Healthcare Promises [aka ACA]

Join Our Mailing List

On the Affordable Care Act

By Rick Kahler MS CFP® ChFC CCIM www.KahlerFinancial.com

Rick Kahler CFP“I’m not sure what’s wrong or what kind of surgery you need, but we have to operate right now.”

If you heard this from your doctor, you’d jump off the examination table and run for the door. Yet that’s essentially the approach the President and Congress used three years ago to pass a bill, optimistically called the Affordable Care Act, which was the largest transformation of the U.S. health care system in our lifetime.

The Debate

During the frenzied debate our elected leaders made many promises as to the amazing benefits this legislation would bestow on Americans. After listening to speeches from President Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and President of the Senate Harry Reid, I recounted those promises in this blog on March 21, 2010.

The Promises

Let’s revisit those promises.

  1. All Americans will now receive affordable, or free, quality health care.
  2. No one will ever be denied coverage.
  3. No one will ever go into bankruptcy because of the costs of health care.
  4. There will be increased access to health care for 95% of Americans.
  5. There will be no decline in the quality of health care.
  6. Health care costs will go down.
  7. Health insurance coverage will be affordable to the middle class.
  8. There will be no decline in Medicare benefits.
  9. Insurance premiums will decline for the middle class.
  10. It will unleash unprecedented entrepreneurial opportunity for the economy.
  11. The deficit will decline, saving taxpayers $1.3 trillion.
  12. It will cut $500 billion of waste, fraud, and abuse out of Medicare.
  13. No government funds will be used to fund abortion.

Are these promises coming true? Many of them are pending full implementation of the act in 2014. Others have fallen flat or encountered the law of unintended consequences.

Obama Care

Business Owner’s

I’ve heard recently from several owners of small businesses about their increased health insurance costs. In addition to premium increases of nearly 50% over the past two years, they are seeing increased administrative costs from what one person called the “insanity and complexity” of the new regulations.

Businesses with fewer than 50 employees aren’t required to provide health insurance. The incentive for owners of businesses close to that threshold is to keep employee numbers below 50, which means curtailing growth or even laying people off.

Those without employer-provided insurance are supposed to be able to shop for coverage in new health care exchanges, beginning this October. However, half the states have chosen to rely on the federal government instead of setting up their own exchanges.

This has brought criticism even from former supporters like Democratic Senator Max Baucus of Montana, who helped write the health care bill. He is concerned that the exchanges will not open on time and consumers won’t have the information they need to use them. He told the Huffington Post that Obamacare is headed for a “train wreck.”

ACA Cost Estimates

The proponents said the ACA would cost $938 billion over 10 years. In addition to the promised Medicare savings, this was to be covered by a total tax increase of $562 billion over 10 years. This included a Medicare tax of 3.8% on dividends, rents, interest, and investment income on individuals and small business earning over $250,000.

The Office of Management and Budget, however, places the cost at $1.8 trillion over 10 years, resulting in a shortfall of around $900 billion.

Assessment

Whether Obamacare becomes the wild success the proponents guaranteed is yet to be seen. However, what we’ve seen so far isn’t promising. We as consumers would be well advised to pay close attention and ask tough questions before we accept this drastic surgery.

More

Conclusion

Are these promises coming true? Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Product DetailsProduct DetailsProduct Details

Product Details  Product Details

Product DetailsProduct Details

 

US Senate Seeks [Medical] Student Loan Solution

Join Our Mailing List

Will Medical and Health Sciences Students Benefit?

By Children’s Home Society of Florida Foundation

The Senate was still unable to craft a compromise last week on efforts to maintain the current student loan interest rate. If there is no action before July 1st, the student loan interest rate on most loans will increase from 3.4% to 6.8%. Both major parties have proposed a one year freeze on the interest rate at 3.4%. However, the leaders from the two parties have different opinions on how to offset or pay for the $6 billion cost of that interest rate freeze.

