical. This education process can take time but it works over the long run. In Massachusetts, for example, youth uninsurance rates dropped from 27% to 8% over several years as the word continued to spread. The Affordable Care Act's opponents will undoubtedly scrutinize the enrollment numbers of this population. Some have speculated that approximately 35% to 38% of Obamacare enrollees should be young for premiums to remain low in the insurance market. However, recent analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation demonstrates that rates will remain stable even with far fewer young people enrolling. Moreover, this view does not take into account rate stabilizers built into the law if the enrolled population is slightly older. To find such strong interest after having essentially only one month of enrollments to consider—given the website malfunctions in October and November—is a big deal. So don't buy the narrative that young people are not enrolling. The young uninsured know a good deal when they see one. Aaron Smith is co-founder of Young Invincibles. (USA Today, 1/15/14) Drinking Linked To Faster Mental Decline In Men Middle-aged men risk a faster mental decline as they age if they've been drinking heavily for years, new research suggests. The study of about 5,000 British civil servants found that over a decade, the added decline was the equivalent of about two extra years of aging for a combined measure of mental abilities like reasoning, and about six years for memory. The heavy drinkers' abilities were compared to those of men who drank moderately or abstained. It's no surprise that heavy alcohol consumption can affect the brain, but the study focuses on an age range that has received much less attention from alcohol researchers than the elderly and college students. The work was published online Wednesday by the journal Neurology. Researchers found no such effect in women, but the study included too few female heavy drinkers to test the effect of drinking the same amount as in men, said Severine Sabia, a study author from University College London. In an email, she said it was not possible to identify a specific minimum level of consumption at which the risk begins in men. Her study used data from over 20 years. Using questionnaires, researchers calculated the men's average daily intake of alcohol for the decade up to when they were an average of 56 years old. Then, they tracked decline in mental abilities over the following decade from tests administered every five years. Accelerated decline was seen for the heaviest-drinking group, which included 469 men with a wide range of alcohol intake. The minimum amount was the equivalent of about 13 ounces of wine a day or about 30 ounces of beer. The maximum was about three times that. Men drinking that minimum amount are not necessarily at risk for accelerated mental decline, since the results pertain to the category overall, said Sara Jo Nixon, a substance abuse researcher at the University of Florida in Gainesville, who did not participate in the work. She also said that the study shows a link between drinking and faster mental decline but not proof that alcohol intake was responsible. And she said that because of the sensitive mental tests used in the study, the extra declines in performance may be too subtle to make a difference in daily life. Sabia said she believed the difference would eventually be noticeable. Still, Nixon said, the study "does suggest that middleaged to young-old individuals do need to pay attention to what their drinking habits have been, and are." (Miami Herald, 1/15/14) http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/01/14 /obamacare-website-enrollment-young-peoplecolumn/4475161/ http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/01/15/3872617/ drinking-linked-to-faster-mental.html#storylink=cpy 65 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 Program to End Homelessness Among Veterans Reaches a Milestone in Arizona federal response to homelessness, said in an interview. “And if we do this for veterans, it’s something that as a nation, if we set our mind to, we can achieve for other populations as well.” Arizona has more homeless veterans than most other states — roughly one in five homeless adults, according to statistics from the state’s Department of Veterans’ Services. In an interview, Greg Stanton, the mayor of Phoenix and a longtime proponent of increasing investment and partnerships on homeless outreach, characterized the recent achievement as “important because we’re helping people in need, but also important because it helps our economy.” According to local and national surveys, it is more expensive to cover the costs of emergency room visits or nights in jail for homeless people than it is to give them homes. A 2009 analysis commissioned by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, which handles the largest population of homeless veterans in the country, found that the monthly cost of housing and supportive services for one person was $605, while the public costs of a person living on the streets were roughly $2,900 a month. Across the country, the strategy is centered on an approach called Housing First, through which a home is not treated as a reward for good behavior. As Ms. Zeilinger put it, it is instead “the platform of stability that lets previously homeless people work on the other issues they’re facing,” like mental illness and addiction, which are particularly