More concerns
There is more and more concern from all medical organizations about what the new congress will or won’t do related to Medicaid and Medicare.
Recent articles include Modern Healthcare Online that states “An ambitious new proposal from an HHS-appointed panel to revamp the Medicaid program is unlikely to prompt much action from Congress now that Democrats will control both the House and the Senate.”
And in another article Modern Healthcare Online they state “The Government Accountability Office said Congress must act to reform Medicare and Medicaid or both programs may be fiscally unsustainable in the long run. Suggesting areas of action for the 110th Congress, GAO Comptroller General David Walker said the federal government should modernize Medicare payment policies to reward quality and efficiency. Walker also said lawmakers should assess the CMS’ managerial oversight of Medicare and reform Medicaid to curtail states’ use of inappropriate financing schemes to boost their federal matching funds. Federal Medicare spending represents about 3.2% of the gross domestic product currently and could rise to 7.3% of the GDP in the next 30 years without congressional action, Walker said in a letter earlier this month to congressional leadership”
The AMA and most other organizations feel like, with the election of the new congress, most of these changes will be placed on the back-burner. This will lead us further into access problems for patients and poorer quality patient care. It will increase the use of emergency rooms and actually cost more money in the long run.
Recent articles include Modern Healthcare Online that states “An ambitious new proposal from an HHS-appointed panel to revamp the Medicaid program is unlikely to prompt much action from Congress now that Democrats will control both the House and the Senate.”
And in another article Modern Healthcare Online they state “The Government Accountability Office said Congress must act to reform Medicare and Medicaid or both programs may be fiscally unsustainable in the long run. Suggesting areas of action for the 110th Congress, GAO Comptroller General David Walker said the federal government should modernize Medicare payment policies to reward quality and efficiency. Walker also said lawmakers should assess the CMS’ managerial oversight of Medicare and reform Medicaid to curtail states’ use of inappropriate financing schemes to boost their federal matching funds. Federal Medicare spending represents about 3.2% of the gross domestic product currently and could rise to 7.3% of the GDP in the next 30 years without congressional action, Walker said in a letter earlier this month to congressional leadership”
The AMA and most other organizations feel like, with the election of the new congress, most of these changes will be placed on the back-burner. This will lead us further into access problems for patients and poorer quality patient care. It will increase the use of emergency rooms and actually cost more money in the long run.
posted by Anonymous at 5:55 AM
14 Comments:
The Republicans held the Senate and Congress for the last 12 years and didnt fix "your" problem, how do you propose the Democratic controlled Senate and House do it in the next 2 years?
Anon6:44,
Standard Republican answer, "It is all Bill Clinton's fault".
Always reminds me of the story about Stalin and Khrushchev. Stalin sent Khrushchev two numbered letters with intructions to open #1 when he had his first crisis. It said, "Blame everything on me".
Letter #2 was to be opened when the next crisis happened. It said, "Prepare two letters...."
Kudos to the posters above me, especially Medrep for finding the facts. This is not a Democratic problem, past or future, despite Modern Healthcare's attempt to suggest it as such.
I hope all the folks who are griping (and who voted Republican time after time) are enjoying their "tax cut".
How did everyone who supported the GOP tax cut believe that it would not eventually effect the services provided by the government? It always sounds great at election time, but when the reality comes home, its a different story.
"...the services provided by the government."
That is exactly why I have voted Republican in the past--I don't want government to be so big. Cut some things out, and let me keep my hard-earned money. The more we depend on government, the more problems like this we're going to have. It's always someone else's fault in this country. It's time we take responsibility for our own lives--and that means taking responsibility for our own health care. Until we have to, we never will. Unfortunately, the Republican party has let me down over the last few years by increasing the size of the government. The President has not helped matters. Conservative voters grew tired of this progression and ended their support of their representatives who weren't doing the job they were sent to Washington to do, and thus the sweeping gains for Democrats last month.
I also might point out that the first post's comment that Republicans held the Senate for the last 12 years is not entirely accurate--Democrats were the majority for a short period after Jumpin' Jim Jeffords switched parties from Republican to Independent. Also, with the narrow split in the Senate between Republicans and Democrats, it's nearly impossible to do anything without support from both parties. That's why nothing productive was done the last few years--neither side wanted to work with the other. The blame for that goes to both parties, and particularly their leaders.
Anony 12:39 said:
"The blame for that goes to both parties, and particularly their leaders..."
Truer words could not be spoken. My thoughts are not meant as a Dems. vs. Repubs. argument.
