Group items tagged

"Is 'Obamacare' like Canada's health-care system? 'Not even close,' according to critics The first major U.S. health-care reform passed in nearly 50 years is the Obamacare but regardless of critics passing judgment on "Obamacare" as "Canadian-style" health insurance, critics note that major differences between the two systems persist. The U.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which went into effect earlier this week, is "not even close" to the Canadian system says McGill University Professor of Political Science Antonia Maioni. "Obamacare keeps in place the basic principle of health care in the United States which is: if you want to get access to care you need to buy insurance coverage," she told CTV News Channel on Friday. "Obamacare is trying to make it easier for people to be able to buy that insurance coverage and, if you are very poor, to be able to qualify for a government program. But it doesn't have the same principle as in Canada, where if you are a legal resident, you are automatically enrolled in a provincial or territorial health plan." In an op-ed published in the Globe and Mail, Maioni said the major differences between "Obamacare" and Canada's health-care system include: "Obamacare" is not a single-payer system (where one entity, usually the government, pays all costs) Care depends on the type of insurance coverage you buy Insurance coverage varies by state Wait times are based on the level of insurance coverage Obamacare" faces challenges in cost control Maioni said that while "Obamacare" was passed, in part, to address American spending on health care - the highest in the world at nearly 18 per cent of GDP, or $3 trillion - the act remains "problematic." "There's nothing in it that speaks to really serious cost control," she said. She furthermore said that while Canada also spends a lot on health care, there are mechanisms that the provinces can use to contain spen

When the Bergen County couple filing for unemployment certified they were "able and looking for work," they did so the same way thousands of others do from home every week - by logging into the state Department of Labor website. The online world, however, is not quite as anonymous as many believe. Every computer carries a unique electronic address so it can be found on the internet, and what alerted state investigators to this particular claim was the location of the network being used. It was not in New Jersey. It was registered to Royal Caribbean Cruises in Miami, and no one was under any illusion that the couple was looking for work at sea. Unemployment fraud is a multimillion-dollar business in New Jersey, say officials, with 1,600 to 2,000 attempts to bilk the system each week - from the couple on vacation certifying they were able to work while cruising to the Bahamas, to hackers from all over the world trying to game the system, to people still trying to collect unemployment benefits even after finding new jobs. "No one likes to be ripped off, but the volume of money we put out is staggering," said Harold Wirths, the commissioner of the Department of Labor and Workforce Development. New Jersey's Unemployment Trust Fund went broke in 2009, not only under the strain of the severe recession that led to high unemployment levels, but from years of fraud that went on through decades of neglect. Wirths said the fund is now solvent again, due in part to anti-fraud measures being put into play that he said have saved the state $448.7 million the past three years. "We're fighting fraud on every front," the commissioner said. It is a national issue, according to Douglas Holmes, president of UWC Strategic Services, a Washington, D.C., group that represents businesses on unemployment issues.

Study: More exercise, less sitting reduces heart failure risk for men More exercise, less sitting reduces heart failure risk for men By American Heart Association DALLAS - sitting for long period's increases heart failure risk in men, even for those who exercise regularly, according to new research published in the American Heart Association journal Circulation: Heart Failure. Preventing heart failure, researchers found, requires a two-part behavioral approach: high levels of physical activity plus low levels of sedentary time. The study is the first to examine the link between heart failure risk and sedentary time, said Deborah Rohm Young, Ph.D., lead researcher and a senior scientist at Kaiser Permanente in Pasadena, Calif. "Be more active and sit less. That's the message here," Young said. Researchers followed a racially diverse group of 84,170 men ages 45 to 69 without heart failure. Exercise levels were calculated in METs, or metabolic equivalent of task, a measure of the body's energy use. Sedentary levels were measured in hours. After an average of nearly eight years of follow-up, researchers found: Men with low levels of physical activity were 52 percent more likely to develop heart failure than men with high physical activity levels, even after adjusting for differences in sedentary time. Outside of work, men who spent five or more hours a day sitting were 34 percent more likely to develop heart failure than men who spent no more than two hours a day sitting, regardless of how much they exercised. Heart failure risk more than doubled in men who sat for at least five hours a day and got little exercise compared to men who were very physically active and sat for two hours or less a day. Study limitations included: Since

