Barone: A Democrat Reaches Across the Aisle on Medicare

It's highly unusual in a presidential debate for two Republican candidates -- the two leading in current national polls -- to heap praise on a liberal Democratic senator.

But in the Fox News debate in Sioux City, Iowa, Thursday night, both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney had very good words to say for Oregon's Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden.

The subject was the Medicare reform plan put forward in a Wall Street Journal opinion article that morning by Wyden and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan.

"Today is a big day for the country," Romney said. It was "an enormous achievement" for Ryan and Wyden, people on opposite sides of the aisle, to come together.

Gingrich, harshly criticized last May for calling Ryan's earlier Medicare plan "right-wing social engineering," went out of his way to say that Romney had produced "a very good plan" for Medicare and that it was "brave" for Wyden to join Ryan in their bipartisan plan.

Politicians' praise is sometimes bestowed overlavishly, but in this case it was well merited. Ryan-Wyden represents a major step forward in public policy and gives hope that the Medicare entitlement can be rendered sustainable.

The Ryan-Wyden proposal provides for continuation of the current Medicare program for those now over age 55. For those younger, it would introduce in 2022 a "premium-support" system that would allow Medicare recipients to choose between the current program and a Medicare-approved private plan.

Those plans would be presented in competitive bidding and would have to be as comprehensive as traditional Medicare and would have to accept anyone who applied. There would be subsidies for low-income seniors.

Private insurers would thus have an incentive to design plans that would offer more generous benefits and lower costs than current Medicare. This kind of market competition has proved effective in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program enacted in 2003. Costs have been lower than government projections, and beneficiary satisfaction has been high.

Ryan-Wyden differs from the Medicare plan Ryan presented last spring by offering the option of keeping the current Medicare system. That is also a feature of the Medicare proposals of candidates Romney and Gingrich.

Wyden, with a solidly liberal voting record, may seem to be an unlikely partner in this enterprise. But he has consistently favored adding elements of market competition to our health care system.

He was one of the relatively few Democrats who provided necessary support for Part D in 2003. And in 2008, he and Republican Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah put forward a health care proposal based on eliminating the current tax preference for employer-provided health insurance.

That preference creates incentives to increase costs, and health policy experts of both left and right have argued for its elimination. But Barack Obama gave Wyden-Bennett the back of his hand and supported a plan that would centralize control in the federal government.

The Obama White House was quick to reject Ryan-Wyden, as well. While Obama has said on occasion that the current Medicare program is not sustainable in the long term, he is now firmly in campaign mode and uninterested in anything other than bashing Republicans for hurting seniors.

Ryan-Wyden makes this kind of cheap-shot politics more difficult. And it comes when a recent poll showed that only 29 percent of voters -- less than one in three -- support the Obamacare legislation. So it's no surprise that Obama prefers Mediscare tactics to defending his administration's largest legislative accomplishment.

The Republican candidates are united in their determination to repeal Obamacare, and repeal is a realistic possibility if Republicans should sweep the 2012 elections as they did in 2010. Ryan-Wyden also renders long-term Medicare reform a realistic possibility.

Ryan-Wyden helps to frame the health care issue in the presidential election as a choice between big government control and market competition. That does not help Obama.

Gallup reports that 64 percent of Americans regard big government, as opposed to big business or big labor, as "the biggest threat to the country in the future." That's just one point under the all-time high since Gallup began asking the question in 1965.

So it's not surprising that Romney and Gingrich saw fit to praise Wyden and that other Democrats are angry with him. But Wyden shows that at least one Democrat, even in campaign season, is more interested in good public policy than in politics.

---

Michael Barone, senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com), is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. COPYRIGHT 2011 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

Get Medical Coverage for Family with Georgia Health Insurance Plan

Health insurance is a step towards the safety of an individual and if the concern is that of family; then, Georgia health insurance plan for your family is the ultimate choice. After all, no one would like to make any compromises on behalf of their family in terms of health. At this point of time, only quality health insurance plans would be appreciable that provides maximum or coverage to almost all types of medical costs. Some areas that are, generally, covered under family health insurance plans are medical costs for child's check up, maternity costs, hospitalization charges, medications, doctor's visit and also operation costs for certain major health issues. All these aspects are designed to suit the needs of the insurance seeker, so that he may not have to do any kind of personal expenses.

Apart from the above mentioned health coverage areas, Georgia health insurance plan also provide part and full compensation in certain serious conditions. In this regard, if the individual get paralytic stroke or becomes permanently handicapped, the insurance company provides more than 75 percent of the total cost of insurance. On the other hand, if the insurance seeker dies within the duration of insurance service; then, the nominee of that insurance seeker would get the complete insured amount from the insurance company. In fact, Georgia health insurance plan is the best as it helps the aspirant insurance seekers to get compensation for each and every type of possible medical cost.

While selecting the best Georgia health insurance plan for your family, it is essential to consider everyone's requirements and this can be complicated to manage. However it is worth persistent with, as having derisory coverage could be far more costly in the long run. When it comes to taking Georgia health insurance plan, every form of pre-existing health conditions needs to be taken into account, and may subsequently be more intricate to insure. Some insurance plans from the house of Georgia health insurance plan focuses on single health issue, such as hernia, gall bladder stone, maternity and also heart surgeries. Well, in this regard, the insurance seeker gets covered for even the minutest medical charges that are associated with these health issues.