Democrats

The Democratic proposal by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) carries the title Stop the Student Loan Interest Rate Hike Act of 2012 (S. 2343). It failed on a vote of 51-43 last week, nine votes below the required 60-vote threshold for passage.

Republicans

The Republican alternative is the Interest Rate Reduction Act (S. 2366). It also failed on a vote of 34-62.

Both Sides

Senate Democrats proposed requiring Subchapter S corporations with three or fewer members and income levels of $200,000 per year ($250,000 for joint filers) to make payroll tax contributions on all income. The Republican solution is to repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund.

Response

In response to the vote, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney stated, “For the second time this month, they voted to ask millions of students to pay an average of $1,000 each rather than close a loophole that allows the very wealthy to avoid paying their fair share.”

Assessment

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stated, “In order to cover the cost of a temporary rate freeze that both parties want, they proposed to divert $6 billion from Medicare and to raise taxes on small businesses – hurting the very companies we are counting on to hire today’s college graduates.”

Editor’s Note: There is very broad support for a one year extension and it is an election year. While the parties have been unable to agree on offsets during the past year, eventually they may choose to pass the bill without offsets. It is quite possible that will happen with the student loan interest freeze.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

LEXICONS: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
ADVISORS: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com

Product Details

How a Few Private Health Insurers Are on the Way to Controlling Health Care

A Re-Post from Robert Reich; PhD

Staff Reporters

The healthcare public option is dead, killed by a handful of senators from small states who are mostly bought off by Big Insurance and Big Pharma -or- intimidated by these industries’ deep pockets and power to run political ads against them.

Assessment

Some might say it’s no great loss at this point because the Senate bill Harry Reid came up with contained a public option available only to 4 million people, which would have been far too small to exert any competitive pressure on private insurers anyway.

Link: http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-few-private-health-insurers-are-on.html

Conclusion

What do you think? Is Reich correct? Then, be sure to subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

***

An Open Letter to President [Elect] Barack Obama

Recognize and Protect Americans’ Right to

Health Information Privacy in Health IT

By Prudence Gourguechon; MD

By Elizabeth Clark; PhD, ACSW, MPH

US Capitol

Dear President-elect Obama:

We look forward to your inauguration with the hope that you will restore the public’s trust in the nation’s institutions which has been so badly shaken by the failed policies of the Bush Administration over the past eight years.  Nowhere is trust more important than in the delivery of quality health care and particularly for effective mental health care. 

Accordingly, we ask that you assure Americans that health information technology legislation under the Obama Administration will preserve and protect the patient’s right to health information privacy rather than erode or eliminate that right.”

We are encouraged that your nominee for DHHS Secretary, Senator Tom Daschle, has made prior statements reflecting support for the right to health information privacy in health IT legislation:

The issue of privacy touches virtually every American, often in extremely personal ways.  Whether it is bank records or medical files or Internet activities, Americans have a right to expect that personal matters will be kept private.  Today, in too many ways, however, our right to privacy is at risk.  Our laws have not kept up with sweeping technological changes.  As a result, some of our most sensitive, private matters end-up on databases that are then sold to the highest bidder.  That is wrong, it’s dangerous, and it has to stop.[1]

We are further encouraged by the recent statements of Senate Majority Leader Reid and House Majority Leader Hoyer that Congress should get the items in the stimulus package right “the first time.”[2]  In 2004, President Bush announced a goal of ensuring that most Americans health records would be accessible in an electronic health information system by 2014.[3]  The Department of Health and Human Services has pushed to accomplish that goal while demonstrating little commitment to preserving the individual’s right to HI privacy.[4]  HHS under the Bush Administration ignored the earlier HHS findings that strong privacy protections are essential if the full benefit of health IT is to be realized.[5]  The Bush Administration “replaced” the individual’s right of consent for the disclosure of identifiable health information adopted in the HIPAA Privacy Rule by the Clinton Administration, with “regulatory permission” for millions of covered entities and their business associates to disclose identifiable health information without the individual’s consent and over his or her objection.[6]  This policy reversal stripped Americans of their traditional health information privacy protection and essentially turned the HIPAA “Privacy” Rule into a disclosure rule.