common among the chronically homeless. The term is defined as those who have continuously lived on the streets for a year or have done so at least four times over three years. Some advocates say the concept works more easily in places like Phoenix, where there is room to build. Victory Place, the 104-apartment complex where Mr. Mackenstadt and Mr. Hankins live, opened last year on the city’s south side. (An additional 96 units are under construction on the same campus.) Meanwhile, in cities like Los Angeles, building is expensive and competition is stiff for existing affordable-housing units, which are already scarce, said Steve Peck, president and chief executive of U.S. Vets, the nation’s largest nonprofit service provider for veterans. There is also the challenge of sustaining the investment, given the steady stream of soldiers back from Iraq and Afghanistan who have been ending up on the streets. “The question,” said Mr. Peck, who served in the Marine Corps in Vietnam, “is how we create enough housing units to house those who are homeless and where we find the money to provide all the services that are essential to keep them in those units.” Through a joint program that is the backbone of the federal effort, the Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Veterans Affairs have given $913 million since 2010 in vouchers, as well as clinical and social services, to Launch Media Viewer Their descent into homelessness began almost as soon as they had closed a dignified chapter in their lives: their military service. Dexter Mackenstadt, 63, a sailor who spent the Vietnam War tracking submarines along the East Coast, slipped into alcoholism. Robert Stone, 56, who spent three years stationed at naval bases in California, fell to that, too, and to a failing heart. John Hankins, 52, who repaired intercontinental ballistic missiles at an Air Force base in Wyoming, spent years as a drifter, living in a methamphetamine lab in the Arizona desert. Today they are neighbors and participants in a program that White House officials have said has led Phoenix to become the first community in the country to end homelessness among veterans with long or recurrent histories of living on the streets. In 2011, by a city count, there were 222 chronically homeless veterans here, a vulnerable, hard-to-reach population of mostly middle-age men, virtually all battling some type of physical or mental ailment along with substance abuse. Federal and city officials acknowledged that was not an exact number, but it is widely regarded as the best measure of the veteran population. Last month, the last 41 members of that group were placed in temporary housing. Shane Groen, a director at the Arizona Coalition to End Homelessness, one of the city’s partners in the program, said the goal was to have them all in permanent housing by Feb. 14. Mr. Stone said, “I’m coming up on nine months sober, and a big part of it is because I have a roof over my head.” He lived on the streets off and on for 15 years until he moved into an apartment here in March. This month, Salt Lake City placed the last of its chronically homeless veterans in housing, its mayor, Ralph Becker, announced. These milestones are the first significant achievements by individual communities in the federal government’s plan to end homelessness among veterans by 2015, part of its ambitious and complex push to eliminate homelessness over all by 2020. Although officials have conceded that the plan is behind schedule, they point to the significant decline in the number of homeless veterans — to roughly 58,000, or 9 percent of the homeless population, last January from 76,000, or 12 percent of the nation’s homeless, in 2010 — as a hopeful sign, given that it happened in spite of difficult economic times. (The number of homeless people over all fell by 5 percent during the same period.) “We do think we can get to the point where we can say there are no more homeless veterans in the country,” Laura Zeilinger, deputy director of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, which coordinates the 66 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 chronically homeless veterans in or near the communities where they live. (The veterans contribute 30 percent of their gross income toward housing.) In cities like Philadelphia and Salt Lake City, private donors and religious groups have helped pay for the types of expenses not covered by the vouchers, like furniture and security deposits. Here the United Way is funding 14 workers known as navigators, who have been deployed to walk the veterans through the confusing process of applying for benefits and housing. One of them, James Roberson, 57, who served in the Navy in the Persian Gulf, said the job also involved more mundane tasks, like making sure the veterans had food at home, that they were clean and that their apartments were in order. Patience is crucial, he said. “You can’t force things on people who have been on the streets so long,” he said. “They won’t take it.” While the retention rate for homeless veterans placed in permanent housing stood at 85 percent nationally after one year, a survey by the Arizona Coalition to End Homelessness put it at 94 percent in Phoenix, a success attributed largely to the navigator program. Mr. Hankins, the former airman, was homeless for six years when a Veterans Affairs social worker stationed at the agency where he had gone to recharge his food stamps card pulled him aside and