Georgia health insurance plan for your family is the best safety that can be provided to them. After all, health of the family is not a matter to be neglected. Indeed, in this case, every possible best health insurance plan is considered. Generally, family health insurance plans include the couple and two of their kids. This makes it easier for you to use the financial help for any member of the family that might have some health problem. Well, such type of insurance plans is also available over internet. All an aspirant insurance seeker has to do is login to his internet connection and search on the required insurance plan. The Georgia health insurance plan for family also has customized plans that can also include certain medical issues, on the demand of their customer to provide them with best health services.

Georgia health insurance plan has a place for everyone and can be customized according to the insurance seeker's demands too.

The Price We Pay for Medical Care

By REED ABELSON

Americans seem to be paying the price for the unrelenting rise in health care costs in this country, according to several studies being published on Thursday in Health Affairs, an academic journal.

The higher cost of coverage has taken a huge cut in the increase in income earned by the average family, says one study, and lower-income families are particularly hard hit, according to another. Meanwhile, the numbers of people who cannot afford insurance or do not have enough coverage have significantly increased, according to a third study.

In an analysis of just how much of a family’s paycheck is being gobbled up, analysts from Rand looked at how much of the average increase in a family’s gross annual income over the past decade has gone to pay for health care.

While the family saw an increase in income from $76,000 a year in 1999 to $99,000 a year in 2009, the researchers then deducted what they estimated would go to pay for insurance premiums, deductibles and co-payments and taxes to support Medicare and Medicaid. By the Rand calculation, if the cost of health care had been in line with overall inflation, the average family would have had nearly $5,400 in additional income a year that they could have spent.

The bottom line: Americans have less and less money to spend “on everything else” because they are forced to devote so much of their income to health care.

The authors conclude: “Given the perilous state of the US economy, the fiscal burdens imposed on ally payers by steadily rising health care costs can no longer be ignored.”

In a second study, researchers make the case that lower-income families are even more burdened by the high cost of medical care than those who are better off. Patricia Ketsche, a researcher from Georgia State University, and others calculated that low-income families pay more than 20 percent of family income toward health care, looking at both private spending and taxes, while other families who make more pay no more than 16 percent of their family income.

A third analysis looks at the unaffordability of health care by estimating how many people were without adequate coverage in 2010. The study, by the Commonwealth Fund, estimates some 29 million Americans were underinsured and about 52 million were or had been recently without coverage. Those 81 million adults compare to an estimated 75 million in 2007 and 61 million in 2003.

While the Commonwealth study suggests the federal health care law has the potential to significantly lower the number of people with insufficient or no coverage, the researchers also emphasize the need to reign in health care costs. “To ensure that premiums and care remain affordable, efforts to slow rising costs of care and reduce waste, duplication, and care of little value must intensify,” they say.

The September issue of Health Affairs is focused on health care costs, and the two studies that look at how American families are affected are available online for a week and afterwards by subscription. The Commonwealth Fund report will remain available on-line without a subscription.

No Job, No Insurance, No Health Care

Workers who lose their jobs in the economic downturn typically suffer a double whammy: they lose not only their incomes but their employer-based health insurance as well. Millions are forced to forgo the medical care that they cannot pay for.

The depressing facts are laid out in the Commonwealth Fund’s latest biennial health insurance survey. An analysis of the data found that nine million working-age adults who lost their jobs between 2008 and 2010 became uninsured. Most of those could not find affordable coverage from insurance companies, and some were turned down when theyapplied.

Of that number, nearly three-quarters delayed needed care because of the cost. They were sick but did not visit a doctor, or chose not to fill a prescription, or skipped a recommended test, treatment or visit to a specialist.

Nearly three-quarters had problems paying medical bills when they did visit a doctor or a hospital. They used up their savings, struggled to pay medical debts over time, took out loans when they could, declared bankruptcy or ended up unable to pay for other basic necessities like food or housing.

Substantial help will not arrive until 2014, when the major provisions of the national health care reforms kick in. The reforms will provide subsidies to help millions of Americans buy insurance on new exchanges and will greatly expand Medicaid coverage for the poor.

In the interim, Congress should extend unemployment benefits to help the jobless pay for health care. It should also re-establish the subsidies provided by the 2009 stimulus package that helped laid-off workers stay on their former employers’ policies while looking for work.

New statement on best practice for critical illness insurance

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) has issued a new statement regarding best practice for providers of critical illness insurance, which will have to be implemented by the end of next year at the latest.

The move by the industry body should mean greater clarity for people taking out critical illness cover, as it introduces changes that take into account previous issues regarding the insurance type, especially in terms of total permanent disability cover in critical illness policies .

Although total permanent disability cover is only involved in 3 per cent of all claims under critical illness, according to the ABI, it does present a much higher proportion of claims that have not been accepted in the past.

The statement therefore brings in a new set of standard definitions for total permanent disability cover, as well as replacing the old wording of the terminal illness definition, including changes to definitions for cancer and Parkinsons disease . In addition, the pre-existing conditions exclusion for policies involving children’s critical illness has been standardised.

Nick Kirwan, assistant director of health and protection at the ABI, said "The work on developing standard definitions for TPD and children’s cover will help ensure that critical illness policies are clear and pay out in line with customer expectations."

Save money on insurance premiums by quitting smoking

This Wednesday 9 March is No Smoking Day and maybe the incentive some are looking for to stop smoking .

