I have to be quick today -- I had a lot of complicated emails from overnight so I'm behind already this morning. So here are the highlights:
Interesting to me how controversial the President's words about the Supreme Court have turned out to be. While it's true that he misspoke a bit, and it probably would have been better had he not commented, I can't imagine having your most important act as President be trashed like it was last week, especially when you know that it's politics rather than law that is driving things. It's not as though he's the first President to criticize the Court. I was really glad he spoke -- I needed to hear him voice his support for the law and for the right result from the Court. When the GOP rants about activist judges, nobody reacts like this. It's really somewhat remarkable.
Ann Romney has MS and, as a result, she would not be able to buy insurance on the open market, or if she could, it would cost a mint. Real people -- people who work for a living and aren't gazillionaires -- don't have the option of paying for their own care if they can't get insurance.This article compares Ms. Romney to another woman with MS who isn't quite so privileged.
The NY Times has launched a new series -- a young woman with leukemia who will be going through bone marrow transplant will write a column each week chronicling her experience. She's introduced herself to us, and now we will follow her journey.
The California Insurance Commissioner is blasting Aetna's 8% rate hikes -- Connecticut approved the same rate hikes on April 4. The California Commissioner is trying to get the legislature to give him authority to regulate premiums, so that probably accounts for the difference in their positions. Connecticut's Commissioner already has that authority. Indeed, Connecticut's Commissioner Leonardi just announced that the insurance companies will be sending consumers a notice of rate increases when the increases are filed so consumers have a chance to comment before the rate increase takes effect. A small but dedicated group of advocates have been pushing for this for a long time, so we are very pleased to see this result, and we thank Commissioner Leonardi for his leadership.
Here's a nicely done piece on what to do if your insurance company refuses to pay for emergency room visits.
And that's it for this morning. Have a great day! Jennifer
Friday, April 6, 2012
We Did It: Connecticut Consumers to Receive Notices of Rate Incareses
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Insurance Department
Thomas B. Leonardi
Commissioner
|
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
|
CONTACT:
|
Donna Tommelleo
|
|
|
860-297-3958
| |
|
April 05th, 2012
|
Insurance Commissioner: Consumers To Receive
Timely Notice of Health Carriers’ Rate Filing
Connecticut Insurance Commissioner Thomas B. Leonardi today
announced that health insurance companies and HMOs will begin notifying
their individual and small group policyholders each time they submit a
rate request to the Insurance Department for review along with guidance
on where to access the filing and submit comments.
"Consumers have a right to know when their health carrier has
filed for a new rate and the Department has worked closely with
carriers to develop a letter on rate notification. Together with the
Department’s postings, this letter is another important outreach
resource that we can use to help educate policyholders about insurance
rate procedures in Connecticut," Commissioner Leonardi said. "I
appreciate the efforts and cooperation of the carriers to keep their
customers well-informed every step of the rate process."
The Commissioner said companies have agreed to mail out the
notification letters at the same time they submit a rate filing to the
Department. The letters will go out consumers who have individual
policies and, in the case of small group, will be mailed to the
employer. The letter will direct consumers to the Health Insurance Rate Filing
link on the Department’s Web site. The site includes the company’s rate
request, correspondence with the Department, a section for public
comment and a brief easy-to-understand summary of the entire filing. The
letter also directs the policyholder to the Department’s e-Alert
section.
The Insurance Department uses several ways to notify the public each time a carrier files for rate change. Subscribers to e-Alerts
get an e-mail with a link to the rate filing section. The Department
also posts news of the filing on the cover of its Web site, on Facebook
and on Twitter.
The agreement drew praise from advocates, the industry and key state lawmakers:
"I appreciate the Commissioner's efforts to secure this agreement with insurers, in lieu of legislation," said State Healthcare Advocate Victoria Veltri.
"OHA has advocated for years for meaningful, advanced notice to
consumers of proposed rate increases to allow consumers the option to
shop for a new plan, prepare for a rate increase and/or provide comment
to the Insurance Department on the insurer’s justification for the rate
increase."
---
"This provision for direct notification of rate increase
requests is an important part of the transparency and accountability
we’ve been working toward in the state’s rate approval process – it’s
gratifying to know consumers will now have more information available to
them so they can participate more knowledgably in the proceedings," Senator Joseph J. Crisco, Jr. (D-Woodbridge), Senate chair of the legislature’s Insurance and Real Estate Committee, said.
"As a regulated industry in the state of Connecticut it only
follows the affected residents of the state ought to play a role in that
regulation if they so desire. I commend Commissioner Leonardi for his
responsiveness on this notification issue and remain grateful to my
legislative colleagues and all those who helped revise our insurance
rate review procedures," Senator Crisco added.
---
"For the sake of consumers, I am very happy with this announcement," said Rep. Robert Megna (D-New Haven),
House chair of the legislature’s Insurance and Real Estate
Committee."Informing consumers ahead of time of any potential rate
increase will allow them flexibility in their financial planning."
---
"The process initiated by Commissioner Leonardi worked
because everyone - the Department, legislators, interest groups and
payers - have had the same goal in mind: putting the best possible
information in the hands of consumers and encouraging them to
participate in the Department's robust rate review process," said Keith Stover, spokesman for the Connecticut Association of Health Plans.
"We applaud the Commissioner's work and the Department's willingness to
develop a sound, practical approach to a vital consumer issue."
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Happy Birthday Mike McCready!!!
As many of you know, Mike McCready -- Pearl Jam guitarist -- and his wife Ashley O'Connor have supported Advocacy for Patients from day one. Thus, when one of them has a birthday, we celebrate. But how to celebrate on a blog? I thought about only reporting good news today, but that would have left the blog blank. So I'm just going to plow ahead and think of all of Mike's great guitar solos while I write!
Still more about health reform and the Supreme Court. Here's an interesting piece on the ... let's call it "tension" between President Obama and Chief Justice Roberts about the role of the Supreme Court and whether the Court would be "activist" if it struck down health reform. However, when the President said that it would be unprecedented for the Court to strike down this law, he meant that, in the past 80 years, the Court has not struck down an Act of Congress based on the Commerce Clause. Meanwhile, one report says that hospitals would be slammed if health reform were struck down. It's so frustrating to know that health reform is such a great thing, but so many people are so misinformed that they continue to blast it.
Here's a woman's story -- a cautionary tale of why health reform is so critical, and why the individual mandate is good policy. Americans struggle with the cost of medical care; even those with insurance have cut back on doctor visits and medications due to copays they can't afford -- especially under Medicare Part D.
But it's also true that patients really don't want more health care than they really need. I've said this many times in response to the argument that patients will suck the system dry and have all kinds of unnecessary treatments as long as it's paid for by insurance. The truth is that, if I never had to talk to another doctor again (besides my brother) that would be okay with me.
Here's a bit of a rant. Mitt Romney claims that President Obama would end Medicare as we know it. But he also supports Paul Ryan's budget, which would provide seniors with a voucher that they could use to purchase health insurance on their own -- greatly shifting costs to seniors and completely ending Medicare as we know it. Romney's claim is based on the $500 billion cut in payments to Medicare Advantage Plans over 10 years. That cut is simply a reduction in profits to Medicare Advantage Plans and not a cut in benefits to seniors, contrary to the GOP plan, which is a drastic cut to the Medicare program. Do the facts just not matter to people when they say things like this?
GE is stepping up its investment in personalized medicine. It appears that it may be possible to tailor treatment to individual patients based on their genetic make-up. So GE is working on technology to tell us more about the biological traits of a cancer or other illness so that we can identify the treatment that is most likely to work. Fascinating.
Meanwhile, the Senate HELP Committee is urging bipartisan support for an initiative that would get life-saving treatments through the FDA approval process and to patients faster.
Finally, Connecticut has taken a huge step towards abolishing the death penalty, as the state Senate passes the repeal bill. The vote came at 2:05 am, after a long night of passionate debate.
In celebration of Mike, the NY Times has another one of its medical puzzles. Can you guess the diagnosis? The answer will be disclosed tomorrow.
And that's it for today! Have a great day. Jennifer
Still more about health reform and the Supreme Court. Here's an interesting piece on the ... let's call it "tension" between President Obama and Chief Justice Roberts about the role of the Supreme Court and whether the Court would be "activist" if it struck down health reform. However, when the President said that it would be unprecedented for the Court to strike down this law, he meant that, in the past 80 years, the Court has not struck down an Act of Congress based on the Commerce Clause. Meanwhile, one report says that hospitals would be slammed if health reform were struck down. It's so frustrating to know that health reform is such a great thing, but so many people are so misinformed that they continue to blast it.
Here's a woman's story -- a cautionary tale of why health reform is so critical, and why the individual mandate is good policy. Americans struggle with the cost of medical care; even those with insurance have cut back on doctor visits and medications due to copays they can't afford -- especially under Medicare Part D.
But it's also true that patients really don't want more health care than they really need. I've said this many times in response to the argument that patients will suck the system dry and have all kinds of unnecessary treatments as long as it's paid for by insurance. The truth is that, if I never had to talk to another doctor again (besides my brother) that would be okay with me.
Here's a bit of a rant. Mitt Romney claims that President Obama would end Medicare as we know it. But he also supports Paul Ryan's budget, which would provide seniors with a voucher that they could use to purchase health insurance on their own -- greatly shifting costs to seniors and completely ending Medicare as we know it. Romney's claim is based on the $500 billion cut in payments to Medicare Advantage Plans over 10 years. That cut is simply a reduction in profits to Medicare Advantage Plans and not a cut in benefits to seniors, contrary to the GOP plan, which is a drastic cut to the Medicare program. Do the facts just not matter to people when they say things like this?
GE is stepping up its investment in personalized medicine. It appears that it may be possible to tailor treatment to individual patients based on their genetic make-up. So GE is working on technology to tell us more about the biological traits of a cancer or other illness so that we can identify the treatment that is most likely to work. Fascinating.
Meanwhile, the Senate HELP Committee is urging bipartisan support for an initiative that would get life-saving treatments through the FDA approval process and to patients faster.
Finally, Connecticut has taken a huge step towards abolishing the death penalty, as the state Senate passes the repeal bill. The vote came at 2:05 am, after a long night of passionate debate.
In celebration of Mike, the NY Times has another one of its medical puzzles. Can you guess the diagnosis? The answer will be disclosed tomorrow.
And that's it for today! Have a great day. Jennifer
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Hump Day Headlines
As you know, earlier this week, the President had a few choice words for the Supreme Court, warning them that judicial activism in the form of striking down the health reform law would undermine the Court's integrity. Well, it seems a judge on the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was offended. He demanded to know of a Justice Department lawyer whether the Justice Department recognizes that courts have the power to strike down Acts of Congress in appropriate cases -- and when she said yes, he ordered her to submit a letter brief, no shorter than 3 pages, analyzing the President's comments in light of the powers of the judicial branch. I feel horrible for this poor lawyer, but it seems pretty clear to me that the key is "in appropriate cases." Courts should strike down laws that are unconstitutional, not laws with which they do not agree. The President toned down his remarks yesterday.
Meanwhile, here's a list of 15 consumer protections that we would lose if the health reform law was struck down. Republicans are starting to think about what to do if the health reform law is struck down -- they always said repeal and replace, so what if they get to the "replace" part of things? Predictable answer: toss the goal of universal coverage and substitute cost cutting instead. I can feel my blood pressure rising as I write this. Obstacles to people getting care cost us money because people without insurance wait until they are very ill, end up in an ER, and when they can't pay the bill, it's your tax dollars that cover it. So failing to provide universal coverage increases costs -- period. They'll let people by insurance across state lines (which means eliminating state coverage mandates), offer tax deductions for people who buy individual insurance, pass malpractice reform. As if any of that makes a dent in this huge problem we have.
Meanwhile, panels of doctors -- professional societies, not government "death panels" -- are recommending that certain tests not be performed in certain circumstances -- things they consider to be wasteful. This is good if the result is really to eliminate waste; it's bad if it's used by insurance companies to limit treatment options. What works for one person may not work for others, and doctors should be free to tailor their practices to the individual patient's needs. The problem will not be these consensus protocols; it will be how they are applied. But note that this is NOT something that is mandated under health reform; this is something the medical profession realizes it needs to address. The hope is that this will empower patients to ask their doctors why they are ordering certain tests -- do I really need this, doc? From that standpoint, this can be a great thing. This is all part of a project called Choosing Wisely. Check out their website -- it's pretty interesting.
Nearly 90,000 poor children in Pennsylvania were kicked off of Medicaid in an effort to control the state's budget. The Governor says he's cleaning house, eliminating people whose paperwork is not in order. It's just just Pennsylvania; lots of states are trying to cut back. Colorado is using a lottery to see which 10,000 of 50,000 eligibles will get benefits. Hawaii tried to limit adults to 10 days in the hospital per year, but the feds wouldn't agree. This is horrendous. If we do not find a way to get a handle on health care costs without leaving people with no care -- who, again, get sicker and end up in ERs and cost us even more money -- our country's economy will not be sustainable. People have to get this. Something has to change. The question, from my standpoint, is how we can control costs without depriving people of care they need. For example, there are many proposals for revamping Medicare. We don't have to go with a GOP plan that converts Medicare to a voucher system designed to make private insurance companies rich. But we do have to do something.
On that note, I'm off to try to do my little part in this massive struggle for the civil rights of people with chronic illnesses. Have a great day. Jennifer
Meanwhile, here's a list of 15 consumer protections that we would lose if the health reform law was struck down. Republicans are starting to think about what to do if the health reform law is struck down -- they always said repeal and replace, so what if they get to the "replace" part of things? Predictable answer: toss the goal of universal coverage and substitute cost cutting instead. I can feel my blood pressure rising as I write this. Obstacles to people getting care cost us money because people without insurance wait until they are very ill, end up in an ER, and when they can't pay the bill, it's your tax dollars that cover it. So failing to provide universal coverage increases costs -- period. They'll let people by insurance across state lines (which means eliminating state coverage mandates), offer tax deductions for people who buy individual insurance, pass malpractice reform. As if any of that makes a dent in this huge problem we have.
Meanwhile, panels of doctors -- professional societies, not government "death panels" -- are recommending that certain tests not be performed in certain circumstances -- things they consider to be wasteful. This is good if the result is really to eliminate waste; it's bad if it's used by insurance companies to limit treatment options. What works for one person may not work for others, and doctors should be free to tailor their practices to the individual patient's needs. The problem will not be these consensus protocols; it will be how they are applied. But note that this is NOT something that is mandated under health reform; this is something the medical profession realizes it needs to address. The hope is that this will empower patients to ask their doctors why they are ordering certain tests -- do I really need this, doc? From that standpoint, this can be a great thing. This is all part of a project called Choosing Wisely. Check out their website -- it's pretty interesting.
Nearly 90,000 poor children in Pennsylvania were kicked off of Medicaid in an effort to control the state's budget. The Governor says he's cleaning house, eliminating people whose paperwork is not in order. It's just just Pennsylvania; lots of states are trying to cut back. Colorado is using a lottery to see which 10,000 of 50,000 eligibles will get benefits. Hawaii tried to limit adults to 10 days in the hospital per year, but the feds wouldn't agree. This is horrendous. If we do not find a way to get a handle on health care costs without leaving people with no care -- who, again, get sicker and end up in ERs and cost us even more money -- our country's economy will not be sustainable. People have to get this. Something has to change. The question, from my standpoint, is how we can control costs without depriving people of care they need. For example, there are many proposals for revamping Medicare. We don't have to go with a GOP plan that converts Medicare to a voucher system designed to make private insurance companies rich. But we do have to do something.
On that note, I'm off to try to do my little part in this massive struggle for the civil rights of people with chronic illnesses. Have a great day. Jennifer
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
If you thought "Obamacare" was bad...
The General Accountability Office -- a nonpartisan government agency -- has released a report that says that the national debt would skyrocket if the health reform law was struck down. Don't believe me? The report is here. Read it yourself if you like. It says what it says -- if the planned changes to Medicaid and Medicare do not happen, the national debt will explode.
Sorry I'm a bit cranky. I'm so sick of writing about this law over and over and having people write me back to tell me crazy stories about all the insane things that they believe are part of this law. Why would you believe someone who hasn't read the law as opposed to someone who has (i.e., me)? Responses to today's newsletter have been wacky. One woman told me her doctor told her there are death panels, and, well, since he's her doctor, she believes him. Another woman called to get my mailing address so she can send me "proof" that the United States is joining the European Union in 2014!!!
I have no problem with people disagreeing with me as a matter of opinion. But when people state AS FACT things that are so clearly untrue, it makes me sort of nuts. Jennifer
Sorry I'm a bit cranky. I'm so sick of writing about this law over and over and having people write me back to tell me crazy stories about all the insane things that they believe are part of this law. Why would you believe someone who hasn't read the law as opposed to someone who has (i.e., me)? Responses to today's newsletter have been wacky. One woman told me her doctor told her there are death panels, and, well, since he's her doctor, she believes him. Another woman called to get my mailing address so she can send me "proof" that the United States is joining the European Union in 2014!!!
I have no problem with people disagreeing with me as a matter of opinion. But when people state AS FACT things that are so clearly untrue, it makes me sort of nuts. Jennifer
How's Your County's Health
A new app will tell you the state of your county's health -- and how education and economic status directly relate to health status. You can try it out here. It's pretty interesting. Not only does it tell you how things are today, but it also shows you how things can be in the future if education and income in your county increase. Check it out! Jennifer
Tuesday Tidbits
Tuesday's the big day for health news, so let's dive right in.
Yesterday was World Autism Awareness Day and I didn't post about it -- no excuses, I just blew it. Let's see if I can make up for it today. Researchers are hard at work to find a cause. Autism is far more common than we thought -- 1 in 88 kids has it. Early diagnosis can make a huge difference. But treatments fall short.
We learned some things about the Supreme Court last week. The banter -- almost comedic at times -- showed a less serious side, but nine sharp intellects (well, Justice Thomas doesn't speak, so we can't really say about him) were on full display. Meanwhile, President Obama thinks the Court will rule in favor of the law. Although his comments could be taken as a bit of a warning forecasting what he will say about the Court if they strike down the law, that the Court's reputation for integrity is at stake, that only an activist Court would strike down health reform. Which is true. A majority of Americans, though, say last week's arguments didn't change their view on health reform. Then again, since most Americans probably didn't listen to or read the arguments, that makes sense. But people whose views were changed were more negative of both the law and the Court. Again, no surprise based on the tone and slant of the arguments. Meanwhile, insurers are moving ahead with reforms regardless of what the Court decides. Of course, that story is mostly about Cigna, which doesn't sell much individual health insurance, and it's the companies that do sell to individuals who we have to watch to see what they will do about covering pre-existing conditions. It's hard to imagine that they will do so voluntarily.
Should the FDA think politically, or should it respond solely to health issues? Apparently, the FDA and the White House don't always agree. When they don't, it gets a bit tense. The FDA isn't an independent agency, but should it be?
The Federal Trade Commission has blocked the merger of two hospitals in Toledo, Ohio. Why do we care? The trend right now is mergers and growth. If the FTC is going to step in, that may change that trend and have an effect on how health care providers respond to the health care crisis in America. But the FTC did approve the merger of Medco and Express Scripts -- creating one huge mail order pharmacy company that may well drive prices upwards. When you look at these two decisions side-by-side, it's hard to make sense of them.
Americans are living longer -- and those who do so are apt to have more education, says a new study. Is education a predictor because the more you know, the healthier your lifestyle? Or is education tied to class, making money the predictor rather than a college education? One thing we now know is that DNA is less of a predictor than we thought it was. A study on twins shows less of a connection than had been anticipated.
Sleep disturbances -- even if not as severe as sleep apnea -- are related to depression. That explains a lot! However, the elderly have lower rates of depression than we might have guessed, but part of that is because it's not being diagnosed. That may change, though, now that, under health reform, an annual depression screening is free. I'm all for screening for depression, but I hope this doesn't just mean a lot more people on anti-depressants. We need to get to the bottom of the cause of the depression -- or, at least, that's what I think.
And then again, maybe we just have too many studies. Here's one that really gets me. Too much happiness can make you unhappy. Too much cheerfulness can make you gullible, insensitive, less successful. Really? And even so, do we care? And mammograms may mean we treat tumors that otherwise would have done no harm. That doesn't tell you how many lives have been saved due to mammograms. And then there's fish. Eating it helps you get nutritional essentials, but it also contains contaminants. Sometimes it seems like all these studies just cancel each other out -- maybe we should just do what we like. But then you read that body mass index has been under-reporting our obesity epidemic, and you know that these studies are reminders of things we do need to know and act upon.
And that's it for this morning. Have a great day. Jennifer
Yesterday was World Autism Awareness Day and I didn't post about it -- no excuses, I just blew it. Let's see if I can make up for it today. Researchers are hard at work to find a cause. Autism is far more common than we thought -- 1 in 88 kids has it. Early diagnosis can make a huge difference. But treatments fall short.
We learned some things about the Supreme Court last week. The banter -- almost comedic at times -- showed a less serious side, but nine sharp intellects (well, Justice Thomas doesn't speak, so we can't really say about him) were on full display. Meanwhile, President Obama thinks the Court will rule in favor of the law. Although his comments could be taken as a bit of a warning forecasting what he will say about the Court if they strike down the law, that the Court's reputation for integrity is at stake, that only an activist Court would strike down health reform. Which is true. A majority of Americans, though, say last week's arguments didn't change their view on health reform. Then again, since most Americans probably didn't listen to or read the arguments, that makes sense. But people whose views were changed were more negative of both the law and the Court. Again, no surprise based on the tone and slant of the arguments. Meanwhile, insurers are moving ahead with reforms regardless of what the Court decides. Of course, that story is mostly about Cigna, which doesn't sell much individual health insurance, and it's the companies that do sell to individuals who we have to watch to see what they will do about covering pre-existing conditions. It's hard to imagine that they will do so voluntarily.
Should the FDA think politically, or should it respond solely to health issues? Apparently, the FDA and the White House don't always agree. When they don't, it gets a bit tense. The FDA isn't an independent agency, but should it be?
The Federal Trade Commission has blocked the merger of two hospitals in Toledo, Ohio. Why do we care? The trend right now is mergers and growth. If the FTC is going to step in, that may change that trend and have an effect on how health care providers respond to the health care crisis in America. But the FTC did approve the merger of Medco and Express Scripts -- creating one huge mail order pharmacy company that may well drive prices upwards. When you look at these two decisions side-by-side, it's hard to make sense of them.
Americans are living longer -- and those who do so are apt to have more education, says a new study. Is education a predictor because the more you know, the healthier your lifestyle? Or is education tied to class, making money the predictor rather than a college education? One thing we now know is that DNA is less of a predictor than we thought it was. A study on twins shows less of a connection than had been anticipated.
Sleep disturbances -- even if not as severe as sleep apnea -- are related to depression. That explains a lot! However, the elderly have lower rates of depression than we might have guessed, but part of that is because it's not being diagnosed. That may change, though, now that, under health reform, an annual depression screening is free. I'm all for screening for depression, but I hope this doesn't just mean a lot more people on anti-depressants. We need to get to the bottom of the cause of the depression -- or, at least, that's what I think.
And then again, maybe we just have too many studies. Here's one that really gets me. Too much happiness can make you unhappy. Too much cheerfulness can make you gullible, insensitive, less successful. Really? And even so, do we care? And mammograms may mean we treat tumors that otherwise would have done no harm. That doesn't tell you how many lives have been saved due to mammograms. And then there's fish. Eating it helps you get nutritional essentials, but it also contains contaminants. Sometimes it seems like all these studies just cancel each other out -- maybe we should just do what we like. But then you read that body mass index has been under-reporting our obesity epidemic, and you know that these studies are reminders of things we do need to know and act upon.
And that's it for this morning. Have a great day. Jennifer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