My point was simply that the reference in the article that HB posted wherein it was suggested that the incoming democratic majority wont solve the medicare reimbursement problem is a disenguous suggestion that the democrats are at "fault", when in fact, the issues are the result of several years of "congressional wisdom", and to the extent that the medicare cuts being complained of were approved as part of the sweeping Republican "tax cut" agenda, the fault lies therein.
I'd like to hear from Lawguy exactly what "services" he feels the government should be providing.
If we would get rid of the needless and wasteful spending, there is plenty of money to support the things the governement should truly be involved with.
One person's "needless and wasteful spending" is another person's truly necessary income. I, for one, am tired of doctors whining about the amount of my tax money they get to see patients who otherwise wouldn't be able to pay them anything. We can debate "needless and wasteful" all night, but a quick walk through the doctor's parking sections at any hospital will make thoughts of "those poor abused doctors" go away instantly. I would rather see more money go to veterans disabled as a result of their military service than contribute to a greater proliferation of BMWs, Mercedes and Lexus automobiles within the medical community.
And one excellent place to begin is the diversion of billions to the unnecessary war in Iraq.
As long as Veteran's benefits were brought up, here is another example of stupidity and duplication in government. A few years ago our Vets were graciously and deservedly given the opportunity to get their medicines free or at reduced costs via the VA system. That is fine. But, the Va system requires that they also go through the VA clinics before they can get those drugs. Now, the majority of my patients who are also Vets have duplicate health care because they also still have their Medicare benefits AND maintain a private physician because, should they require hospitlaization, they do not want to go to the VA hospital. So, I order tests and later find out the VA ordered the same thing. I prescribe medicines and later find out the VA clinic ordered medicines, usually different from mine. The VA outpatient clinic, in my experience, makes no effort to see if such tests have recently been done on their patients nor do they share any information regarding care they have given the Vets with the private physicians. I think it makes for serious potential problems when too many physicians who are not talking with each other, changing medicines and duplicating or (if they expect the other physician to take care of a problem) neglecting care. Would it not have made much more sense to give these patients a choice...keep their Medicare benefits but supply their medicines via the VA or forfeit their Medicare and be provided for completely by the VA system?? I wonder how much money in this faulty scheme alone we could save and spend more wisely? Should we tax payers have to support this kind of double dipping? It certainly is not the vault of our Vets...I think they deserve the best. But they could be better served by a better system.
If you think things are bad now, you might get more than you wish for. Remember Hillery is in the wings, just itching to try to "Fix" the broken Healthcare System, and everything else thats wrong with this country. People will have something to cry about if that happens.
Let me begin by saying I am not a physician. I have worked in the medical field for over 40 years as an RN. And yes in that capacity I have seen all kinds of MDs. As in all walks of life, the occupation is composed of all kinds of personalities. Some can be very arrogant and difficult. But there are just as many who are decent, hard working, caring individuals. I can no longer stand by and hear the numerous criticisms of their financial success. What motivates these criticisms?
Let me ask those who would comment about the doctor's parking lot at any hospital filled with luxury cars. How much time did you spend in getting your education? How much money did you invest in your education? How much money did you spend in setting up your "company" when you graduated from college? And how many hours a week do you now work? And do you have all holidays and weekends off? And when you go to a social gathering how often does some one come up to you for a free consultation? Do you repeatedly share your "private" time with your customer? It would be interesting to know the hourly earnings an MD makes when expenses and time spent on the job are factored into the formula. Many,many people would not be willing to devote the time and work and the risk it takes to establish oneself as an MD.
And don't for a minute think I am a polly-anna. I just have observed that through the years there are a great number of jealous, unmotivated individuals who speak when they don't have all the facts.
I contend that much of the negative criticism is influenced by the green monster called jealousy. Why shouldn't a physician expect a return on his/her investment?
This is ridiculous. I'm moving to Canada.
newalbian, you might want to keep in mind that the vast majority of those billions is being spent here in the US, not in Iraq
Anonymous 10:25 missed the point about the doctor's parking lots. It isn't meant as a criticism of what they make, but rather a simple observation that they seem to be doing quite well and, to me, look ridiculous when they expect taxpayers (who generally make a lot less) to dig deeper to subsidize them. Despite all the complaints about reimbusement levels, the government pours an enormous amount of tax money into the medical community and, whether they think it is sufficient or not, it covers a lot of overhead expense that wouldn't go away if the patients disappeared.
Post a Comment
<< Home