By stopping smoking it’s not the health that’s benefits but it can help finances . If an average packet of 20 cigarettes costs approx £6.85, those who smoke one packet a day could potentially save £2,500 a year.

It isn’t just the cost of the cigarettes where money can be saved. Savings can also be made on life and health insurance premiums, but only 12 months after quitting.

According to LifeSearch non-smokers can pay up to 50 per cent less in premiums. By getting in touch with your insurance company or a financial adviser, you could be making big savings.

However Matt Morris, senior policy adviser at LifeSearch advises, "It is important to make sure you have a new policy in place before cancelling the existing one, as a new policy could turn up some nasty surprises in underwriting and may even be declined if your health has changed."

U.S. Appeals Florida Health Care Ruling

The Justice Department filed notice on Tuesday that it was appealing a decision by a federal judge in Florida who struck down the new health care law, saying it was unconstitutional for the federal government to require Americans to obtain health insurance. The judge, Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, voided the entire law after finding that the insurance requirement was “inextricably bound” to other provisions of the statute. The Justice Department said it was asking the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, to provide an “expedited review” of the decision.

Simplyhealth unveils health plan to support over 70s

Affordability is crucial to maintaining the health and wellbeing of the nation's ageing population, according to the results of a recent survey carried out by health insurance provider Simplyhealth .

Almost 45 per cent of over 70s said that if access to healthy living was more affordable, it would help them keep fit and active. With 16 per cent of the UK's population aged 65 and over, its necessary for improvements to be made to the affordability of healthy living if Britain is to manage this growing demographic. Paying heed to this, Simplyhealth has introduced a new health plan, the Simply Cash Plan 70 Plus, for individuals aged 70 and over.

Clare Lee, spokesperson for Simplyhealth, said: "According to our research, 58 per cent of over 70s do attend regular health appointments. Yet, 26 per cent of those surveyed said that they needed extra encouragement to regularly attend routine health appointments. That's why we've launched Simplyhealth's new Simply Cash Plan 70 Plus, to help those over the age of 70 better budget for their everyday healthcare needs."

Repeal The Health Care Law? Not So Fast

Republicans regained control of the House on Tuesday in part with a pledge to "repeal and replace" the new health law. But carrying out that campaign promise won't be as easy as making it was.

"Republicans cannot repeal Obamacare with President Obama wielding the veto pen," says Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies for the libertarian Cato Institute. "I mean that's not within a set of possible outcomes."

That's because as large as the new GOP majority will be come January, it's still not large enough to override a presidential veto. In addition, the Senate will still be controlled by the Democrats, who are unlikely to go along with the repeal effort.

But Cannon, who is no fan of the new law, says House Republicans are not without weapons to do battle with the measure. "They're going to do everything they can to try to cripple the law, throw sand in the gears and make it even more unpopular than it has been for the pass 18 months," he says.

One major way they can do that is by holding oversight hearings. Using subpoena power if necessary, Republicans could end up forcing Obama administration health officials to spend nearly as much time on Capitol Hill as they do in their offices actually trying to implement the law.

Cannon says a barrage of hearings and investigations by Republicans could help solidify public opinion against the measure. "The more they keep the law in the news and the more of a steady drumbeat of bad news they create about this law, the more likely it is that eventually someone with the power to overturn or repeal this law will do so," he says.

Threats Could Backfire

But all those hearings could also have the opposite effect — giving the administration a chance to make its case in favor of the law, a case that often got drowned out during the election campaign.

"The next round of this, while there will continue to be the broad sloganeering on both sides, will presumably get a little bit more into the detail," says Martin Corry, a health care lobbyist and former official at the Department of Health and Human Services during the Bush administration. "So if you're a family with a 22 year old still in college, you may not want to see that provision [that lets grown children stay on their parents' health plans] repealed."

Corry says other threats — such as trying to starve the new law by holding back its funding or preventing agencies from writing regulations needed to implement it — could also backfire.

That's because, he says, "many provisions in the law take effect, regulations or not, implementation dollars or not," so simply cutting off the money or the regulations could end up leaving those who must still comply with the law with even less certainty about what they should do.

Former Republican Sen. Dave Durenberger of Minnesota says he thinks the Democratic-led Senate could try to dampen the House repeal efforts by holding a series of hearings of its own. Among other things they could give health care groups a chance to tell Congress what things in the law they want to see fixed.

"And just putting that 'here are some things that could be improved' on the table, takes some of the wind out of the sail for repeal," Durenberger says.

At a news conference Wednesday, President Obama signaled he was open to some changes to the health law. He even suggested one of his own — repealing an unpopular provision increasing the number of 1099 forms small businesses must file with the IRS.

"It was designed to make sure that revenue was raised to help pay for some of the other provisions," the president said, "but if it ends up just being so much trouble that small businesses find it difficult to manage, that's something that we should take a look at."

Health Reform to Cover Most Young Adults by 2014

More than 12 million of the nation's 15 million uninsured young adults ages 19 to 29 may be able to get health insurance in 2014 as a result of the healthcare reform law, according to a report released Friday by the Commonwealth Fund.

"By providing multiple insurance options for young adults at key life transition points, including graduation from high school and college, the law will significantly reduce both the short- and long-term gaps in health insurance that have historically plagued this age group at all income levels," wrote Sara Collins and Jennifer Nicholson, both of the Commonwealth Fund.

