Posts Tagged ‘CHIP’
Does This Make Sense to Anyone?
Author : Toni Bigby
Dec 23rd, 2009 | by
We know. We don’t want to “make the perfect enemy of the bad” and all.
But really, this new thing about the insurance company tax exemption? We need to take another look. As of now, non-profit insurance companies that operate in the private marketplace (primarily the Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies) and spend at least 92% of premiums directly on medical costs would be exempted from the new tax on insurers in the Senate bill. (Wall Street Journal’s explanation of this “bright spot” ).
This needs to be extended to companies serving the public through Medicaid, Medicare and CHIP. Otherwise, millions of state tax dollars currently being used to provide health care to children, seniors and others will instead be sent straight back to Washington, leaving the states to find some way to make up the difference.
We don’t think anyone meant the new tax on insurers to actually be a tax on states, but that’s how it works out in the current iteration of the bill. It doesn’t make sense to us.
By the way, Associated Press offers a pretty comprehensive list of all the compromises in the Senate bill as it stands, here.
Article Tags
Blue Cross/Blue Shield • Children’s Health Insurance Plans • CHIP • health care reform • health insurance • health insurance plan • Medicaid • Medicare • SCHIP • taxes • Wall Street Journal • WSJ
One Playground Accident Away from Bankruptcy
Author : Toni Bigby
Dec 14th, 2009 | by
It’s true…the cost of health care for most families in our country has put them in a seriously helpless situation. It’s sad to think that one playground accident could bankrupt a family of four. A fall from the monkey bars, a broken leg from a football game, an ill-timed sprint in front of the swings. It’s enough to keep many parents up at night.
However, Senator Robert Casey’s (D-PA) recent amendment to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) should be applauded because of its focus on protecting and improving the successful Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Our country’s children have a lot at stake in health reform. More than eight million children remain uninsured, and more are losing employer-sponsored coverage daily. Each day a child is uninsured is a lost opportunity to strengthen America’s future. Casey’s amendment goes a long way toward protecting and improving coverage for millions of children in low-income working families across the nation by:
- Providing full funding for CHIP through 2019;
- Maintaining current CHIP eligibility through 2013, and setting a floor for income eligibility for children in all states at 250 percent of poverty ($55,125 for a family of four) beginning in 2014;
- Streamlining enrollment procedures making it easier for children to get coverage and keep it;
- Ensuring that coverage for children remains affordable;
- Guaranteeing all children in CHIP the comprehensive care they need from head to toe; and
- Requiring an HHS report in 2016 that will compare coverage for children in CHIP with coverage for children in the new Health Insurance Exchange and if coverage (including benefits, cost-sharing, premiums, and other features) is comparable or better, children can be transitioned from CHIP into the Exchange in 2019.
Our nation has made great strides over the last decade in securing health coverage for low-income children of working families. We must now seize this historic opportunity to build on the success of prior efforts and the bipartisan CHIP program, and ensure that children will be better off, not worse off, as a result of health reform. This amendment will do just that.
Along with 610 organizations/individuals across the nation, we offer our strong support for the CHIP Amendment (#2790). We stand ready to work with the Senate to achieve our common goal of reforming our nation’s health care system and ensuring that all children, indeed everyone in America, have access to the health coverage they need and deserve.
Insurer Fee – Reasonable Idea… Unintended Consequences
Author : Chris Whistler
Dec 10th, 2009 | by
Whenever a new concept is proposed, those at the deliberation table automatically ask “what would happen if?” before they decide to act. With health care reform for example, the driving questions are more like: “Are the changes going to result in more Americans getting coverage? Are the proposed changes budget neutral?” Given the broad scope of the proposed health care legislation, it’s easy to see how details can get overlooked. And when time is ticking, unintended consequences have a higher chance at prevailing.
One concern that should be brought to light is the $6.7B annual fee proposed on insurers. While conceptually this might make sense given the number of Americans who will be required to obtain coverage and the new revenue that insurers stand to gain, a portion of this fee would not be limited exclusively to commercial health insurance companies. Health plans that contract with federal and state governments to serve Medicaid, Medicare, and beneficiaries of the Children’s Health Insurance Plan (also known as CHIP) would also get taxed too.
Well, the challenge is that a significant portion of this fee will fall on state budgets because of the way states are required to reimburse health plans that serve its most vulnerable residents. The new fee will unintentionally require states and the federal government to ultimately come up with additional public dollars to pay for this added fee.
Also, this fee would unfortunately raise the overall costs of these government programs and place additional strains on programs that are already in extreme financial distress. For example, Ohio’s Medicaid program would have to potentially come up with an estimated $65 million annually. Subsequently, the burden of this fee will be paid for by taxpayer-funded government programs and beneficiaries that use these health plans.
Easy solution to the problem? Just exempt health plans administering government entitlement programs from the application of this fee. Problem solved; Unintentional consequence diverted.
Article Tags
Children's Health Care • Children’s Health Insurance Plans • CHIP • health care plan • health care reform • health insurance • health insurance plan • insurer fee • Medicaid • medicaid program • Ohio medicaid program • SCHIP • taxes
Dissecting the Senate Finance Committee Proposal
Author : Toni Bigby
Oct 9th, 2009 | by
Senate Finance Committee Completes Mark-up; Expected to Vote Out of Committee on Oct. 13
The Senate Finance Committee completed debate on proposed health care legislation at 2:18 am last Friday. The Finance Committee was the last congressional panel to consider a health care reform bill and plans to vote this week after the bill’s final language has been made public and the Congressional Budget Office has provided final cost figures. Democrats hold a 13-10 committee majority which clears the way for the full Senate to begin debating the measure on October 13, 2009.
The panel considered many amendments over a two-week period and voted to reduce or waive fines for people who fail to buy coverage and give states money to help insure low-income Americans.
The legislation, estimated to cost $900 billion over 10 years, mandates that Americans get insurance and provides subsidies to those who need them, creates nonprofit cooperatives to offer an alternative to private insurance companies, and prohibits insurers from denying coverage to people with pre-existing medical conditions.
Instead of approving a public option amendment, the finance panel voted 12-11 for a compromise plan offered by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., that would give federal funds to states to negotiate with private managed care plans to buy coverage for people who would not qualify for the Medicaid program. This compromise option would be eligible to people with income between 133-200% FPL. For individuals, that means income between $14,403 annually and $21,660. For families of four, the eligibility would be $29,326 to $44,100.
Individual mandate – Lowering the Penalty & Allowing Exemptions Dismays Insurers
An amendment proposed by Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) was also approved that reduce the penalty for those who fail to comply with an individual insurance mandate to $750 per adult, from $1,900 per family as originally proposed. It also waives the penalties in 2013 and phases them in through 2017. In addition, people who would have to pay more than eight percent of their income to buy insurance would be exempt from the penalties, down from 10 percent.
This amendment is of significant concern to commercial insurers as it could allow 2 million Americans to remain uninsured without contributing to the insurance pool.
Insurers are outraged by the risk involved as they would be required to guarantee coverage for all Americans should the health reform measure pass. A strong individual mandate made this option feasible.
Other notable items:
- By a vote of 13 to 9, the committee approved an amendment by Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) that would keep low-income children in the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), instead of covering them through the Exchanges. This was a key interest for CareSource as we hope to continue to provide coverage to children who qualify through CHIP in Ohio and Michigan.
- Physician groups were upset to find out that the hospital industry is exempt from a crucial cost-cutting measure related to Medicare payments included in Senate Finance Chairman’s mark. Hospitals were held exempt because they were able to negotiate a $155 billion cost-cutting agreement with Baucus and the White House.
What’s Next?
The bill that emerges from Baucus’s panel must be merged with one that passed the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee for debate and vote by the full Senate and eventually reconciled with a House measure.
Across the Capitol, Democratic leaders in the House met privately with moderate members, with liberals, and then with first-termers as they struggled to achieve a consensus on legislation to bring to the floor. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced it would probably be at least two more weeks before House legislation was ready.
