PNHP

Survey Confirms (Again) that US Health Insurance Makes Us Sicker & Poorer

Survey Confirms (Again) that US Health Insurance Makes Us Sicker & Poorer

Summary: A Commonwealth Fund survey thoroughly documents that US health insurance of all types poses widespread financial barriers to care, and thus leaves us sicker. Not news, but essential to repeatedly document. The only solution: comprehensive universal public coverage.

Paying for It: How Health Care Costs and Medical Debt Are Making Americans Sicker and Poorer, Findings from 2023 Health Care Affordability Survey, The Commonwealth Fund, October 26, 2023, by Sara R. Collins, Shreya Roy, Relebohile Masitha

Highlights [HJM * bolded summaries]

  • Large shares of insured working-age adults surveyed said it was very or somewhat difficult to afford their health care: 43 percent of those with employer coverage, 57 percent with marketplace or individual-market plans, 45 percent with Medicaid, and 51 and percent with Medicare. *43-57% of insured working-age adults find health care difficult to afford.
  • Many insured adults said they or a family member had delayed or skipped needed health care or prescription drugs because they couldn’t afford it in the past 12 months: 29 percent of those with employer coverage, 37 percent covered by marketplace or individual-market plans, 39 percent enrolled in Medicaid, and 42 percent with Medicare. *Over 12 months, 29-42% of insured adults or family delay or skip needed care due to unaffordability. This is higher for poor families, and reaches 64% for uninsured (see figure below).

  • Cost-driven delays in getting care or in missed care made people sicker. Fifty-four percent of people with employer coverage who reported delaying or forgoing care because of costs said a health problem of theirs or a family member got worse because of it, as did 61 percent in marketplace or individual-market plans, 60 percent with Medicaid, and 63 percent with Medicare. *54-63% of those delaying or skipping care got sicker as a result.
  • Insurance coverage didn’t prevent people from incurring medical debt. Thirty percent of adults with employer coverage were paying off debt from medical or dental care, as were 33 percent of those in marketplace or individual-market plans, 21 percent with Medicaid, and 33 percent with Medicare. *21-33% of adults are paying off medical debt.
  • Medical debt is leading many people to delay or avoid getting care or filling prescriptions: more than one-third (34%) of people with medical debt in employer plans, 39 percent in marketplace or individual-market plans, 31 percent in Medicaid, and 32 percent in Medicare. *31-39% of those with medical debt delay or skip care as a result.

Comment:

By Jim Kahn, M.D., M.P.H.

This survey powerfully quantifies the failure of our insurance system to assure financial access to care. The findings aren’t new (eg, see a similar survey by KFF), but they’re still shocking.

Which raises the question: What’s the purpose of US health insurance?

For me, the answer is clearer with each report released and each year passed: the fragmented health insurance system is designed to benefit powerful interest groups: insurers, pharma, and large providers.

Who are the losers? All of us needing medical services that – even with insurance – are often financially out of reach.

Dozens of other countries have solved the health insurance challenge. Universal lifelong coverage with identical comprehensive benefits, and without opportunity for profiteering. Far lower costs, and far better overall health outcomes.

Embarrassing and painful survey results like this will disappear only once we adopt single payer insurance.

http://healthjusticemonitor.org…

Stay informed! Subscribe to the McCanne Health Justice Monitor to receive regular policy updates via email, and be sure to follow them on Twitter @HealthJustMon.

Hospitals, doctors drop private Medicare plans over payment disputes

By Ken Alltucker
USA TODAY, October 27, 2023

One large health system with hospitals in Virginia and Ohio this year cut off in-network access to consumers enrolled in some Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield Medicare and Medicaid health insurance plans.

Two doctors groups with Scripps Health in San Diego are terminating contracts with private Medicare plans over concerns about payments and routine denials.

For years, hospitals, doctors and health insurance companies have squared off over how much to pay for medical services. Insurers negotiate contracts with hospitals and doctors so their customers can get lower, in-network rates at those facilities. These negotiations, usually hammered out behind the scenes, are becoming increasingly tense and public as hospitals seek adequate payments and health insurance companies attempt to check spiraling medical bills.