In the past five years since the amended HIPAA Privacy Rule was put into effect, there have been more than 40,000 complaints of health information privacy violations of the HIPAA Privacy Rule, but HHS has not imposed a single civil penalty.[7]  Since January 2005, the privacy of more than 42 million electronic health records has been breached or compromised.[8]  Currently 250,000 Americans each year are victimized by health identity theft.[9]  A recent HIT industry survey found that all of the electronic health information systems currently in use are “severely at risk of being hacked” and the health information stolen or altered.[10]  According to Department of Justice figures, 67% of health care businesses that use health IT have been the victims of cybercrime resulting in the health IT systems of more than 80% of those businesses being down five hours or more at a cost of tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars.  Health care businesses reported the greatest duration of downtime of any category of business.[11]  Electronic data breaches increased by nearly 50% last year.[12]

It is, therefore, not surprising that nearly 70% of Americans have heard or read about medical records being lost or stolen, and most of those believe that computerized health records are the most vulnerable.  Approximately, 21 million Americans believe their medical records already have been lost or stolen.[13]

Even the Bush Administration has conceded belatedly that privacy protections are essential for public acceptance of a health IT system and that those protections must include the right of the individual to make an “informed decision” about the collection, use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information.[14]  HHS Secretary Leavitt recently stated, “Consumers shouldn’t be in a position to have to accept privacy risks they don’t want.”[15]

Other groups that have been hesitant in the past to support privacy protections have recently begun to acknowledge that health IT legislation must require privacy protections in the “forefront of all technological standards” and must assure the public that identifiable health information will be disclosed only with the patient’s consent.[16]  Even the Department of Homeland Security has recently adopted Fair Information Privacy Practices consistent with the Privacy Act of 1974 that require individual consent for the collection, use, dissemination, and maintenance of personal information.[17]

There should be no question that Americans have a right to privacy for highly personal health information.  The right to informational privacy was recognized by Congress as a “fundamental right” of all Americans protected by the Constitution in the Privacy Act of 1974 and by HHS under the Clinton Administration when it issued the original HIPAA Privacy Rule.[18]  According to prevailing case law, the Constitutional right to privacy for highly personal health information is now so well established that no reasonable person could be unaware of it.[19]  The right to health information privacy is also protected by the physician-patient privilege recognized in 43 states,[20] and the psychotherapist-patient privilege recognized in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and in Federal common law.[21]  The right to privacy of personal information including health information is also protected by the tort law or statutory law of all 50 states,[22] and 10 states include a specific right to privacy in their state constitutions.[23] 

HHS, under both the Bush and Clinton Administrations, has recognized that health information privacy is essential for quality health care because patients will not disclose information necessary for accurate diagnosis and treatment unless they are confident that their right to health information privacy will be protected.[24]  The patient’s right of consent for the disclosure of identifiable health information is also a core element of the standards for the ethical practice of health care for virtually all health professionals.[25]

Accordingly, we ask that you take a truly patient-centered approach to health IT and that you ground a national electronic health information system in the core concept of professional ethics which provides that, where possible, informed consent will be obtained for the disclosure of an individual’s identifiable health information.[26]

We recommend that you adopt the patient-centered, ethics-based approach to health IT set forth in the TRUST Act (H.R. 5442) which was introduced by Congressman Ed Markey in the last Congress and was co-sponsored by former Congressman Rahm Emanuel, current Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman and 13 other House members. 

The country needs a new direction in health information technology legislation that preserves and protects fundamental rights and acknowledges that, while health IT may provide benefits in the future, it also poses an immediate threat to the right to privacy that Americans cherish and expect.

With the greatest respect and hope for the future.

Prudence Gourguechon; MD

President

American Psychoanalytic Association

Elizabeth Clark; PhD, ACSW, MPH

Executive Director

National Association of Social Workers                           

 

For more information, contact:

James C. Pyles, Esq.                                                   

Powers Pyles Sutter & Verville, PC                                

1501 M Street, N.W., 7th Floor                                      

Washington, D.C.  20005                                               

202/466-6550                                                                

jim.pyles@ppsv.com                                                     

For the American Psychoanalytic Association            

James K. Finley

750 First Street, N.E.

Suite 700

Washington, D.C.  20002

292.366-8315

jfinley@naswdc.org

For the National Association of Social

Workers

 

REFERENCES:


[1]  Statement by Senator Tom Daschle on the establishment of the Congressional Privacy Caucus, Cong. Record-Senate, S11777 (Dec. 14, 2000).

[2]  Top Democrats Give Longer Timetable for Stimulus Bill, The Washington Post, A2 (Jan. 5, 2009).

[3]  “President Bush’s Technology Agenda,” (Jan. 20, 2004). http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/technology/economic_policy200404/chap3.html

[4]  Health Information Technology, Efforts Continue but Comprehensive Privacy Approach Needed for National Strategy, GAO-07-988T, p. 3 (June 19, 2007); Health Information Technology, Early Efforts Initiated but Comprehensive Privacy Approach Needed for National Strategy, GAO-07-238, p. 4 (Jan. 10, 2007).

[5]  65 F.R. 82,466 (Dec. 28, 2000).

[6]  Compare, “Our regulation will ensure that those consents cover the routine uses and disclosures of health information, and provide an opportunity for individuals to obtain further information and have further discussions, should they so desire.”  65 F.R. 82,474 (Dec. 28, 2000) with “The consent provisions…are replaced with a new provision…that provides regulatory permission for covered entities to use or disclose protected health information for treatment, payment and health care operations.”  67 F.R. 53,211 (Aug. 14, 2002). 

[7]  Health Information Privacy/Security Alert (Jan. 5, 2008).

[9]  “Panel:  Electronic Health Records May Save Money, But Can They Keep Information Safe?”  CQ Healthbeat News (June 19, 2008).

[10] “Electronic Records at Risk of Being Hacked, Report Warns,” Search CIO.com (Sept. 19, 2007).

[11] Cybercrime Against Businesses, 2005, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special Report, pp. 6, 13, 16, 18-19 (Dec. 2008).

[12] Data Breaches Up Almost 50%, The Washington Post, D2 (Jan. 6, 2009).

[13] “Millions Believe Personal Medical Information has Been Lost or Stolen,” Harris Poll (July 15, 2008). 

[14] “Individual Choice Principle,” HHS Privacy Principles (Dec. 15, 2008). http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/documents/NationwidePS_Framework.pdf

[15] HHS News Release (Dec. 15, 2008).

[17] Privacy Policy Memorandum, Department of Homeland Security, p.3 (Dec. 29, 2008).

    http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_policyguide_2008-01.pdf

[18] Pub. L. 93-579, sec. 2(a)(4):  “The Congress finds that the right to privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States.”  “Privacy is a fundamental right.”  65 F.R. 82,464 (Dec. 28, 2000). 

[19] Gruenke v. Seip, 225 F.3d 290, 302-03 (3rd Cir. 2000).  See also, Sterling v. Borough of Minersville, 232 F.3d 190, 198 (3rd Cir. 2000). 

[20] See, e.g., Northwest Mem. Hosp. v. Ashcroft, 362 F.3d 923 (7th Cir. 2004).

[21] Jaffee v. Redmond, 116 S.Ct. 1923 (1996).

[22] HHS Finding, 65 F.R. 82,464 (Dec. 28, 2000).

[23] Those states are Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, and Washington.

[24] National Privacy and Security Framework, p.1, Dept. of HHS (Dec. 15, 2008); 65 F.R. 82,468 (Dec. 28, 2000). 

[25] Finding of National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics, report to Sec. Leavitt, p. 3 (June 22, 2006).

[26] American Medical Association policy, H-315.978 Privacy and Confidentiality, reaffirmed 2001.