The Insider: All this could be yours someday
Fuzzy logic As the “tax extenders” bill makes its way through the Senate, a provision to extend COBRA premium subsidies for the unemployed is in jeopardy. Opponents in the Senate and the Blue Dogs in the House who stripped the provision from legislation two weeks ago argue that it’s unfair to help people who are unemployed when other, equally needy people are getting no assistance.
Just stop and think about that for a minute: It’s not like they’re identifying an alternative beneficiary for assistance, or arguing to accelerate implementation of the Affordable Care Act. They are basically saying, “Because we can’t help everybody, we won’t help anybody.” If you apply that reasoning more broadly it leads you to advocate the repeal, or at least the suspension, of Medicare and Medicaid until 2014, when financial assistance to obtain coverage becomes more generally available–a move few Congressmembers would dare consider, even in a non-election year.
With unemployment remaining high, the COBRA premium subsidies in limbo are badly needed. They are good for the economy, the health care system, and mostly for the thousands of struggling families who will be able to retain their coverage. Find out more at Community Catalyst’s implementation headquarters.
Faulkner on health care When William Faulkner wrote, “The past is never dead. It’s not even past,” he could have been talking about the politics of health care more than a half-century into the future. Congressional Republicans’ challenge of the White House public education campaign on Medicare changes as misuse of government funds for partisan advantage hearkens back to Democrats’ attacks on the Bush administration over the original Medicare Part D roll-out.
And Senators who opposed PPACA seem intent on re-debating the legislation at every opportunity: first, in the context of Don Berwick’s nomination to head CMS, and now in the debate over the Medicare physician payment fix. Republicans have offered an alternative that does more for the physicians but partially pays for it by eliminating desperately-needed financial assistance for state Medicaid programs—while slipping in a “poison pill” that would roll back the individual responsibility provisions in PPACA. Such a move could appeal to many on the left who are concerned that the affordability provisions don’t go far enough.
Someday, all this could be yours As the “repeal and replace” drumbeat goes on, a third ‘r’ should be added to the sequence: Recycle. Congressional Republicans are recycling ideas from the debate that were shown to fail to reduce the number of uninsured or eliminate insurance discrimination.
But as several states move forward with anti-Affordable Care Act ballot measures, new research from Massachusetts shows just how wrongheaded such opposition is. Until the coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act kick in in 2014, Massachusetts provides the closest thing we have to a “beta site” for what the health care system of tomorrow will look like. While critics focus on the continuing cost challenges (problems that pre-dated health reform in Massachusetts and were not really addressed in the landmark law in 2006) new reports published by the Urban Institute and the National Bureau of Economic Research underscore just what other states can gain as they move forward with implementing the law.
Urban’s latest report shows that the coverage gap between racial and ethnic minorities and non-Hispanic whites has been closed—the only place in the country where this is true. Additional findings show:
- –high rates of coverage in Massachusetts persist despite continued high unemployment
- –economic barriers to obtaining care remain low and have declined further for some populations since the inception of the law
- –four years into implementation, there is still no evidence of ‘crowd-out’ of private coverage, and public support for the Massachusetts system remains high.
The NBER paper found that since reform in Massachusetts, there have been fewer preventable hospitalizations and emergency room-generated admissions, and length of hospital stays has been reduced, most likely due to improvements in access to ambulatory care.
Sure makes implementation look like a lot better idea than repeal.
–Michael Miller, director of strategic policy