The number of uninsured young adults rose from 13.7 million in 2008 to 14.8 million in 2009. In addition, 5 million insured 20-somethings have very high out-of-pocket costs, leaving them effectively underinsured, the authors noted.

Take a look at reality of health care reform

"A judgment is said to be true when it conforms to the external reality." - St. Thomas Aquinas

I loved the '90s supernatural drama "The X Files," with its ominous, blinking message - "The truth is out there." The "powers that be" seek to hide or distort the truth, that message whispered, but it won't stay cloaked forever.

The first round of Affordable Care Act (health reform) mandates, which took effect in September, reminded me of that message - that external realities exist, no matter how much wishful thinking or righteous indignation we throw at it.

Let's examine two sets of "external realities."

Consider first a young family without family health care coverage. According to the latest census findings, the majority of children live in households making $74,999 per year or less. Focus on the 0.7 percent who reside in households earning $35,000 to $49,999 and the 19.6 percent who live in households earning $50,000 to $74,999. These are typical middle-class households. Imagine for a moment that this family must either choose a sizable payroll deduction for family coverage or a premium for a "child-only" policy. There's the mortgage, taxes, utilities, car payments, car insurance, groceries, clothing, and a little recreation. Living paycheck to paycheck, would you choose to pay a premium for a healthy child who, at most, needs routine immunizations and the occasional office visit for colds? Or would you use that money for some other, seemingly more pressing, need? It is eminently understandable that such families would roll the dice and go without insurance. Before September, however, this was a risk with dire consequences should a child fall ill. Perhaps that risk served to pressure some families into taking the payroll deduction or buying a "child-only" policy.

Now imagine being an insurance company. By definition, insurance is an agreement that one party will assume a risk for a fee paid by the other. With life insurance, the buyer bets he will die, while the insurer, armed by the actuary, believes he will not. The few statistical aberrations are adequately paid for by the vast majority who make no claims. This majority forms a pool, which protects the solvency of the insurer and its continued ability to pay claims. With health insurance, the protective pool is formed by the healthy as a hedge against the claims of the sick. A pool composed entirely of the sick is called bankruptcy.

These two realities, of the family and of the insurer, crashed head on in September. As of Sept. 23, insurers are prohibited from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. However, the mandate that everyone must purchase insurance doesn't kick in fully until 2016. If you are the young family, there is now absolutely no reason to worry about insurance. If your child stays healthy, as most children do, you can pocket the premium without guilt. Going without is no longer a gamble, because insurers have to cover your child if, God forbid, he or she should need an organ transplant or chemotherapy or some other treatment that costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Lagging U.S. life expectancy ranking blamed on health system

The Un­ited States is fall­ing sharply be­hind in world­wide rank­ings of life ex­pect­an­cy, and short­com­ings in the U.S. health care sys­tem may be to blame, sci­en­tists say.

Re­search­ers stu­dy­ing the is­sue con­clud­ed that obes­ity, smok­ing, traf­fic ac­ci­dents and hom­i­cide can’t ac­count for the drop—“lead­ing us to be­lieve that fail­ings in the U.S. health care sys­tem, such as costly spe­cial­ized and frag­ment­ed care, are likely play­ing a large role,” said Pe­ter Muen­nig of Co­lum­bia Uni­vers­ity, lead au­thor of the stu­dy.

In the re­search, which ap­pears in the Oct. 7 on­line is­sue of the jour­nal Health Af­fairs, Muen­nig and co-au­thor Sher­ry Glied of Co­lum­bia cite the grow­ing lack of health insur­ance among Amer­i­cans as a pos­si­ble cul­prit.

The study looked at health spend­ing, be­hav­ior­al risk fac­tors like obes­ity and smok­ing, and sur­viv­al rates for men and wom­en ages 45 and 65 in the U.S. and 12 oth­er in­dus­t­ri­al­ized na­tions.

While the U.S. has achieved gains in 15-year sur­viv­al rates dec­ade by dec­ade from 1975 to 2005, the re­search­ers found that oth­er coun­tries en­joyed even great­er gains. So the U.S. slipped in the rank­ing, even as per cap­i­ta health care spend­ing rose at more than twice the rate of the oth­er coun­tries.

Around 1950, the Un­ited States ranked 5th for life ex­pect­an­cy at birth for wom­en and 10th for men among de­vel­oped coun­tries, ac­cord­ing to re­search cit­ed by Muen­nig and Glied. The most re­cent fig­ures, from the CIA World Fact­book, rank the Un­ited States 22nd among those same coun­tries.

Muen­nig and Glied found si­m­i­lar trends in the 13 coun­tries that they stud­ied, though they only ex­am­ined 15-year sur­viv­al rates for peo­ple at age 45 and 65.

When they com­pared risk fac­tors, they found very lit­tle dif­fer­ence in smok­ing habits be­tween the U.S. and the com­par­i­son coun­tries—in fact, U.S. smok­ing rates de­clined more quickly than most oth­er coun­tries.

And while peo­ple are more likely to be obese in the U.S. than else­where, this was al­so the case in 1975, when the U.S. was less far be­hind in life ex­pect­an­cy, the in­ves­ti­ga­tors not­ed. More­o­ver, they said, the pe­rcentage of obese peo­ple ac­tu­ally grew faster in most of the oth­er coun­tries be­tween 1975 and 2005.

