Skip Navigation LinksHome | Editors' Blog | Post

Will Senate Democrats oppose doc fix, cuts to uninsured?

Photo courtesy of the National Institutes of HealthFederal lawmakers return to Washington next week to take care of the Medicare payment fix and other provisions found in the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010 (HR 4213). As you recall, the Senate left town for the Memorial Day holiday hours before the House voted for the bill.

There will likely be a fight or filibuster in the Senate over passing HR 4213. If you read Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein, the opposition should come from Senate Democrats. Pearlstein criticized conservative Democrats ("Blue Dogs") in the House this week for cutting $30 billion in health coverage and unemployment insurance from the tax bill, and choosing to keep $22 billion in funding to prevent Medicare reimbursements from falling off a cliff. Blue Dogs chose to pay physicians treating the elderly instead of providing money to those who can't afford insurance, he said. He writes:

The irony is, of course, that much of that money for Medicaid and COBRA would eventually have made its way into the hands of doctors and other health professionals. Instead, those clever Blue Dogs have found a way to get the docs the money to maintain their lifestyles, but without having to provide the extra care. That's a lousy set of policy trade-offs, one that a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic president, should have the wisdom to reject.

Forget that physicians are already limiting the number of Medicare patients they treat because reimbursements in Medicare aren't what they should be. Increasing pay will also help treat the ever growing Medicare patient population. And, forget that the House did cut billions from previous versions of the doc fix section  - reducing it from a 4-year fix to a 19-month fix - to lower the overall cost of the bill.

Regardless, I don't think Democrats will oppose the fix. I think the opposition will come from Senate Republicans on this one.  

To comment, login here.
Reader Comments (4)

We are living in a sad world...

i am amazed that people would want to cut health care for people even though their is a lot of ill people in this country also physicians took an oath to help all people who are in need of health care but now that they are getting some money in their pockets they do not want to be true to their oath and if someone does not have healthcare insurance they wont help them.

It is amazing the disconnect between the congress and the realities of the medical providers, all medical providers.

America is becoming the land of entitlement but no one wishes to pay for what they believe they are entitled to, in this case heaalthcare.

I do not claim to have the answers but I do know that health care reform will serve no purpose if physicians are not available to provide services if physicians are not paid an equitable amount relative to reimbursement. 

It seems that members of Congress do not realize that the medicare rate is the "prime" rate on which all payer contracts are indexed to.  Why does Congress not tell aerospace contractors, the pharmaceutical industry and the lawyers that their rates of reimbursement will be reduced 21.5%  via an act of Congress and let the howling truly begin?

The thousands of Doctors, by law, can not band together to negotiate fair and reasonable reimbursement rates as compared to the less that 12 of the big health care insurance companies who negotiate those reimbursement rates. 

It is easy to see which way that negotiation will go and the evidence is the millions paid in bonuses to the executives of Anthem, United Health Care, Blue Shield, etc. and let us not forget the billions in profits sent to Anthem's corporate parent in the Midwest.  And the beauty of this arrangement is that those bonuses and profit repatriation is from funds that were supposed to be spent in the pursuit of providing medical care to the insureds.

I believe we have fogotten that the purpose of the health care preimium is to provide care to the insureds/patients and not to line the pockets of the executives or the stockholders.

I don't know what sources have been referenced and I am sure the statement of "...limiting the number of Medicare patients..." may be true overall and severly in some locations.  However, I challenge the author to analyze and research further as I am in a Healthcare Ministry, like other Catholics, Baptists, Methodist, etc...  and I know that we have not limited our Medicare.  We treat all and are of service to our community.  The sickly, traumatics, and routines are serviced here and we run from the top of Missouri to the bottom of Arkansas and on into Kansas and even OK City.  Therefore, please understand, we need the funding as we are not limiting our Medicare patients.  In addition, our physicians and those independant docs lifestyles have dramatically changed as we are having less and less "contracted" payors due to lack of business' affording coverage for their employees or employees lacking funding to afford it.  Everyone is suffering right now; pay cuts on salaries - doctors and employees, and patients with no insurance as our bankruptcies and charities are increasing.  That tells you, we are still helping everyone at a "cost" already, without a government paycut.

Sincerly,

A passionate reader on saving our patients wellness.

Login

User Name:
Password:
Welcome to the new Part B News Online. If you are a returning user having trouble logging in, please click here.
Back to top