ObamaCare: Temporary Rate Hikes Forever
One of the biggest problems plaguing Medicaid is access. Rates vary by state, the jointly funded federal-state health program for the poor and disabled generally reimburses health providers at far lower rates than Medicare, the federal health program for seniors. And Medicare typically pays somewhat lower rates than private insurance. The result? Health providers are wary of adding Medicaid beneficiaries into their patient mix.
This is a potential problem for President Obama's 2010 health law, which expands Medicaid coverage to about 16 million individuals. So it proposes a fix. Sort of. As The Washington Post reported yesterday, the law makes Medicaid reimbursements for primary care doctors equal to Medicare's reimbursement rates. But only for two years—2013 and 2014. After that, there's no provision for keeping the increased rates. And needless to say, there's no funding either. The tail end of The Post's report suggests the problem this is likely to create without entirely spelling it out:
Atul Grover, chief advocacy officer for the AAMC, praised the Medicaid pay boost.
"I don't think we're going to solve the problem of access in this one short provision. But it's a step in the right direction."
Still, he said, "it's just two years. So what do you do after those two years are up?"
That's a good question, especially since at the end of 2014 there will be millions of new Medicaid beneficiaries, with even more to come, assuming that the health care law has not been repealed or struck down by the courts. But although we don't know what will happen then, we can guess. If the history of Congressional attempts to keep doctors from taking pay cuts under Medicare's sustainable growth rate (SGR) formula via an endless succession of temporary "doc fixes" is any indication, Congress will begin yet another tradition of temporary patches that only make the system more unstable.
In related news, two members of Congress once again proposed yet another permanent "fix" to the sustainable growth rate this week. It's not the first. I seriously doubt it will be the last.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
1nd!
Swine
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
http://www.canadafreepress.com.....icle/46516
Have a daily dose of paranoia.
Sounds plausible.
I wouldn't be surprised for an instant that the Dems are feeding money to Occupy (hell, the unions are, so same diff).
Sadly, I wouldn't even be shocked to learn that they are using law enforcement agencies to do so.
Of course, it would be monumentally stupid, since a violent and destructive Occupy blows back on Dems, not Reps, but that's no reason to doubt that Dems would do it.
You guys are worried about nothing. Congress would never vote to postpone cuts to physician reimbursement rates.
HULK PUNCH CANCER RIGHT OUT OF PUNY HUMANS!
does that count as radiation therapy? my insurance provider needs to know.