Hom­i­cide and traf­fic deaths, mean­while, have ac­counted for a sta­ble share of U.S. deaths over time, and can’t ex­plain the drop in life-ex­pect­an­cy rank­ing, the sci­en­tists said.

The most likely re­main­ing ex­plana­t­ion is flaws in the health care sys­tem, said Muen­nig and Glied, point­ing to the role of un­reg­u­lat­ed fee-for-service pay­ments and high re­li­ance on spe­cial­ty care amid sky­rock­et­ing costs.

Students 'should consider the value of their belongings' when searching for a house insurance quote

Students searching for a house contents insurance policy to cover them when they are away from their parent's home could do well to evaluate how much their belongings are worth.

This is according to Graeme Trudgill, technical and corporate affairs executive at the British Insurance Brokers' Association (BIBA), who explained that consumers should account for designer clothes, their computer, printer and gadgets like iPads - as when combined their value could be very high.

"People have a lot of stuff and you have got to make sure that you just add it all up. It doesn't take long - you can do a quick check and your insurance broker can help talk you through it to make sure you have covered everything," he continued.

However, students - of which UCAS states there will be 470,789 attending new courses this year - may not have to shell out for their own individual policy, as some providers offer home-from-home deals where parents extend their policy to cover the youngsters' possessions while they study elsewhere.

Aetna gets OK to hike rates on individual health policies in California

More than 1 million Californians will see their health insurance premiums rise Oct. 1 now that regulators have wrapped up their review of a plan by Aetna Inc. to raise rates an average of 19% for 65,000 individual policyholders.



Aetna was cleared Friday by the state Department of Insurance to proceed with its new plan. It was the last of four major insurers to be reviewed by the department, which has OKd double-digit rate increases by Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield of California and Health Net Inc. in the last month.



Regulators stepped up their scrutiny of the insurers after Anthem announced plans earlier this year to raise premiums by as much as 39%, triggering a backlash among policyholders, lawmakers and the White House. The insurer canceled the hikes and sought smaller increases that were allowed.



The insurance department has no authority to block rate hikes as long as they comply with California law, which requires insurers to devote at least 70 cents of every premium dollar to medical claims.



Aetna's plan met that threshold, the state concluded Friday. All of the hikes reviewed by the state take effect Oct. 1.



"The Department of Insurance in no way condones or supports these insurance rate increases on California policyholders, but the unfortunate reality is that legally insurers are entitled if their rate filings are found to be in line with state law," spokesman Ioannis Kazanis said.



Aetna welcomed the insurance department's decision and defended its rate increase as a necessary move to keep up with rising healthcare costs. The company said its maximum increase for a fraction of its members would be 30%.



"We are pleased that, after extensive and thorough review, the [department] has accepted the rates for Aetna's individual products in California," said Beth Anderson, president of Aetna's west region.



"Rate increases are never easy, but the growing market trends we are seeing in California — such as the increasing prices for hospital care, prescription drugs, doctor's visits and other healthcare services — directly impacts what our members pay."



Some Aetna policyholders voiced alarm at the coming increase, saying double-digit hikes each year could soon put insurance beyond their reach. Dave and Jo Nixon, for example, will see their annual cost rise 23%, to $17,676 from $14,340. The San Jose couple also have a $3,000 deductible.



"The trend is just crazy," said Dave Nixon, 56. "In two or three years, I'll be paying more for my health insurance than my rent."



Aetna and the other insurers had put their rate increases on hold since July while an outside consultant to the insurance department reviewed their paperwork.



Aetna announced last month that it was going forward with its Oct. 1 increases before the consultant had finished his review. The state would not give its consent until that work was finished.

Learning About Health-Care Reform

With new health-care reform legislation being hotly debated nationwide, it’s not surprising that a meeting on the subject Friday at the Surry County Senior Center in Mount Airy drew a crowd.

“The new health-care reform is confusing to a lot of people, so if you feel confused, you’re not alone,” Annalisa Davis, the center coordinator, said at the start of a meeting attended by about 50 people, mostly retirees.

They came to hear Bill Wilson of the AARP in Raleigh discuss the various provisions of the bill and what it means not only for senior citizens, but younger families and individuals as well as employers.

“I have yet to see the perfect piece of legislation,” said Wilson, who has many years of experience in public-policy work in the N.C. General Assembly, and gave a similar presentation Friday afternoon in Pilot Mountain.

“And this does not break that mold,” he added of health-care reform. “This is a 2,000-plus-page bill.”

While its passage was controversial and continues to be resisted by many although it has become law, Wilson told the local gathering that some of the bill’s provisions represent an improvement over the present situation.

“But what people really want to know is ’how does this affect me?’”

Medicare Changes

Given the makeup of the audience, a major focus of Friday’s program was Medicare, the federal government program that provides health-care coverage to persons 65 and older and the disabled.

Wilson assured those gathered that guaranteed benefits offered under this program will be continued under the new health-reform legislation. It also is expected to add 10 years to Medicare’s financial solvency, ensuring its continued availability.

One positive way in which Medicare will be affected, Wilson said, is by expanding wellness and preventive care coverage, which will allow annual checkups — and tests and screenings, such as bone-density screenings — at no out-of-pocket costs.

“There are huge improvements in preventive care,” Wilson continued, which are aimed at reducing costs of medical treatment by catching major problems earlier. “That’s an important part of the new bill.”

