Tag Archives: Health care reform

Facing growing health care costs, Mass. tries containment #ahcj13

Priyanka Dayal McCluskey

About Priyanka Dayal McCluskey

Priyanka Dayal McCluskey is a business reporter at the Worcester (Mass.) Telegram & Gazette. She is attending Health Journalism 2013 on an AHCJ-Healthier Beat Fellowship, which is supported by The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust.

Massachusetts is famously ahead of other states when it comes to health insurance coverage. Ninety-eight percent of Bay State residents have insurance.

But the state is also way ahead in another area: health care costs. The cost of care is the highest per capita in the country and, consequently, the world, according to Andrew Dreyfus, president and CEO of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts.

Insurers, providers and government regulators have been working, with some success, to curb the rate of health care costs in Massachusetts. Continue reading

Premium shock: The story isn’t as simple as it seems

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

You’ve seen lots of stories – and you may well have written some – about how much the cost of insurance is going to rise for younger people in the exchanges next year – the so-called “premium shock” or “price shock.”

This is a fair concern – but be careful that you handle it fairly. Continue reading

‘The insured and the unsure:’ What will businesses do?

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

I clicked on an Economist story on the future of employer-sponsored health insurance  to get a sense of what picture it was painting for its largely overseas but U.S.-savvy,  business-oriented audience.  It turned out to be a very good overview.

I thought it may have been a tad heavy on the “lots of small- to midsize-employers will drop coverage” angle but not excessively so. It would have been nice to note that they’ve been dropping coverage for years, one reason that the health law was enacted. But it is fair to worry about how employers will react and how employees will fare under the Affordable Care Act and the article lays out a lot of related issues clearly. (I didn’t see a byline on the online version – so kudos whoever you are.)

Unlike some articles and commentary I’ve seen in the U.S. press, when this piece noted that premiums may go up, it also noted:

  1. they’ve been going up long before health reform and
  2. low-wage and middle-income workers will get subsidized, so the sticker price isn’t the same as what they will actually pay.

It drives me crazy that the subsidies are so often neglected. Continue reading

HHS gives some states flexibility in decisions on health insurance exchanges

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

A headline in The New York Times recently confused some people – initially including me.

States Will Be Given Extra Time to Set Up Health Insurance Exchanges,” the paper said on Jan. 15.

Initially I thought the Department of Health and Human Services had delayed the start of the exchanges – which would have been really big news (and I couldn’t imagine how I missed it).

But the exchanges aren’t being pushed back (despite the periodic spates of rumors in Washington that they will be…) Enrollment starts in October 2013. The exchanges will have to be up and running on Jan. 1, 2014 – although I don’t think any of us will be surprised if some states’ exchange debuts are bumpier than others. What the states ARE getting is extra time to make a decision about their exchange – or maybe to reconsider their decision. For states that are running their own exchanges, nothing changed. The deadline was in December and, with a very few exceptions (more below), those decisions are made.

The extra flexibility is for the rest of the states – most of which are letting the federal government run the exchange, and some of which will have a “partnership” exchange, with the federal government doing most of it but the state assuming some functions. The deadline for that decision – fully federal or partnership – is Feb. 15. That’s where HHS is giving them wiggle room. Continue reading

Story highlights parents affected by state decision on Medicaid expansion

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

Ron Jackson of Oklahoma Watch wrote one of the best stories I’ve seen laying out the policy dimensions and the human face of the decision by some states to forgo Medicaid expansion.

Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen (@JoanneKenen) is AHCJ’s health reform topic leader. If you have questions or suggestions for future resources, please send them to joanne@healthjournalism.org.

You’ll recall, of course, that when the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act it made the Medicaid expansion a state option, not a requirement.

That created an anomaly that the law’s authors did not intend: People with incomes at the poverty level and up to four times the poverty level (roughly $92,000 for a family of four) will be able to get subsidized insurance in the state-based health exchanges starting in 2014.  But people who are poorer than that – who are below the poverty level and who are not now eligible for Medicaid in their state (which is way more restrictive than most people imagine) won’t get subsidies.

If their state doesn’t expand Medicaid, they get nothing.

Oklahoma is among the states rejecting the coverage expansion – saying it will leave them on the hook for untold millions of dollars, even though the federal government has promised to pick up the full cost for three years and 90 percent over the long haul.