offered to help. He is one of eight clients of Mr. Roberson’s at Victory Place. “If I had to do this on my own,” Mr. Hankins said one recent morning as he strolled in Victory Place, “I’d never have made it here.” (New York Times, 1/16/14) http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/us/programto-end-homelessness-among-veterans-hitsmilestone-in-arizona.html?ref=economy http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/01/16/3874143/ legislators-to-consider-private.html#storylink=cpy Obama Data Analysts Study Health-Care Habits Under Obamacare A group of data analysts who helped President Barack Obama win two terms in the White House are now partnering with a coalition of health-care providers in Camden, N.J., to study how people’s consumption habits change under the new health law. BlueLabs, a company formed last year by members of the Obama data team, is partnering with the Camden Coalition of Healthcare Providers to compile information tracking the treatment patterns of people who enroll in Medicaid or the new insurance marketplaces under the Affordable Care Act. For example, the team will gather data on how frequently the newly insured go emergency rooms or outpatient health centers and compare that with their previous behavior. The goal is to help health-care providers and policymakers in other parts of the country understand what is driving health-care costs and better serve patients’ needs. The work is being funded by a $450,000 grant awarded to the Camden Coalition by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The project will give the BlueLabs team a chance to employ some of the same methods they honed studying voters’ behavior during back-to-back presidential campaigns. Mr. Obama’s re-election effort is widely considered the most sophisticated campaign in modern politics thanks in large measure to a data team that collected large amounts of information about which voters were perusable, what messages moved them and the best method for delivering those messages. “On the 2012 Obama campaign, our analytics team consolidated critical data from across the organization into a single database and used that resource to run one of the most successful and efficient campaigns in U.S. history,” said Erek Dyskant, a co-founder of BlueLabs. “Now, we’re using the same techniques to make community health programs more effective.” The collaboration will build on work the Camden Coalition has been doing in New Jersey for years. The Coalition, which is comprised of doctors, nurses and other health-care administrators, started gathering patient data years ago from the three major health-care systems in Camden. The coalition eventually compiled that information in a central database that helped local health-care providers improve outcomes and bring costs down. The group discovered, for example, that in one year just 13% of the patients in Camden accounted for 80% of the health-care costs there, according to its website. Often these were people who were going to emergency rooms for common ailments, like a head cold or sore throat, or others who waited until Legislators To Consider Private Option Change A legislative committee is to hear a budget presentation from the Arkansas Department of Human Services and questions about the state's Medicaid expansion plan are likely to come up. The Joint Public Health Committee meets at 3 p.m. Thursday. The meeting comes days after a special election expanded the Republican majority to 22-13 in the Senate, which could signal trouble for Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe's plan to continue the state's Medicaid expansion. Last year, legislators narrowly approved a plan to subsidize private insurance for low-income people who qualify for coverage through a federally funded Medicaid expansion. Legislators begin a fiscal session on Feb. 10, and Beebe says he is hopeful that the votes will be there to continue the program. (Miami Herald, 1/16/14) 67 E-Newsletter – National and Industry News Florida Council January 20, 2013 their illness advanced because they did not seek preventative care. The Camden Coalition and BlueLabs will now apply those methods to see how people change their health-care consumption patterns under the Affordable Care Act. The goal is to help hospitals, outpatient centers and community health organizations spend money efficiently and address patients’ needs. BlueLabs and the Camden Coalition will anonymously aggregate medical claims and other patient information and break it down by geography and demographic groups. The new tool has been dubbed the Camden Health Explorer. The Camden Coalition will then work with health-care providers and policymakers in other communities to help them interpret the information in an effort to trim costs and improve treatment. “By creating an open source of anonymous data, the Explorer will inform broader, important discussion about the health of entire communities,” said Aaron Truchil, manager of research for the Camden Coalition. “This tool will leverage the data generated during patient care to improve the efficiency of communitylevel health programs, enabling organizations to make smarter decisions, ranging from deciding where to locate a new clinic or what language should be used to run a diabetes class.” (Wall Street Journal, 1/15/14) http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/01/15/obamadata-analysts-study-health-care-habits-underobamacare/ 68
© Copyright 2024 Paperzz