Wilson also addressed another well-documented concern related to Medicare — the so-called “donut hole” seniors have fallen into which is associated with the Medicare Part D program that subsidizes the cost of prescription drugs.

The donut hole occurs when seniors exceed $2,700 in total drug expenses in a plan year, which then requires them to pay 100 percent of their prescription costs until $4,300 is spent out of pocket. The “hole,” which 3.4 million Americans fall into annually, can appear in a hurry when extremely expensive medications are involved.

Wilson said certain provisions in the new health-care legislation are aimed at lowering out-of-pocket costs for prescription medications, gradually leading to the planned closure of the donut hole by 2020. This will include rebates being offered to Medicare beneficiaries to help offset the drug costs.

“It is still complicated, but hopefully by 2020, we’re going to simplify this a little bit,” Wilson told the audience Friday.

The health-care-reform legislation also seeks to reduce Medicare costs through such measures as identifying fraudulent providers, eliminating overpayments and implementing a vendor-certification program.

Those who attended Friday’s program had plenty of follow-up questions for Wilson regarding Medicare.

Arvid Simmons of Mount Airy wondered what will happen with reimbursement rates for medical providers under the program; specifically if people enrolled in Medicare will have to make up the difference between what a doctor or hospital charges and what’s allocated.

According to Wilson, efforts to reduce the reimbursement rate by 22 percent — as a means of keeping costs of care down — have fallen by the wayside. “I don’t know of any provider who could take a 22-percent hit,” the speaker added.

A related question concerned the problems seniors are experiencing in some locations in finding doctors who no longer will accept Medicare patients because of the paperwork and financial issues involved.

“It’s a real problem for people moving into the state, especially urban areas,” Wilson said. While a physician in Raleigh or Winston-Salem might continue to see a longtime patient, new retirees to North Carolina are having trouble finding doctors willing to treat them through the Medicare program.

Effects On Individuals

Wilson also addressed the matter of how the recent legislation will impact the uninsured or those who buy their own coverage.

Beginning in 2014, the new health-care program will provide a one-stop shopping opportunity for them to obtain coverage through “state exchanges.”

These plans will offer a standard plan of comprehensive benefits, with four levels of coverage in all. There will be no discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, according to the AARP official.

Until 2014, temporary coverage can be obtained through “high-risk pools,” but these will still be expensive compared to most plans.

“This is a temporary program to help people who have trouble buying insurance, until we get to the state exchanges in 2014,” Wilson explained.

He also pointed out that the health-reform legislation will equalize the costs of coverage, which now can be higher based on someone’s gender, health status or the fact they are older adults. “Now if you’re a female, you’ll pay exactly the same premium as a male does,” Wilson told audience members.

The measure further eliminates coverage limits for medical care, which can soon be met if a catastrophic illness strikes someone. The main reason people lose their homes is because of high health-care expenses, Wilson said. “This will go a long way toward eliminating those bankruptcies and foreclosures,” he said of the new legislation.

Tax credits are in place to assist consumers in paying their premiums, to couples earning less than $58,280 and individuals with incomes lower than $43,320.

Also, the new plan expands eligibility for Medicaid coverage, which is available to low-income persons.

Families who are part of an employer-provided health plan can have their unmarried children covered under the same policy until they reach age 26. “That starts this year,” Wilson said.

“This will cover a lot of young people who think they are invincible,” he added, but don’t realize that they might be hurt in a car accident and need coverage.

Penalties Possible

Individuals are required to have basic medical coverage under the reform package, and will face penalties otherwise, according to Wilson.

Beginning in 2014, those who are eligible to buy insurance through a state exchange and don’t will be assessed a penalty of $695 per year or 2.5 percent of their taxable income, whichever is greater.

The penalties are designed to generate funds to offset some of the costs of those who remain uninsured and then require care.

Employer Impact

The guest speaker also discussed the new legislation’s effects on employers Friday. “This is a big sticking part in the bill,” he said.

Under its provisions, small businesses are exempt. “For any company with less than 50 employees, there’s no requirement that you provide health insurance coverage at all,” Wilson added.

However, tax credits are available to assist those businesses in paying for coverage for eligible employees.

Around 80 percent of American businesses employ fewer than 10 people.

About 2 percent of businesses across the country will be subject to some increase in costs under the recently passed bill.

Wilson responded Friday to rumors that employees will have to pay taxes on insurance provided through company plans. “Not true,” he said.

No Dental

In response to another question from an audience member, Wilson said dental coverage remains a “big gap” in terms of the overall health-care picture. “You’re out of luck,” he told the woman who inquired about that aspect.

While there is some coverage for dental services under Medicaid, that is not the case for Medicare, Wilson said.

“It’s one of the biggest problems we have right now in this state,” the speaker said of lack of dental-care coverage. “It just impacts your entire health,” Wilson added, explaining that tooth problems can affect a person’s nutrition, for example, and lead to other medical difficulties.

Those attending Friday’s presentation seemed to come away with a better understanding of the new legislation.

“I thought it was very good,” said Nancy Walker, who believes the program was interesting as well as informative.

“We are a small business owner,” explained Walker, a Mount Airy native who know lives in Rural Hall and co-owns an electrical firm. She said she came to Friday’s meeting concerned about how health-care reform will affect her personally and her business.

“What’s in this program that we don’t know about yet, us as a little guy?” she asked.