SACRAMENTO, California - Aetna Inc. discontinue selling individual health insurance policies in California, just weeks after opting out of the exchange that is being established as part of the national health care reforms, a state regulator said last month. California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones said he was disappointed in Aetna's decision because consumers need more choices. The decision does not affect people who have Aetna insurance through their employer. "This is not good news for California consumers," Jones said in a statement. "A competitive market with more choices for consumers is important, as we implement the Affordable Care Act and health insurance coverage is a requirement." In California's individual health insurance market, Aetna is a quite small player. According to 2011 figures compiled by the California HealthCare Foundation, Aetna has about 5 percent of the state's individual health market. By comparison, Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield and Kaiser share 87 percent. Aetna says it has about 58,000 individual enrollees in the state and expects to have about 49,000 by the end of the year. It plans to withdraw from the state at the end of the year but will continue to offer small and large group plans, as well as Medicare, dental and life insurance products. Those in search of to buying their own health insurance will be directed to Covered California, the state's new health insurance exchange starting Oct. 1. Aetna was not among 13 insurance carriers that will sell individual coverage to millions of Californians through the exchange. According to Jones' office Under state law, Aetna will not be allowed to sell individual policies in California for five years once it leaves that market. http://www.westhillinsuranceconsulting.com/blog/ http://www.westhillinsuranceconsulting.com/

Westhill Healthcare Consulting is one of the internet's oldest sites that offer consumer information on reasonably priced health and medical coverage since it was published during early 90's. It is the most-trusted independent site, respect and loyalty was earned trough the years of hard work. All the information on this site is projected to the general consumer audience. Westhill Healthcare Consulting is not selling insurance and is not an insurance agency Your concern is our business, as service to our visitors, we provide health insurance quotes from carefully chosen partners who are in the business of selling health insurance, and who meet Westhill Healthcare Consulting strict standards. It is the referrals that pay us and in turn this is what we use to pay the cost of publishing this site. http://www.westhillinsuranceconsulting.com/blog/

Does health insurance increase your lifespan? Felue Chang, who is newly insured under an insurance plan through the Affordable Care Act, receives a checkup from Dr. Peria Del Pino-White at the South Broward Community Health Services clinic on April 15 in Hollywood, Fla. The mortality rate in Massachusetts declined substantially in the four years after the state enacted a law in 2006 mandating universal health care coverage, providing the model for the Affordable Care Act. In a study released last week, Harvard School of Public Health professors Benjamin Sommers, Sharon Long and Katherine Baicker conclude that "health reform in Massachusetts was associated with a significant decrease in all-cause mortality." The authors caution that their conclusions, published in Annals of Internal Medicine, may not apply to all states, and other studies have shown little correlation between having insurance and living longer. Nevertheless, the Harvard study adds to a growing body of evidence that having health insurance increases a person's life expectancy.

A 27-year-old in Jackson pays $336 a month for the second-cheapest silver health plan on Mississippi's s federally run insurance marketplace. That is more than twice as much as the $154 a 27-year-old in Nashville would pay for the same type of policy, and the $138 for a similar person in Tucson. Across all 34 insurance marketplaces run by the federal government, the average is $287, about 25 percent cheaper. The reason for the higher prices in some markets? Paltry competition, say Leemore Dafny and Christopher Ody from Northwestern University, and Jonathan Gruber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Jackson has only two insurers on the marketplace: Humana and Centene. By contrast, four insurance companies slug it out on Nashville's exchange. In Tucson, there are eight. Jackson's over-the-top premiums underscore one of the least-heralded shortcomings of the rollout of the Affordable Care Act: the scarcity of insurers on health plan exchanges, which is driving up the price of policies across the country. The research by Ms. Dafny, Mr. Gruber and Mr. Ody, to be published by the National Bureau of Economic Research next week, concludes that premiums on the exchanges are 11 percent higher than they would be if all the health insurance companies that sell policies in each state had participated in the new markets for health plans. More competition not only would lower premiums, but would also save the federal government money. It would spend $1.7 billion less in subsidies to low- and middle-income Americans buying policies on the health care insurance exchanges. "Half of the population in the states with health exchanges facilitated by the federal government is served by three insurers or fewer," Ms. Dafny said. "To have competition on the exchanges you need competitors." The findings are somewhat perplexing, though. By law, 80 to 85 percent of premiums must be devoted to medical spending. Insurers don't have particularly large profit margin

Here's some cheerful news: States and the federal government are doing little to stop a costly form of Medicaid fraud, according to a government report released last week. Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for poor Americans, now covers more than half its members through what's known as Medicaid managed care. States pay private companies a fixed rate to insure Medicaid patients. It has become more popular in recent years than the traditional "fee for service" arrangement, in which Medicaid programs reimburse doctors and hospitals directly for each service they provide. Despite the growth of managed care in recent decades, officials responsible for policing Medicaid "did not closely examine Medicaid managed-care payments, but instead primarily focused their program integrity efforts on [fee-for-service] claims," according to the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress. The managed-care programs made up about 27 percent of federal spending on Medicaid, according to the GAO. The nonpartisan investigators interviewed authorities in California, Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Texas over the past 12 months. STORY: No Background Checks Needed for Home Health Workers in 10 States Funded jointly by the federal government and the states, Medicaid provided health insurance to about 72 million low-income Americans at a cost of $431 billion last year, according to the report. By the Medicaid agency's own reckoning, $14.4 billion of federal spending on Medicaid constituted "improper payments," which include both overpayments and underpayments. That's 5.8 percent of what the federal government spends on the program. The $14 billion figure doesn't tally what states lose to bad payments. The fraud risk for managed care is twofold. Doctors or other health-care providers could be bilking the managed-care companies, which pass on those fraudulent costs to the government.

A pair of editorials last week took up the issue of Medicare and Medicaid fraud, waste and abuse, signifying these problems are becoming a greater focus of public attention and debate "Area ambulance companies are facing deserved scrutiny for their disproportionate share of the nation's outsize[d] healthcare costs," The Inquirer wrote. Ground ambulance providers around Philadelphia collected 64 percent more Medicare dollars than the national average in 2012, with 33 area companies raking in 10 times the norm, the article noted. "No wonder Medicare has stopped taking new company enrollments while it sorts out the fraud," the article stated. The Inquirer referenced charges against eight local ambulance providers since 2011, including one's five-year prison sentence for executing a $3.6 million scam involving kickbacks for unnecessary transport. "Medicare is still not as open [as] it should be," the editorial said. "It has spurned numerous attempts by The Inquirer to get additional information on the ambulance companies that are costing the government the most." The paper wants to know if aberrant providers still collect federal money and if Medicare demanded overpayment refunds. Meanwhile, a Farmington Daily Times editorial highlighted the case of Agave Health, Inc., an Arizona mental health services company that in six months received more than $172,000 from Medicaid. Half this money was disbursed before the completion of a state audit led to a funding freeze for 15 nonprofit healthcare providers. "The question is whether those payments suggest state officials prejudged the conclusion of the audit before it was completed," the editorial stated. That audit exposed $36 million in Medicaid overpayments, the Times reported, which led New Mexico to halt Medicaid funding to in-state providers and shift business to Arizona companies like Agave. But New Mexico paid Agave more than it paid in-state providers.

Wal-Mart endorsed ObamaCare in 2009 and helped drag the bill through U.S. Congress, and so far it hasn't recanted. By holding back economic growth and incomes, perhaps the law is expanding the retailer's customer base. Another plus-at least for management-is that Wal-Mart can jettison its employees into the ObamaCare insurance exchanges. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that the largest U.S. private employer is dropping health benefits for some 30,000 workers, or about 5% of its part-time workforce. Earlier health-plan eligibility triage in 2011 had removed tens of thousands of Wal-Mart workers from the balance sheet, so this latest purge was probably inevitable. Wal-Mart cites its inability to manage higher-than-anticipated health expenses. Perhaps- wasn't ObamaCare supposed to bring those costs down? Obviously the company is also responding rationally to ObamaCare's incentives. With a subsidized government alternative now open for business, and since corporations aren't liable for a penalty for not covering people who work fewer than 30 hours a week on average, cost-control logic says to send such coverage ballast over the side. Other retail and grocery chains including Target, Home Depot and Trader Joe's have already done the same. ObamaCare's critics predicted that such insurance dumping was inevitable, and the only question now is how many and how fast other companies partake of the new all-you-caneat entitlement buffet. Get whatever you like, the bill's on taxpayers. The disruptions will be concentrated in industries with large numbers of low-skilled and low-income workers, like restaurants, hospitality and, yes, retail. The irony is that even as Wal-Mart drops insurance because it is too costly, President Barack Obama is claiming credit for lowering health costs. He boasted the other day that the law gave every U.S. family "a $1,800 tax cut" by supposedly reducing the rate of employer-premium growth. Obama

