GOP hardliners soon to be in control of the House have made repeal of the detested healthcare reform law a cornerstone of their agenda, despite the impossibility of actually being able to repeal it, politically, at least until an election or two has passed, and despite the fact that their ascent to power had more to do with the terrible economy and high unemployment than any mandate to repeal the law.
It seems that, finally, there may be movement towards increased public support for the law. A new McClatchy poll shows a majority of Americans now in favor of the law:
A majority of Americans want the Congress to keep the new health care law or actually expand it, despite Republican claims that they have a mandate from the people to kill it, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.
The post-election survey showed that 51 percent of registered voters want to keep the law or change it to do more, while 44 percent want to change it to do less or repeal it altogether.
Driving support for the law: Voters by margins of 2-1 or greater want to keep some of its best-known benefits, such as barring insurers from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions. One thing they don’t like: the mandate that everyone must buy insurance.
Of course, it is the mandate that makes the whole thing hang together. And it’s hardly news that people like the individual provisions and protections found within the law. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Movin' Meat*
After assuming control of the House in the mid-term elections, Republicans vowed to eviscerate the Affordable Care Act, the health reform law signed by the “Big O” last March. Thank heavens, therefore, that the Boehners were too busy congratulating themselves to even notice those federal helicopters dumping $1 billion in cash on some needy biotech companies just as the election results were being tallied.
Yep, it happened. Federal disbursements in the form of grants and tax credits were made last week, as required by a provision in the reform law known as the Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Project Program. According to the terms of this program, biotech and life sciences companies with less than 250 employees could apply for federal funds to cover research costs they had incurred in the last two years, so long as the research focused on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic diseases. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Pizaazz*
In October, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report on Fraud and Abuse Training in Medical Education, finding that 44 percent of medical schools reported giving some instruction in the anti-kickback statute and related laws, even though they weren’t legally required to do so. (As an aside, do we really live in such a nanny state? Over half of all medical schools don’t teach their students anything about this issue — because nobody’s making them — even though it is an issue that looms large in the practice of medicine.)
On a more positive note, about two-thirds of institutions with residency programs instruct participants on the law, and 90 percent of all medical schools and training programs expressed an interest in having dsome instructional materials on the subject of the anti-kickback statute, physician self-referrals (Stark) rules and the False Claims Act.
So in November, the OIG released a Roadmap for New Physicians – A Guide to Avoiding Fraud and Abuse, available on line and as a PDF. It’s a good 30-page primer on the subject. While some of the examples given are specific to newly-minted physicians, anyone in the health care industry would benefit by reading it. The document offers a window into the thinking of the OIG, its perspective on the wide range of issues summarized within, and is a good touchstone for any individual or organization seeking to structure a relationship that needs to stay within the bounds of these laws. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at HealthBlawg :: David Harlow's Health Care Law Blog*
Forgive me for being a little late to the healthcare insurance reform discussion. I was busy, y’know, providing actual healthcare to sick people while that whole rigamarole was going on. But that one sentence, uttered over and over by everyone from the President on down, always stuck in my craw. At long last, I’m finally able to properly articulate my response.
Trying to pass sweeping health insurance reform legislation while telling people that, of course, they “can keep their current plans if they want” is like legislating tough new laws against wifebeating and assuring women that, of course, they can stay with their husbands if they like.
No one tries to force victims of domestic violence to leave their abusers, but they do try to help them understand that they have options, and that they don’t deserve to be treated so poorly. I firmly believe that people who like their current insurance plans probably have several things in common. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Musings of a Dinosaur*
“So, what do you think about the election?”
“So, what do you think about Obamacare?”
“What do you think about this healthcare situation?”
I get these questions throughout my day. My patients are mostly suburban and white, so their view is overall on the conservative side. Yet I have found that few see the results of the election as a hopeful sign for healthcare. I don’t either.
Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows that I am a “flaming moderate” when it comes to politics. I don’t have much faith in anyone who identifies too strongly with one party of the other. I am really angry with congress and their lack of gonads to work on really coming up with solutions. Interestingly, my patients, regardless of their political leaning, agree with much of what I say. Here are the things they all seem to agree with:
1. Congressional politics is hurting us. Members of congress (both sides are equally guilty) are more focused on what is good for their party than what is good for those who they represent. If a democrat is elected to this district, I expect him/her to represent all of the people in that district, not just the democrats (the same is obviously true for republicans). This doesn’t mean they must lose all of their ideology, but ideology should be a means, not an end. The reason to hold an ideology is to come to solutions to problems with that ideology as a vehicle. The goal is to help the people you represent through your ideology, not bang them over the head with it. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Musings of a Distractible Mind*