Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
eddy

Health insurance is a right......

Rate this topic

42 posts in this topic

therefore, we need Obamacare and if you don't take part in that right by purchasing health insurance, you get threatened with fines or jail time.

 

 

 

 

Is contraception a right, and if you don't take part in that right by using contraception, you get threatened with fines or jail time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks on medicare are finding it more difficult to find primary care physicians:

 

GOVERNMENT

Problems finding new Medicare primary care doctors small but growing

MedPAC's chair calls the trend "worrisome" and says it's another argument for repealing the SGR formula, which is keeping some physicians from accepting new patients.

By Charles Fiegl, amednews staff. Posted Jan. 9, 2012.

 

PRINT|E-MAIL|RESPOND|REPRINTS| SHARE Washington -- A federal survey of Medicare beneficiaries shows that slightly more patients are having difficulty finding new primary care physicians to care for them.

 

Searching for a new family physician or internist who is accepting Medicare patients was more difficult than scheduling an appointment with a new specialist, according to an annual survey on physician access conducted by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. The 2011 survey found that 3.6% of Medicare patients reported having no problem finding a new primary care physician, while 2% had what they considered small or big problems finding one. All other patients surveyed were not looking for a new physician last year.

 

■Some hard times finding a new physician

■See related content

In previous years, surveys showed patients having relatively fewer problems scheduling appointments with new primary care physicians, said Cristina Boccuti, a MedPAC principal policy analyst, during a Dec. 15 commission meeting. Non-Medicare patients also reported more trouble last year.

 

"In general, for both Medicare and the privately insured groups, access to primary care physicians is trending down, which has been concerning the commission for a number of years," Boccuti said.

 

MedPAC Chair Glenn Hackbarth called the trend "worrisome" and said the new data reinforced the need to eliminate the sustainable growth rate formula that helps determine Medicare pay rates. The SGR was scheduled to reduce Medicare payments by 27.4% on Jan. 1, but Congress in December 2011 delayed the cut by two months, establishing a new deadline of March 1. The uncertainty caused by the SGR has dissuaded some physicians from accepting new Medicare patients or has prompted them to limit new appointment slots.

 

A third of Medicare patients looking for a new primary care doctor had trouble finding one in 2011. Federal lawmakers have continued to defer on a decision to eliminate the SGR by enacting temporary patches for the last decade, Hackbarth said. As a result, the cost of a repeal that would simply maintain current Medicare rates over 10 years has grown to $289.7 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Repealing the formula and providing annual payment updates pegged to the increased costs over time of providing care would cost $352.7 billion, the CBO said.

 

The fiscal and political climate in Washington is not conducive to writing off these costs, Hackbarth said. The committee also has had concerns that any savings found in Medicare would continue to be used for purposes other than payment reform. For instance, the 2010 health system reform law was financed in part by more than $400 billion in Medicare cuts.

 

"So our fear as we discuss the SGR over the course of this calendar year is that we were getting closer and closer to the point where continuing the SGR could become a destabilizing force in the Medicare program, and hence the urgency of moving ahead with repeal," he said.

 

Commissioners discussed renewing their October 2011 recommendations to Congress for repealing the SGR. One recommendation suggests that Congress replace the SGR formula with a 10-year pay freeze for primary care, while reducing payments for other services by 5.9% for three years and then holding rates steady for years four through 10.

 

The American Medical Association has opposed that recommendation because it says the drastic cuts and freezes to physician pay would not preserve patients' access to care. Many physicians already are facing pay cuts related to Medicare requirements on electronic prescribing, electronic medical records and quality reporting. Reducing base pay or freezing rates would leave doctors unable to care for Medicare beneficiaries and unable to transition to new payment models that better coordinate patient care, the AMA has said.

 

Back to top

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Some hard times finding a new physician

The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission's 2011 physician access survey compared beneficiaries and privately insured individuals 50 to 64 years old. The survey found that most patients can find a new doctor when they need one, but slightly more people reported difficulties accessing a new source of care than in 2010. The 2011 survey found that:

 

■6% of Medicare patients looked for a new primary care doctor.

■3.6% had no problem finding a new primary care physician, while 0.7% had a small problem and 1.3% had a big problem.

■14% sought care from a new specialist.

■12.1% had no problem finding a new specialist, while 1.1% had a small problem and 1% had a big problem.

Source: "Assessing payment adequacy: fee-schedule and ambulatory surgical center services," MedPAC, Dec. 15, 2011 (www.medpac.gov/transcripts/phys asc public dec2011.pdf)

 

 

Taken from the following article:

 

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/01/09/gvsc0109.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Folks on medicare are finding it more difficult to find primary care physicians:

GOVERNMENT

Problems finding new Medicare primary care doctors small but growing

MedPAC's chair calls the trend "worrisome" and says it's another argument for repealing the SGR formula, which is keeping some physicians from accepting new patients.

By Charles Fiegl, amednews staff. Posted Jan. 9, 2012.

PRINT|E-MAIL|RESPOND|REPRINTS| SHARE Washington -- A federal survey of Medicare beneficiaries shows that slightly more patients are having difficulty finding new primary care physicians to care for them.

Searching for a new family physician or internist who is accepting Medicare patients was more difficult than scheduling an appointment with a new specialist, according to an annual survey on physician access conducted by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. The 2011 survey found that 3.6% of Medicare patients reported having no problem finding a new primary care physician, while 2% had what they considered small or big problems finding one. All other patients surveyed were not looking for a new physician last year.

■Some hard times finding a new physician

■See related content

In previous years, surveys showed patients having relatively fewer problems scheduling appointments with new primary care physicians, said Cristina Boccuti, a MedPAC principal policy analyst, during a Dec. 15 commission meeting. Non-Medicare patients also reported more trouble last year.

"In general, for both Medicare and the privately insured groups, access to primary care physicians is trending down, which has been concerning the commission for a number of years," Boccuti said.

MedPAC Chair Glenn Hackbarth called the trend "worrisome" and said the new data reinforced the need to eliminate the sustainable growth rate formula that helps determine Medicare pay rates. The SGR was scheduled to reduce Medicare payments by 27.4% on Jan. 1, but Congress in December 2011 delayed the cut by two months, establishing a new deadline of March 1. The uncertainty caused by the SGR has dissuaded some physicians from accepting new Medicare patients or has prompted them to limit new appointment slots.

A third of Medicare patients looking for a new primary care doctor had trouble finding one in 2011. Federal lawmakers have continued to defer on a decision to eliminate the SGR by enacting temporary patches for the last decade, Hackbarth said. As a result, the cost of a repeal that would simply maintain current Medicare rates over 10 years has grown to $289.7 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Repealing the formula and providing annual payment updates pegged to the increased costs over time of providing care would cost $352.7 billion, the CBO said.

The fiscal and political climate in Washington is not conducive to writing off these costs, Hackbarth said. The committee also has had concerns that any savings found in Medicare would continue to be used for purposes other than payment reform. For instance, the 2010 health system reform law was financed in part by more than $400 billion in Medicare cuts.

"So our fear as we discuss the SGR over the course of this calendar year is that we were getting closer and closer to the point where continuing the SGR could become a destabilizing force in the Medicare program, and hence the urgency of moving ahead with repeal," he said.

Commissioners discussed renewing their October 2011 recommendations to Congress for repealing the SGR. One recommendation suggests that Congress replace the SGR formula with a 10-year pay freeze for primary care, while reducing payments for other services by 5.9% for three years and then holding rates steady for years four through 10.

The American Medical Association has opposed that recommendation because it says the drastic cuts and freezes to physician pay would not preserve patients' access to care. Many physicians already are facing pay cuts related to Medicare requirements on electronic prescribing, electronic medical records and quality reporting. Reducing base pay or freezing rates would leave doctors unable to care for Medicare beneficiaries and unable to transition to new payment models that better coordinate patient care, the AMA has said.

Back to top

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Some hard times finding a new physician

The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission's 2011 physician access survey compared beneficiaries and privately insured individuals 50 to 64 years old. The survey found that most patients can find a new doctor when they need one, but slightly more people reported difficulties accessing a new source of care than in 2010. The 2011 survey found that:

■6% of Medicare patients looked for a new primary care doctor.

■3.6% had no problem finding a new primary care physician, while 0.7% had a small problem and 1.3% had a big problem.

■14% sought care from a new specialist.

■12.1% had no problem finding a new specialist, while 1.1% had a small problem and 1% had a big problem.

Source: "Assessing payment adequacy: fee-schedule and ambulatory surgical center services," MedPAC, Dec. 15, 2011 (www.medpac.gov/transcripts/phys asc public dec2011.pdf)

Taken from the following article:

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/01/09/gvsc0109.htm

 

 

 

"Folks on medicare are finding it more difficult to find primary care physicians"

 

Does that have anything to do with the Gov cutting what they will pay for the doctors to do?

 

 

Which way is it;

 

doctors are greedy or gov stingy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

finding a pcp or gp taking new patients is getting difficult period.

 

I know when got my new plan the doctors i contacted said they were not taking new patients. I was 30 btw.

So I called the insurance company and they picked a doctor and set the apt. for me.

when called to confirm the receptionist said the doctor did not take any new patients and didn't know how i got my appt.

I saw the doctor.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
finding a pcp or gp taking new patients is getting difficult period.

I know when got my new plan the doctors i contacted said they were not taking new patients. I was 30 btw.

So I called the insurance company and they picked a doctor and set the apt. for me.

when called to confirm the receptionist said the doctor did not take any new patients and didn't know how i got my appt.

I saw the doctor.

 

interesting

 

I know my father was let loose by his doctor of many many years

 

actually, he could've stayed but would have to paty out of pocket and look to get reimbursed from Medicare

 

the doctor simply was dropping his Medicare clientel unless they pay out of pocket

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is OK with war, invading nations for profit and spending Trillions in the effort for corrupt governments we put in place for decades,

pissin off the world. What does it get us ? Bankrupt like the Soviets and Bin Laden said it would.

If we shored up our homeland defenses and used special ops like Israel in other countries to keep abreast of any threat to us, all those Trillions could be

used for healthcare for all, making everyone's lives here at home, American lives, better.

But for the war cause, we're 25th in the world at just about everything but war spending.

Someone asked the Chinese premiere if his country was really communist since it looked very much like a capitalist one.

He said, whatever works, we call it communism.

So many other countries are 30 years into green energy and producing students that far out seed ours.

We need to take care of Americans for a change and that means putting those war dollars into infrastructure, healthcare and job creation.

For if we don't, we face the same fate as the Soviet Union.

History has a point of repeating itself and if you read about the Soviets, it's our story too.

Why is anyone opposed to taking care of our own and just a few who can afford it ? Isn't helping each other what took us through the Great Depression ?

It made 25% of those out of work feel better having a job and built most of our infrastructure. We should be doing that 20 years ago.

But we believe in these politicians who are criminals when they have to pass a bill that says they can't do insider trading, which is already against the law.

they did it just to give themselves a Get Out Of Jail Free Crd.

How one citizen could want to deny another citizen something that may keep them alive is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get a job that pays for it. Me and the wife did.

ANd by the way, I wouldn't mind my taxes going up to pay for you.

reagan had one of the biggest tax increases, GHWB raised them,

and I would gladly pay more at my salary to help others.

that is the christian way. Maybe if all the wealthy Mormons and Christians

felt the same we could help others. But that would be too Jesus like.

 

Two bills passed in 1982 and 1984 together "constituted the biggest tax increase ever enacted during peacetime,

 

The following year, Reagan made one of the greatest ideological about-faces in the history of the presidency, agreeing to a $165 billion bailout of Social Security. In almost every way, the bailout flew in the face of conservative ideology. It dramatically increased payroll taxes on employees and employers, brought a whole new class of recipients--new federal workers--into the system, and, for the first time, taxed Social Security benefits, and did so in the most liberal way: only those of upper-income recipients. (As an added affront to conservatives, the tax wasn't indexed to inflation, meaning that more and more people have gradually had to pay it over time.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect TJ to cut the IRS a bonus check this April.

 

When does the hand of government stop digging deeper into our pockets?

What will be next on the progressive agenda after contraception is paid for, and the gays can get married?

 

What will the Leftists want the government to do for them next, free toilet paper??? I have the right, but not the responsibility, for a clean butt, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I expect TJ to cut the IRS a bonus check this April.

When does the hand of government stop digging deeper into our pockets?

What will be next on the progressive agenda after contraception is paid for, and the gays can get married?

What will the Leftists want the government to do for them next, free toilet paper??? I have the right, but not the responsibility, for a clean butt, right?

 

Next, no one will have to pay taxes, except the rich folks, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does the hand of government stop digging deeper into our pockets?

 

We don't mind paying taxes for wars that kill our brave soldiers, for that we'll ante up all we can, but to help our fellow American,

which in turn will help us rise globally as a nation against those who are outpacing us by miles, then we want to be cheap.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden in the Medicare bashing above:

"In general, for both Medicare and the privately insured groups, access to primary care physicians is trending down, which has been concerning the commission for a number of years," Boccuti said.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does the hand of government stop digging deeper into our pockets?

We don't mind paying taxes for wars that kill our brave soldiers, for that we'll ante up all we can, but to help our fellow American,

which in turn will help us rise globally as a nation against those who are outpacing us by miles, then we want to be cheap.

 

Apples and oranges. Completely. Do you see the difference between paying your share of the bill for mutual expenses, like a defense and infrastructure, and the fuits of your own labors to antoehr person, from whom you derive no benefit in turn? Until you guys understand the difference you'll never get the issue.

 

That's not even getting in to how it corrupts a society to have one segment milking another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these problems we have are created not by the poor or the citizens (except that we vote for these people) but by the wealthy and politicians they put in office.

We could have a completely different country if corporations put profits back into their companies instead of taking out the profits to stash away so they keep up

with other countries making their product less expensive.

Politicians who are sponsored by these corporations spend the money for private interests and leave the rest for all americans which means there is none.

So they have us quarrel as a distraction so they get away with more of the same. Like the Soviet Union we are going broke but we have a learning deficiency

when it comes to history.

What would all the defense contractors do if there were no more wars ? Want to be bailed out ? Go into another business ? The only logical solution

is eternal war.

So if we're to blame any one segment for our problems, it's the M.I.C. Without them we'd be abundant with money and truly be a 21st century nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.