Affordable health insurance – What you should know

There has been quite a few changes to the health-insurance industry in 2010, and there will be many more to come throughout the rest of the year. Many of the rules that currently control health insurance industries could well be changed.

It may be difficult to start looking for health insurance. Now the term “Affordable health insurance” may seem a contradiction in terms.as due to high premiums it’s not easy to believe that the coverage is actually worth the money.

The cost of health insurance coverage is small when you look at the cost of health care without the insurance.

The best way to find cheap health insurance is by checking the prices of a whole host of health insurance providers. Health insurance companies will charge you depending on many aspects such as if you are a smoker, your current weight and any existing health problems.

What you really need to know is how you can save money on health insurance. Taking the first offer that comes along will, most of the time, leave you paying more then you have to. You should also remember, just because one company has the lowest premium, this does not mean they are offering the best value for money.

Find out which physicians and hospitals are covered in your health insurance. Make sure your health care plan includes hospitals that are located nearby. Try not to be enticed by higher deductibles. Remember that a higher deductible could lower your possible monthly premium but it can also make you pay more for standard care.

Now the best tool you have available when you want to buy health insurance is to use the Internet. If you are ready to start looking for cheap health insurance, you can go online and get an online quote. Its important that you do proper research as many people are paying too much for their medical plan as some providers may charge for coverage which is unnecessary.

It's war on the wards of China's hospitals

FORGET the calls by many Chinese patients for more honest, better-qualified doctors. What Shenyang's 27 public hospitals really need, officials have decided, is police officers.

And not just at the entrance, but as deputy administrators. The goal: to keep disgruntled patients and their relatives from attacking the doctors.

Officials in this north-eastern industrial city of nearly eight million people have a point. Chinese hospitals are dangerous places to work. In 2006, the last year the Health Ministry published statistics on hospital violence, attacks by patients or their relatives injured more than 5,500 medical workers.

"The police should have a permanent base here," said a neurosurgeon at Shengjing Hospital. "I always feel this element of danger."

In June alone, a doctor was stabbed to death in Shandong Province by the son of a patient who had died of liver cancer.

Three doctors were severely burned in Shanxi Province when a patient set fire to a hospital office. A paediatrician in Fujian Province was also injured after leaping out a fifth-floor window to escape angry relatives of a newborn who had died under his care.

Over the past year, families of deceased patients have forced doctors to don mourning clothes as a sign of atonement for poor care, and organised protests to bar hospital entrances. Four years ago, 2,000 people rioted at a hospital after reports that a three-year-old boy was refused treatment because his grandfather could not pay £50 in upfront fees. The child died.

Doctors and nurses say the strains in the relations between them and patients' relatives are often the result of unrealistic expectations by poor families who, having travelled far and exhausted their savings on care, expect medical miracles.

We're Headed Straight Off a Cliff If Health Care Passes

Pork is the preferred legislative meat for members of Congress, but this weekend they opted for bologna as they tried to convince the public – and themselves – that their so-called “health care” or health insurance “reform” monstrosity will be good for us. At least Castor oil was supposed to work even though it tasted awful. This bill not only tastes bad, it will curdle the best health care system in the world, which could be made a lot better, but will be made much worse with many of the provisions in this legislation.

Democrats now readily admit that Medicare is full of waste, fraud and abuse, but they want us to believe they can run an even larger venture without throwing additional money away. Amazing!

President Obama again claimed in Saturday remarks to the House Democratic caucus that the bill will reduce the deficit by $1.3 trillion. He must know that isn’t true because the money “saved” from Medicare cuts will go to pay for new spending. Only in Washington can you save money and spend money at the same time.

Addressing critics of the bill, President Obama said no one is “going to pull the plug on grandma.” They won’t have to. Grandma will be denied treatment because she will be too much of a financial burden on government. It’s called rationing. Grandma had better start working out, eating lots of oatmeal and hope she doesn’t get sick. Why do you think the president kept mentioning sick children? It’s because children are the ones who will get the most – and best – treatment. Rahm Emanuel’s brother, Ezekiel, has said government has a right to decide how many health care dollars you are worth. And if children with a lifelong taxpaying potential are worth more than grandma who is taking more from the tax pot than she is contributing, that’s too bad for grandma.

The president also said the bill will save money by requiring only one test by the doctor “not five tests.” But what if the first test doesn’t reveal the nature of an illness? Suppose a cancer is hiding in one organ and the test is for cancer in another organ? A second (or fifth) test might reveal the location of the disease, but under Obamacare, a government bureaucrat will allow just one test. -- It’s a form of Russian roulette.

The president promised again “you can keep your doctor.” But what if the doctor quits because he or she can’t afford to accept reduced fees mandated by government to keep costs down, while paying ever-increasing premiums for malpractice insurance to protect the doctor from lawsuits, which, by the way, is another reason the doctor did so many tests.

Companies sometimes test-market new products in regions of the country to see how well they sell. Government-run health care has been test-marketed in Massachusetts and it is a disaster. The cost of the state’s insurance program has ballooned by 42 percent, or almost $600 million. According to an analysis by the Rand Corporation, “in the absence of policy change, health care spending in Massachusetts is projected to nearly double to $123 billion in 2020, increasing 8 percent faster than the state’s gross domestic product.”