When investigators suspected that Houston's Riverside General Hospital had filed Medicare claims for patients who weren't treated, they moved to block all payments to the facility. Then politics intervened. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat, contacted the federal official who oversees Medicare, Marilyn Tavenner, asking her to back down, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. In a June 2012 letter to Ms. Tavenner, Rep. Jackson Lee said blocking payments had put the hospital at financial risk and "jeopardized" patients needing Medicare. Weeks later, Ms. Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, instructed deputies to restore most payments to the hospital even as the agency was cooperating in a criminal investigation of the facility, according to former investigators and documents. "These changes are at the direction of the Administrator and have the highest priority," a Medicare official wrote to investigators. About two months after that order, Riverside's top executive was indicted in a $158 million fraud scheme. The hospital was barred from Medicare this May, and the CEO was convicted in October. What happened at Riverside General Hospital shows how political pressure from medical providers and elected officials can collide with efforts to rein in waste and abuse in the nearly $600 billion, taxpayer-funded Medicare system. More than a dozen former investigators and CMS officials said in interviews that they faced questions from members of Congress about policy changes or punitive action affecting providers or individual doctors.

Thom Tillis is stuck at the state capitol trying to resolve a budget quarrel as speaker of the North Carolina House. It's a spot that helps Hagan emphasize Tillis' role leading a Republican-controlled state government that Democrats contend has gone overboard with conservative zeal by restricting access to abortion and the voting booth while cutting corporate taxes and slashing spending on schools. (Hagan, the daughter of Joe P. Ruthven, grew up in Lakeland.) If Tillis is worried by Hagan's portrayal, he doesn't show it. Drinking coffee last week from a hand-grenade-shaped mug in his no-frills legislative office, he's got his own message in his campaign to take Hagan's Senate seat. "Obamacare," he said, "continues to be a big problem." Similar themes are playing out in other crucial Senate races, as voters have four months to decide which party will control the chamber in the final two years of Barack Obama's presidency. For Republicans, it's all about tying Democrats to Obama - especially to a health care law that remains unpopular with many Americans. And for Democrats, the election is about just about anything else, especially if they can steer attention away from Washington and federal matters. It's a political strategy that sometimes gives the campaigns an inside-out feel, with veteran senators running as if they were first-timers without a Washington resume to defend or tout.

Millions of Americans gained health insurance coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act this year, but the influx apparently has not yet translated into patients packing doctors' offices. That may reflect a lack of understanding about how and where to seek care-and a lack of outreach by their new plans and providers. "If coverage expansion is allowing patients to establish new relationships with physicians, we would expect to see physicians devote a greater share of their calendars and work effort to caring for new patients," wrote the authors of a report released this week by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Athenahealth, a company that sells cloud-based health information and practice management technology. But that is not what they found. Though it may seem counterintuitive, the organizations discovered that during the first five months of 2014, all specialties-with the exception of pediatrics-experienced lower rates of new-patient visits than they had in the year-ago period. This was based on data taken from more than 14,000 providers across specialties. For example, the proportion of visits from new patients to primary-care physicians in the sample from January to May 2014 was 18.8% compared with 19.3% during that same five-month period in 2013. The study did not analyze what caused this decline, but the authors suggest that one reason is that the newly insured are continuing to go to emergency departments instead of physician offices. That explanation seems consistent with studies that showed increased emergency department use after pre-ACA expansions of health insurance in Massachusetts and Medicaid in Oregon.