Jackson described what that means to “tens of thousands of low-income parents.” Continue reading

‘Escape Fire’ movie tells powerful patient stories

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

I wrote earlier this fall about several new documentaries about health care. I’ve now had a chance to watch one of them, “Escape Fire” and talk to the filmmakers Matthew Heineman and Susan Froemke.

Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen (@JoanneKenen) is AHCJ’s health reform topic leader. If you have questions or suggestions for future resources, please send them to joanne@healthjournalism.org.

The film has a fairly simple basic message: The American health care system is a mess. But solutions, at least partial solutions, are there for the taking.

Part of the film focuses on the payment and delivery of health care – what those of us who write about this a lot may think of as the Dartmouth Atlas message. The fee-for-service system rewards quantity over quality and encourages all sorts of stuff to be done that doesn’t make a lot of sense and isn’t necessarily right for the patients. A part of the film looks at the – related – issue of designing a health care system around people who are sick, rather than emphasizing investment in keeping people well; Dean Ornish, Andrew Weil and Wayne Jonas all appear. We know a fair amount about keeping people well. But that’s not what our system primarily pays for.

The filmmakers, Heineman and Froemke, whose interest in the health care system was stirred when they made a film a few years ago on Alzheimer’s disease, spent more than three years on this project. The more they learned about the health system, the more astonished they became at the scope of its flaws.

“We have worse outcomes but we’re spending twice as much as other nations, “ Heineman said. And despite all that money, we don’t have a “patient-centered preventive and safe system.” The system, as he put it, is “high-tech over high-touch.”

The filmmakers weren’t alone. “We found out that no one in the medical profession is happy” about much of American medicine, they said. Doctors who want to do primary care, or who want to have a more “whole patient” approach even as a specialist, encounter all sorts of barriers. “It’s the spending structure,” Froemke said. “Medicine became a for-profit industry; we lost our moral compass.”

The film has its share of experts, some of whom like Donald Berwick, M.D., will be (I hope!) familiar to health journalists. But the heart of the film, as Froemke put it, is the stories it tells about ordinary – or maybe not so ordinary—patients and doctors.Three stories in particular stood out for me: Continue reading

Watch funding, implementation and court cases as health reform moves forward

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

The election is over. Obamacare survived.

So what’s the story in your state or community?

Implementation. Or lack thereof.

Joanne KenenJoanne Kenen (@JoanneKenen) is AHCJ’s health reform topic leader. If you have questions or suggestions for future resources, please send them to joanne@healthjournalism.org.

So here’s an overview of where things stand in D.C. – and what it means for the health beat.

(Soon we will post a short separate item on the new state insurance exchange deadlines. If your state wants to run its own exchange, the deadline is still Nov. 16. They have more time to fill in the details though.)

The Affordable Care Act will not be repealed. Maybe the House will still hold a few symbolic repeal votes, but it’s not going to be repealed. That does not mean that critics of the law won’t try to dismantle parts of it. Some likely targets include the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board and some of the industry taxes, particularly the medical device tax. Watch your own legislators to see where they go on this—if you are in a state or district with a medical device industry, watch the Democrats as well as the Republicans (and the medical device businesses themselves). Ask them how they want to offset the funding; if they eliminate one of the taxes that paid for the coverage expansion, where do they want to get that money instead? Adding to the deficit isn’t going to go over as a solution.

The law’s funding is vulnerable. How vulnerable and which parts? Hard to say yet. But for what it’s worth, #DEFUND is the new Twitter rallying cry for opponents of the law (some of whom do not seem to realize that the Republican House can’t act unilaterally … but I digress). There will be ample opportunities for Republicans to try to take a whack at this, not just through the annual budget and appropriations process but through the lame duck session of Congress getting under way this week that will try to find a way of averting, at least temporarily, the fiscal cliff. Continue reading

Wanted: Other ways to say ‘implementation’

Pia Christensen

About Pia Christensen

Pia Christensen (@AHCJ_Pia) is the managing editor/online services for AHCJ. She manages the content and development of healthjournalism.org, coordinates social media efforts of AHCJ and assists with the editing and production of association guides, programs and newsletters.

Health care journalists need synonyms for ‘implementation’

With the re-election of Barack Obama, the march toward implementing health care reform will continue. But @JoanneKenen, AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform, noted that what health care journalists need now are synonyms for "implementation."