The cost of insurance in Massachusetts is the highest in the nation. Double-digit rate increases are expected again this year. Yet, President Obama claimed Saturday that under the Democrats’ plan, rates will go down. How is this possible? If Massachusetts can’t run a cost-effective health program, how can the federal government? And by the way, the only reason Massachusetts has not gone broke (but is headed there) is because Washington has conducted large transfusions of cash because it has a vested interest in protecting the illusion of Massachusetts’ success.

The president said we should support the health insurance bill out of “a sense of neighborliness and community.” When I was growing up, that meant you, not government, helped your neighbor. Government was a last resort, not a first resource. Never has “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you” sounded more like an empty promise.

Remember when Democrats used to care about debt as a burden to our children and grandchildren? They claimed to care about debt when it was a “mere” $450 billion under George W. Bush. Now it’s headed toward the trillions. Where are the green eye-shade Democrats now? They’re spending us into debt as fast as the Treasury can print the money – or the Chinese will lend it to us. The interest on the national debt now exceeds the GDP of some countries.
Total U.S. debt has soared to an all-time high of 370 percent of yearly economic output. That far exceeds its peak of 300 percent during the Great Depression.

Jobs will be lost because of this bill. Already, Caterpiller Company is laying-off workers because it estimates the health care bill will cost the company $100 million.

Why should we believe the promises of politicians? While the president and Speaker Nancy Pelosi touted Medicare, what they forgot to mention was that the cost of that program (and the waste, fraud and abuse that is rampant in it) was supposed to be a fraction of today’s cost. In fact, it was sold on the basis of low cost.

There are no such things as cheap government programs. They become like the "Blob That Ate Tokyo," gobbling up everything in their path.

President Obama quoted Abraham Lincoln, who said he was “bound to be true” and suggested that he, too, was bound to be true. This legislation is so full of budget gimmicks, tricks and lies that the only thing true about is that it will make health care in America worse, not better.

Obama Urges Dems to Come Together for Health Care

Victory within reach, President Barack Obama exhorted House Democrats on Saturday to stay true to their party's legacy and make history by bringing health insurance to millions of struggling families now left out. Leaders exuded confidence as they defused thorny problems in the countdown to a landmark vote.

Obama evoked Abraham Lincoln's moral compass and extolled Democratic achievements such as Social Security and Medicare — once controversial, now an essential part of the social fabric — on a day marked by a frenetic hunt for votes inside the Capitol and angry tea party demonstrations at the door. Some protesters hurled racial insults at black members of Congress.

"Is this the single most important step that we have taken on health care since Medicare?" Obama asked rank-and-file Democrats far from the chanting crowds. "Absolutely. Is this the most important piece of domestic legislation, in terms of giving a break to hard working, middle-class families out there since Medicare? Absolutely.

"It is in your hands," Obama said, bringing lawmakers to their feet. "It is time to pass health care reform for America and I am confident that you are going to do it tomorrow."

In a carefully orchestrated appeal to unity ahead of a career-defining vote, Obama and House leaders were joined by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who brought a pledge from more than 50 of his Democratic colleagues to promptly finish the bill after the House votes Sunday. House Democrats have been wary of being left in the lurch by the famously unpredictable Senate.

A series of last-minute flare-ups threatened to slow the Democrats' march to passage, after more than a year of grueling effort.

The most intense focus was on a small group of Democrats concerned that abortion funding restrictions in the legislation don't go far enough. Determined to avoid votes on such a charged issue, Democratic leaders raised the possibility of addressing the concerns of abortion foes through an executive order from Obama. It would reaffirm existing federal law barring taxpayer funded abortions except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

Fear of absorbing health insurance costs hit San Diego’s youth

Health care reform remains a hotly debated issue. It makes sense. The U.S. Census Bureau reported 46.3 million people had no health insurance in 2008.

Still, the debate has failed to highlight a key group: young people even though the health care package will affect them just as much. The issue is more so prominent in college town, San Diego.

In 2008, people age 18 to 24 had the highest rate of no health coverage at 28.6 percent, according to data compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau. The second highest uninsured group included people 25 to 34 years old at 26.5 percent. Thus, young people constitute more than half of all uninsured people in the U.S., according to the report.

If the proposed health care reform is passed, college students would be greatly impacted and in multiple ways.

First off, the millions of people who are uninsured, which includes college students, would have to obtain insurance, said San Diego State University political science professor Brian Adams.

In fact, he said this is one of the positive aspects of the legislation.

“Young people should probably get insurance anyway, because even if you’re healthy you can get into a car accident or you can have some catastrophic illness,” he said. “If you get into a car accident and you have $200,000 of health care debt, it can bury you for decades.”

SDSU journalism and media studies senior Natalie Scott is thankful to have health insurance through her parents’ plan while she is in school. She is concerned, however, about being covered once she graduates.

“I want to be covered even when I’m done with college and have my first real life job,” she said. “I won’t be getting paid too much so it is important to me that I get coverage and can afford it while I am working on my career.”

Other students, like Mary Zhong, have no health insurance. Her health care was terminated under her parents’ health plan when she recently turned 20. Zhong, who is a political science major, said she is “immensely” concerned about health care and hopes to purchase coverage through her part-time job.

“I recently studied abroad in Oxford University in England and was in awe of their universal health care system,” she said. “The U.S. is a highly industrialized nation, and yet I find it baffling that we are without some form of universal medical access. Everyone needs health care, and it should be easy to access.”