Experts say these disputes could be an early warning sign of more contract terminations ahead as hospitals and large doctor groups seek lucrative payments to offset inflation, healthcare workers’ double-digit raises and escalating prices for medical supplies.

But for patients caught in the middle of these disputes, the results can be devastating. Some need to switch doctors or insurance plans or potentially pay higher, out-of-network rates at a time when half of Americans are struggling to afford the rising cost of medical care.

Scripps Health ended the 2024 Medicare Advantage plan contracts with two medical units, called Scripps Clinic and Scripps Coastal. The decision will affect about 32,000 patients who will either need to switch Medicare plans or find new doctors.

“We’re unfortunately on the vanguard of what I think is going to be a very ugly few years between hospitals and commercial insurance companies,” said Chris Van Gorder, President and CEO, Scripps Health.

Hospitals target private Medicare plans

Many contract terminations involve hospitals rejecting terms for private Medicare insurance plans, known as Medicare Advantage plans. While traditional, government-run Medicare allows enrollees to choose from a wide variety of doctors and hospitals, private Medicare plans restrict access through networks and impose some cost-sharing requirements such as copayments or deductibles.

Hospitals that are rejecting private Medicare plans say they don’t reimburse at the same levels as traditional Medicare, delay or deny care through prior authorizations or impose other limitations.

Van Gorder said Scripps’ Medicare Advantage exit was a “very difficult decision” but one he had to make due to more than $75 million in annual losses. He tried to negotiate more lucrative reimbursement rates, but those talks fizzled.

While private Medicare plans are funded by government-run Medicare, they’re also profitable because insurers keep a portion of those payments before paying for care, he said.

Van Gorder described private Medicare offerings as “delay, deny or don’t pay” plans. “They’re in the business of making money,” he said.

Hospitals cut off insurers that ‘don’t reimburse us adequately’

Doctors groups and hospitals are more willing to air frustrations over private Medicare plans after think tanks and government watchdog agencies have issued critical reports about these insurers’ profits and practices, said David Lipschutz, associate director and senior policy attorney for the Center for Medicare Advocacy.

In 2022, a government watchdog report said private Medicare plans routinely rejected claims that should have been paid and denied services found to be medically necessary. These private plans rejected nearly one in five claims allowed under Medicare coverage rules and denied 13% of authorizations for medical services that government-run Medicare would have allowed, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services inspector general investigators found.

Doctors and hospitals “are more willing to publicly express their frustration,” Lipschutz said, because these private Medicare plans get what “many people would characterize as overpayments.”

More than a half dozen other hospital systems from Bend, Oregon to Nashville, Tennessee have announced private Medicare contract terminations or lapses.

St. Charles Health System in Bend said it will end Medicare contracts next year with Humana, HealthNet and WellCare.

Mark Hallett, St. Charles’ chief clinical officer, said sticking with those private Medicare plans would “result in restrictions to patient care, longer hospital stays and administrative burdens” for doctors.

How To Get Health Insurance in Other Countries: Be Born

Summary: Dr. Danielle Ofri, an insightful commentator on the practice of medicine, overlooked annual re-enrollment for her health insurance at work due to an email glitch. So she was automatically bumped to “basic coverage”, excluding her husband and kids. Panic ensued. Other wealthy nations avoid this inefficient and upending bureaucratic hoop. So would single payer.

It Shouldn’t Be This Easy to Lose Your Health Insurance, New York Times, October 25, 2023, by Danielle Ofri (NYC primary care doctor & thoughtful author on the practice of medicine)

A few days before New Year’s Eve, an unfamiliar health insurance card for me arrived in the mail. I assumed there must have been an error and called the human resources department of the medical center where I’m employed as a doctor.

“No,” the representative replied, “it’s not a mistake. You didn’t enroll this year, so you automatically got put on the basic plan.”

“That’s … that’s impossible,” I stammered. “I’ve always signed up my family for the same health plan.”

“I’m sorry, Dr. Ofri,” the representative said, rechecking her records, “but you didn’t enroll this year.”

Could that be? Could I have somehow forgotten? Or missed the notification? “But don’t worry,” she said. “We’ve put you on the basic plan.”

“OK,” I said, starting to relax and thinking out loud. “I guess my kids will get to meet some new doctors.”

But the representative did not match my tone. “I’m sorry, but the basic plan is just for the employee,” she said, “not your family.”

[Dr. Ofri recounts the emotional and bureaucratic turmoil this created, and ends by stating …)

Of course, none of this would be necessary if the only requirement for getting insurance was – as it is in most countries – being born. Instead, Americans are forced to live within an illogical patchwork of plans and regulations that so easily allows people to fall through the cracks.

Comment:

By Don McCanne, M.D., et al.

To no surprise, this New York Times article provoked a large number of reader responses, still pouring in as this was composed. A handful of selected excerpts from their responses:

“As the good doctor has said, ‘There’s gotta be a better way.’”

“I just wish that America had even one political party that believed in Universal Healthcare. Not ’near universal.’ Not ‘a path to universal.’ Not ‘affordable.’ But actual, everyone-is-covered, universal healthcare.”

“Most Europeans I know do not have this problem. Their healthcare systems are focused on healthcare and not the care of and feeding of corporations and esp corporate execs and shareholders.”

“Even better: a single-payer system like the one in Canada. You don’t have to sign up.”

“The people of this country clearly want the national health plan like other developed countries enjoy.”

“Time to evict private/for-profit players from the health care system and turn to universal, single payer.”

“It would be far better to have a single payer or national coverage.”

“That Congress, for many decades, has not passed single payer/universal health care legislation is proof of the insanity & or greed in our country.”

“A problem easily solved. Medicare for All. Original Medicare. Not Medicare Advantage.”

“Every comment I read here appeals for single payer health care.” (Not quite, but impressive. – DMc)

“The AMA confirmed Thursday that it is leaving the Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, an industry group that opposes Medicare for All. The decision does not signal a policy change.” (I’m a special lifetime member of AMA, and I strongly support Medicare for All. – DMc)

“The only genuine workable system is single-payer Improved Medicare for All. It’s time to start listening.”

“We’re at a point where a little over 60 percent of Americans support single-payer healthcare for all.”

“Medicare for All”

“Yet another problem universal health care would solve.”

“Or maybe we just need universal health insurance?!”

“We need a national health care system.”

“It’s high time to have Medicare for All.”

“Medicare for All is the only sensible, fair and equitable way to distribute the financial burden of health care in this country.”

“Healthcare should be a right for all of our citizens.”

“A single payer system is far simpler, less costly, has better outcomes.”

“We need Medicare for All.”

“Agree that it’s time for Medicare for All.”

“Say it, Dr. Ofri – Medicare for All! We’re finally hearing about the widespread egregious problems with U.S. healthcare, for which the only realistic solution is Medicare for All.” (finally?! for decades! – DMc)

“I’m surprised that no one has pointed out that doctors don’t want a single payer system.” (I suppose that it is time for those of us at Physicians for a National Health Program to turn up the volume again! – DMc)

From Don McCanne: “An improved version of Medicare for All as a SINGLE PAYER, takes care of the problem for everyone, forever!”

The point is, support for a single payer, Medicare for All program in this nation is very strong, and we are long overdue for our political leaders to move forward with bringing health care justice to all of us by enacting and implementing such a system.

http://healthjusticemonitor.org…

Stay informed! Subscribe to the McCanne Health Justice Monitor to receive regular policy updates via email, and be sure to follow them on Twitter @HealthJustMon.

Queer Women Select Health Care Access as #1 Priority

Summary: A new poll finds that queer women, asked for policy priorities, most often named universal health care at the top, following by climate change. Health care for all is a critical, central, and motivational component of progressive priorities.

Queer women are prioritizing climate and health issues over LGBTQ+ rights, new poll shows, The 19th, October 20, 2023, by Orion Rummler

Expanding health care access, addressing climate change and protecting reproductive rights all matter more to queer women polled in a recent survey than furthering LGBTQ+ rights. These issues need to be reflected in LGBTQ+ rights organizations, researchers and advocates say.

The survey captured the experiences of thousands of queer women, as well as the experiences of anyone in the LGBTQ+ community who has previously identified as a woman and who centers their emotional, sexual or family life around women. It encouraged transgender men, as well as gender-fluid people, to share their views.

Respondents were asked to write in their own answers about their top policy priorities, their various gender identities and favorite things about being queer, and what kind of accessibility barriers they face to reach LGBTQ+ services.

When the survey asked queer women for their top three policy priorities, respondents were not given a list to choose from; they were asked to write in their own three core issues. Still, clear trends emerged.

More accessible health care was the most commonly prioritized. Forty-five percent said in the survey that more affordable or accessible health care – which they also described as universal health care or Medicare for all – is their top concern. Universal health care means that health insurance coverage is available to everyone and is provided by the government or private companies, or a combination of both. Medicare for all, a separate policy, would expand Medicare to replace other public and private health insurance plans.

Meanwhile, 37 percent of surveyed queer women said combating environmental and climate change is one of their top three priorities, Thirty-six percent listed reproductive justice, abortion access and bodily autonomy as one of the issues that matter most to them.

Comment:

By Don McCanne, M.D. and Jim Kahn, M.D., M.P.H.

It might be expected that queer women would experience socioeconomic pressures that might make them a valuable resource on what policies might improve the status of their group and thus, by extension, the status of everyone. It is instructive and encouraging that, without being given a list to choose from, they spontaneously selected accessibility to health care as their most important priority with the environment (which some progressives rank as first) and reproductive health (a leading political advocacy issue) ranking as second choices.

Once again, we have a group which has had reason to give considerable thought to these important issues and has concluded, as we have, that affordable, accessible, universal health care – Medicare for All – is their most important priority. Implied in that is sharing an affordable health care system that serves all of us equitably, and they so astutely remind us that “equitable” includes all individuals, regardless of sexual preferences.

This has potent implications for political alliance and synergy. Movements for gay / bisexual / transgender rights, against racism, to reduce economic inequality, to protect democracy, and for universal health care align in the broad rubric of preserving and advancing human rights. Access to health care is something everyone wants. The more we recognize the links among these social causes, the more effectively we can work powerfully together.

http://healthjusticemonitor.org…

Stay informed! Subscribe to the McCanne Health Justice Monitor to receive regular policy updates via email, and be sure to follow them on Twitter @HealthJustMon.

Nahiris M. Bahamón, MD

Pediatrics

Dr. Nahiris M. Bahamón is a community pediatrician at Lowell Community Health Center in Lowell, MA. She is an experienced advocate for increased access to high quality health care, especially for immigrant and other marginalized communities. Dr. Bahamón has also worked with the American Academy of Pediatrics to increase awareness about the needs of immigrant families, and to increase access to culturally sensitive, high quality care. Originally from Colombia, she moved to the U.S. as a refugee with her family.

Dr. Bahamón has been active in the movement for Medicare for All since medical school. She was a co-founder of Residents for a National Health Program and served on the PNHP Board of Directors. Dr. Bahamón earned her medical degree from Boston University and completed her residency in pediatrics at the University of Chicago. She is available to speak in English and Spanish.

‘Not Being Blindsided’

By Patty Harvey
North Coast Journal (Humboldt County, Calif.), Letters, October 19, 2023

It’s that time again. If you’re thinking goblins and scary monsters, think again. Humboldt County seniors are being inundated with slick ads, mailers and presentations designed to lure them into the private health insurance plans known as Medicare Advantage (MA). (“California Says No to Privatizing Medicare,” Sept. 21.)

These plans are fraught with pitfalls and misconceptions, the first being you are not joining Medicare. You may, in fact, save money at the outset but there are long-term deficits. It is important if you choose such a plan to ask questions first. For example, you may want to know:

  • In workshops you ask that I decide how much health care I am going to need in the future in order to determine my plan’s parameters. How can I be expected to anticipate the future?
  • What local doctors and hospitals can I access? (It turns out there are only 12 physicians and two hospitals here in the program network.)
  • Which of the many perks you offer are actually available here and how much does the plan pay for each?
  • Can I return to traditional Medicare with a Medigap policy after being on Medicare Advantage after one year?
  • What is the maximum out-of-pocket I would have to pay in one year, in network and out?
  • If I need care in a specific hospital or from a specific specialist of my choice will I be covered?
  • Publicity around MA details massive fraud and abuse by these companies that overcharge the Medicare trust fund by billions of dollars every year. Hospitals and physicians are refusing to accept MA patients due to repeated delays and denials of treatments and layers of paperwork. Does this plan ever deny treatment and for what reasons?

What seems too good to be true often is neither good nor true. Being prepared means not being blindsided.

https://www.northcoastjournal.com…

Strong Swiss Support for a Single National Health Insurer

Summary: Switzerland if often cited as an example of how private insurance (highly standardized and not-for-profit) can achieve universal coverage. Yet, a recent poll found 3 to 1 support for a single national health insurer, and only 1 in 5 favor retention of private insurance.

Majority of Swiss want single national health insurer, survey finds, SWI Swissinfo, October 4, 2023

A majority of Swiss would support the creation of a single health insurer, rather than the multiple options currently available.

According to the online poll by the Ipsos Switzerland institute between September 27 and 29, 61.2% of the 800 respondents said they were in favor of a single health insurer. Some 21.1% were opposed and 17.7% had no opinion.

A majority of 58% also approved the idea of adjusting premiums according to income levels.

While respondents supported changes in the financing of compulsory health insurance, they rejected the idea of limiting benefits in exchange for paying a lower premium.

As for tackling costs, the left-wing Social Democrats have launched an initiative demanding that no insured person should pay more than 10% of their income on health insurance premiums. The text demands that federal and cantonal authorities contribute more to reducing premiums.

The Swiss have already twice refused the creation of a single national health insurer in popular votes.

Comment:

By Don McCanne, M.D.

There has been a popular drive in the United States to improve traditional fee-for-service Medicare and then expand it to include everyone in the form of a public single payer insurer. At the same time, a private version of Medicare – Medicare Advantage – has been heavily marketed with increasing sales in spite of evidence such as recently released by Physicians for a National Health Program that shows that these private plans are overpaid by more than $100 billion per year in patient and taxpayer dollars.

Those supporting the use of private insurance for national health programs often cite the Swiss system of compulsory private insurance. This argument could make some sense if the private insurers would make no profit on a truly standard universal insurance, as in Switzerland and other nations. But not if the private insurers profit from highly variable and inadequate insurance, as in the US. Moreover, based on the current poll, even in Switzerland support may be shifting to a single payer system, progressively financed. In a recent survey of what worried the Swiss most, health insurance premiums ranked first.

It may be that the Swiss have been observing the pathological U.S. markets of private health insurance and have decided that a health care financing system owned and administered by the people is really a better way after all. Importantly, the British have demonstrated that they must elect government stewards who are actually willing to fund their system fully enough to meet all of their health care needs. But what they don’t want to do is to cut the funds, hand them over to private administrators who then shunt whatever they can to billionaire healthcare investors.

If only we in the U.S. can learn from our own mistakes, dump private Medicare Advantage, and adopt a public single payer Medicare for All program. The Swiss seem to agree.

http://healthjusticemonitor.org…

Stay informed! Subscribe to the McCanne Health Justice Monitor to receive regular policy updates via email, and be sure to follow them on Twitter @HealthJustMon.

Medicare Advantage keeps growing. Tiny, rural hospitals say that’s a huge problem.

By Sarah Jane Tribble
NPR, All Things Considered, October 17, 2023

Jason Bleak runs Battle Mountain General Hospital, a small facility in a remote Nevada gold-mining town that he describes as “out here in the middle of nowhere.”

When several representatives from private health insurance companies called on him a few years ago to offer Medicare Advantage plan contracts so their enrollees could use his hospital, Bleak sent them away.

“Come back to the table with a better offer,” the chief executive recalls telling them. The representatives haven’t returned.

Battle Mountain is in north-central Nevada, about a three-hour drive from Reno and four hours from Salt Lake City. Bleak (whose name is pronounced “Blake”) suspects insurance companies simply haven’t enrolled enough of the area’s seniors to need his hospital in their network.

Medicare Advantage insurers are private companies that contract with the federal government to provide Medicare benefits to seniors in place of traditional Medicare. The plans have become dubious payers for many large and small hospitals, which report that the insurers are often slow to pay or don’t pay.

Private plans now cover more than half of those eligible for Medicare. And while enrollment is highest in metropolitan areas, it has increased fourfold in rural areas since 2010. Meanwhile, more than 150 rural hospitals have closed since 2010, according to the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina. States such as Texas, Tennessee and Georgia have had the most closures.

Medicare Advantage growth has had an outsize impact on the finances of small, rural hospitals that Medicare has designated as “critical access.” Under the designation, government-administered Medicare pays extra to those hospitals to compensate for low patient volumes. Medicare Advantage plans, on the other hand, offer negotiated rates that hospital operators say often don’t match those of traditional Medicare.

“It’s happening across the country,” says Carrie Cochran-McClain, chief policy officer of the National Rural Health Association, whose members include small-town hospitals.

“Depending on the level of Medicare Advantage penetration in individual communities, some facilities are seeing a significant portion of their traditional Medicare patient or beneficiary move into Medicare Advantage,” Cochran-McClain says.

Kelly Adams is the CEO of Mesa View Regional Hospital, another rural hospital in Nevada. He says he applauds Battle Mountain’s Bleak for keeping Medicare Advantage plans out of his hospital “as long as he has.”

Mesa View, which is a little more than an hour’s drive east of Las Vegas, has a high percentage of patients enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.

“Am I going to say I’m not going to take care of 40% of our patients at the hospital or the clinic?” Adams says, adding that it would be a “tough deal” to be forced to reject patients because they didn’t have traditional Medicare.

Mesa View has 21 Medicare Advantage contracts with multiple insurance companies. Adams says he has trouble getting the plans to pay for care the hospital has provided. They are either “slow pay or no pay,” he said.

In all, the plans owe Mesa View more than $800,000 for care already provided. Mesa View lost about $1.3 million taking care of patients, according to its most recent annual cost report.

Cochran-McClain, of the National Rural Health Association, says the growth in the plans also narrows options for patients because “the contracting that is happening under Medicare Advantage frequently has an influence on steering patients to specific types of providers.” If a hospital or provider does not contract with a Medicare Advantage plan, then a patient may have to pay for out-of-network care. That generally wouldn’t happen with traditional Medicare, which is widely accepted.

At Mesa View, patients must drive to Utah to find nursing homes and rehabilitation facilities covered by their Medicare Advantage plans.

“Our local nursing homes are not taking Medicare Advantage patients because they don’t get paid. But if you’re straight Medicare, they’d be happy to take that patient,” Adams says. (Medicare pays for limited nursing home stays post-surgery or injury. Long-term care is covered only by Medicaid, for those who qualify.)

David Allen, a spokesperson for AHIP, an industry trade group formerly known as America’s Health Insurance Plans, declined to respond to Bleak’s and Adams’ specific concerns. Instead, he says enrollees are signing on because the plans “are more efficient, more cost-effective, and deliver better value than original Medicare.”

Sara Lonardo, press secretary for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, says CMS has acted to ensure “that private insurance companies are held accountable for providing quality coverage and care.”

The reach of private Medicare Advantage plans varies widely in rural areas, says Keith Mueller, director of the Rural Policy Research Institute at the University of Iowa’s College of Public Health. If recent trends continue, enrollment could tip to 50% of rural Medicare beneficiaries in about three years — with some regions like the Upper Midwest already higher than 50% and others lower, such as Nevada and the Mountain States, but trending upward.

In June, a bipartisan group of Congress members, led by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, sent a letter urging federal agencies to do more to force Medicare Advantage insurers to pay health systems what they owe for patient care.

In an August response, CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure wrote that a final rule issued in April made “impactful changes” to speed up care and address concerns about prior authorization — when a hospital and patient must get advance permission for care to ensure it will be covered by an insurer. Brooks-LaSure noted another proposed rule that, once finalized, could mandate that insurers provide specific reasons for denying care within seven days.

Hospital operators Adams and Bleak also want more federal action, and fast.

Bleak at Battle Mountain says he knows Medicare Advantage plans will eventually move into his area and he will have to contract with them.

“The question is,” Bleak says, “how can we match the reimbursement so that we can sustain and keep our hospitals in these rural areas viable and strong?”

https://www.npr.org…

Medicare Malady: A second opinion

By Ann Troy, M.D.
Pacific Sun (Marin County, Calif.), October 17, 2023

Seniors are being bombarded with ads encouraging them to switch from traditional Medicare to a “Medicare Advantage plan.”

The ads point out that premiums for Medicare Advantage plans are less than what one has to pay for traditional Medicare plus a supplemental (or medigap) plan. In addition, they offer perks such as vision, hearing, and dental care and gym memberships. Wonderful—as long as you don’t actually need medical care.

But what if you do need medical care? Then, you are faced with everything we hate about health insurance: narrow networks, high co-pays and deductibles, and denials of care—often costing members tens of thousands of dollars.

Traditional Medicare is efficient and well-run with overhead of only 2%. Medicare Advantage plans are allowed to keep 15% of what Medicare pays them as profit. They are paid on a capitated basis based on the age and medical problems of their enrollees.

Medicare Advantage plans routinely “upcode” the diagnoses of their patients to make them sound sicker than they really are in order to get more money from Medicare. It is estimated that these plans steal as much as $140 billion a year from Medicare, and they have faced many multi-million dollar fines for their dishonesty.

As someone who has had traditional Medicare for several years, I am happy to pay my monthly premiums for Medicare and supplemental (or Medigap) insurance for the peace of mind of knowing that this is all I will pay for medical care regardless of what I need and that I can go to almost any doctor, hospital or clinic in the country.

Physicians for a National Health Plan, a 25,000 member group, urges seniors to avoid Medicare Advantage plans (which they call Medicare Disadvantage) and opt for traditional Medicare. I couldn’t agree more.

https://pacificsun.com…

Medicare for All Explained Podcast: Episode 104

The U.S. Has the Worst Healthcare System Among Wealthy Nations

October 15, 2023

Podcast host Joe Sparks wonders why the myth that the U.S. has the best health care system in the world persists, when all evidence points in the opposite direction.

“The one parameter where the U.S. is number one is cost,” he says. “There is no excuse for having the most expensive health care system in the world while getting inferior results.”

Additional episodes will be uploaded monthly. Subscribe in iTunes, or access a complete archive of the podcast, below.

https://medicareforallexplained.podbean.com

Things to know if you’re eligible for Medicare

By Mary McDevitt, M.D.
Sonoma Valley (Calif.) Sun, October 10, 2023

If you are newly eligible for Medicare, your must choose between Traditional Medicare and a Medicare Advantage program which includes Kaiser.  Traditional Medicare was started in 1965 and it pays 80% of most medical services.  Most people purchase a supplemental insurance policy to cover the other 20% that is not paid for by Medicare,  It’s important to remember that the funding of Medicare comes from our tax dollars by way of a payroll tax during our working career for Medicare part A (Hospital Care) and a monthly deduction from our Social Security for Part B (Physician and other services).

In 1997 at the urging of for-profit insurance companies, Medicare Part C was implemented.  This is what is known collectively as Medicare Advantage programs.  These programs are formed around a “Network” of Physicians, Hospital(s) and other medical services.  Although many of these programs offer a low monthly premium, they usually require “co-pays” for most services, and if you go out of “Network” you may be responsible for the entire bill.

Physicians have problems with these programs in that they often require “Prior Authorization” for expensive procedures.

The Inspector General of Health and Human Services recently found that Medicare Advantage programs improperly denied 13% of prior Authorization requests and 18% of payments.  Another problem with the Advantage programs is that they portray their patients as sicker than they are (Upcoding) in order to get greater reimbursement from Medicare.  At present the Department of Justice has joined six False Claim cases against Kaiser for overcharging Medicare by  one Billion dollars. It is interesting to note that the original six cases were brought by Kaiser employees.

The original goals of the Medicare Advantage programs was to coordinate care and save Medicare money.  Multiple studies since their inception by MedPac have shown that they have never saved money.  Now, with the extensive use of “Upcoding”  by these programs there is concern about the solvency of Medicare for future seniors.

My personal decision to go with Traditional Medicare was based on the facts that I could go to any hospital and see any doctor of my choosing.

As you evaluate your own medical and financial situation, be aware that if you join a Medicare Advantage program you have 12 months to change your mind and enroll in Traditional Medicare without penalty. For unbiased help you can contact Medicare direct at 1-800-Medicare, seven days a week or, the CA State Health Insurance Assistance Program at 1-800-434-0222 or go to their Website at https://www.aging.ca.gov.

Choose wisely.

https://sonomasun.com…