Storified by Pia Christensen · Wed, Nov 07 2012 09:35:56

what health care journalists need now: synonyms for "implementation." #hcr #obamacare #acaJoanne Kenen
@charlesornstein @JoanneKenen Synonyms for implementation: enact, adopt, phase in, begin, launch, install, put in place, kickstart.Jordan Rau
Execution? RT @charlesornstein: RT @JoanneKenen: what health care journalists need now: synonyms for "implementation." #hcr #obamacare #acaKristen Hallam
@kristen_hallam @charlesornstein hmmm. Execution might be a Dem synonym but a GOP antonym….#hcrJoanne Kenen
next..GOP antonyms MT @jordanrau: @charlesornstein Synonyms 4 implement: enact, adopt, phase in, launch, install, put in place kickstart…Joanne Kenen
@JoanneKenen "putting into practice" … "carry out" … What else, folks? Synonyms for "implementation." #hcr #obamacare #acaCarla K. Johnson
@joannekenen @charlesornstein Hard to find a neutral synonym. Fulfillment, also problematic. Let’s invent a new word! ACAzation.Kristen Hallam

Effects of ACA’s insurance rate reviews vary based on state

Joanne Kenen

About Joanne Kenen

Joanne Kenen, (@JoanneKenen) the health editor at Politico, is AHCJ’s topic leader on health reform and curates related material at healthjournalism.org. She welcomes questions and suggestions on health reform resources and tip sheets at joanne@healthjournalism.org.

So all those headlines about how the Affordable Care Act’s insurance rate reviews are keeping premium hikes more reasonable and saving consumers?

Core Topics
Health Reform
Aging
Oral Health
Other Topics

It’s true. Up to a point.

Marketwatch’s Jen Wieczner took a look at how state laws vary – meaning rate review goes from having teeth in some places to barely having gums in others:

To keep prices in check, the health reform law instituted a procedure known as rate review, by which state insurance departments evaluate carriers’ proposed premium hikes of 10% or more to determine whether they are justified. But even when they deem the proposed increases excessive or unreasonable, insurance commissioners can’t always stop companies from putting them into effect.

HHS recently announced that rate review saved consumers $1 billion in rate hikes. (Here’s an HHS page explaining rate review, here’s a helpful state-specific tool and here’s the recent announcement on savings.)

But in some states, all the officials can do is wag their finger.

“At the end of the day, the companies can tell us to pound sand,” says Dave Jones, the insurance commissioner in California, one of 13 states where the rate reviews are not binding. “It’s very frustrating. Frankly, our hands are tied behind our back.”

Jones has found some increases unreasonable and said so loud and clear. But the carrier doesn’t have to listen. Continue reading

The Supreme Court has ruled. Now what?

Pia Christensen

About Pia Christensen

Pia Christensen (@AHCJ_Pia) is the managing editor/online services for AHCJ. She manages the content and development of healthjournalism.org, coordinates social media efforts of AHCJ and assists with the editing and production of association guides, programs and newsletters.

Now that the Supreme Court has issued a decision on health care reform, how do you localize and cover it for your readers, listeners and viewers?

To assist reporters across the country who will need to localize the decision and what it means for their states and local communities, AHCJ will host a one-hour online roundtable of experts to offer you suggestions on stories you can pursue right away and in the weeks ahead. We will help you identify stories that make sense for you as a local or regional reporter.

The U.S. Supreme Court

Photo by functoruser via Flickr

The event will take place at noon ET on June 29, the day after the court releases its ruling.

Participants include:

  • Alan Weil, executive director, National Academy for State Health Policy
  • Kevin Outterson, associate professor of law and associate professor of health law, bioethics and human rights, Boston University
  • Bruce Siegel, M.D., M.P.H., president and chief executive officer, National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems
  • Moderator: AHCJ President Charles Ornstein, a senior correspondent for ProPublica

To participate in the webcast, click on this link at the time of the webcast. You will need your AHCJ website username and password to log in. During the event, you will be able to send in questions through a chat function and listen to the answers via your computer’s speakers.

AHCJ is committed to helping you cover this milestone decision. And for many valuable tips and resources, visit our health reform topic pages, compiled by health reform topic leader Joanne Kenen.

Some related items you will find on the health reform topic pages: