[Soon] the new GOP-controlled House of Representatives will be voting on and is expected to pass a bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) – lock, stock, and barrel. There is virtually no chance the repeal bill will get through the Senate, though, which maintains a narrow Democratic majority, and President Obama would veto it if it did.
But let’s say that the seemingly impossible happened, and the ACA was repealed. What would the impact be on healthcare coverage, costs, and the federal deficit?
In a letter to Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its preliminary estimates of the impact of repeal on the deficit, uninsured, and costs of care, and found that it would make the deficit worse, result in more uninsured persons, and higher premiums for many:
– Deficit: repeal of the ACA would increase the deficit by $145 billion from 2012-2019, by another $80 to $90 billion over the 2020-21 period, and by an amount “that is in the broad range of one-half percent of the GDP” in the decade after 2019* — or about a trillion dollars. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at The ACP Advocate Blog by Bob Doherty*
Repealing healthcare reform has become a way of stockpiling ammunition for the campaign trail. The Republican-led House has scheduled a repeal of healthcare reform for Wednesday, Jan. 12, and they’d garner as allies some but not all 13 Democrats that voted against healthcare reform to begin with. The House’s quixotic vote would then promptly die in the Democrat-held Senate.
But recording votes on repeal would put pressure on already vulnerable lawmakers, as well as give a quick boost to incoming ones. A Gallup poll shows 46 percent of Americans want healthcare reform to be repealed, 40 percent don’t want repeal.
Unfortunately, not only can’t the law be passed, it would add $230 billion to the federal debt by 2021, according to the Congressional Budget Office. House Speaker John Boehner said, “I don’t think anyone in this town believes that repealing Obamacare is going to increase the deficit,” although Republicans have already exempted a repeal of the healthcare law from new rules prohibiting legislation from adding to the federal debt. (Politico, Kansas City Star, [Aurora, Ill.] Beacon-News, USA Today, CNN)
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
A year ago Gangadhar Sulkunte shared his story here about how he and his wife became e-patients of necessity, and succeeded, resolving a significant issue through empowered, engaged research. As today’s guest post shows, he’s now actively engaged in thinking about healthcare at the level of national policy, as well – and he calls for all patients to speak up about this new issue. – Dave
I recently came across a Pauline Chen piece in the New York Times, “Listening to Patients Living With Illness.” It refers to a paper by Dr. Wu et al, ”Adding The Patient Perspective To Comparative Effectiveness Research.” According to the paper and the NY Times article, Dr. Wu and his co-authors propose:
- Making patient-reported outcomes a more routine part of clinical studies and practice and administrative data collection.
- In some cases requiring the information for reimbursement.
Patient-Centered Outcomes is outcomes from medical care that are important to patients. The medical community/research focuses on the standard metrics related to survival and physiological outcomes (how well is the part of the body being treated?). In the patient-centered outcomes research, they will also focus on outcomes important to patients such as quality of life. In other words, the care experience will be viewed through the eyes of the patients and their support groups to ensure that their concerns are also addressed. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at e-Patients.net*
With the new healthcare reform bill signed into law, the fate of physician-owned hospitals was sealed:
The bill Congress passed in March includes a ban on new physician-owned hospitals and freezes those already in business at their present size. Doctors hold a one-third interest in Avera Heart, which opened in 2001, so the bill President Obama signed would prevent that facility from ever growing.
The law change, in effect, leaves expansion of treatment of cardiovascular disease open for Sanford to dominate locally in coming years — if in fact that field of medicine grows. Avera Heart says such growth is not a given, because people are living healthier and have less need for emergency care. (Argus Leader)
While it’s easy to point to the potential conflict of interest inherent to physician-owned medical facilities, it’s not so easy to demonstrate that non-physician-owned hospitals don’t have similar conflicts with generating profits. After all, continuing to build large $78 million expansions requires hospitals of any kind to achieve a return on their investment in order to continue operations. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr. Wes*
The large healthcare bill has some very good elements in it that should help the average American.
One is a provision that will kick in in 2011 that says all health insurers will need to spend 85 percent of the premium dollar on actually providing care. This means people may actually receive benefits they pay for. What a concept! Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth*