Health on the Horizon's Final Post

August 25: Talking with folks in Lebanon Pa about healthcare

Today marks the end of my one-year journey around the state of Pennsylvania.  This summer I spent a lot of time reflecting on how I was going to conclude this year-long experience for today’s post.  What has been the most prominent lesson I’ve learned?  What was the meaning of this project?  The answer came to me last week when I bought a hotdog.

It was a fundraiser to assist with medical costs for a woman who was battling cancer.   While I do not know the particulars of the situation, images of similar events entered my consciousness:  the tin can on a coffee shop counter, a bake sale, a car wash.  Everyone has seen similar acts of kindness, charity to help those unfortunate enough to get sick.  While charity is an admirable thing, it has challenged me to ask if this is what we have come to consider public policy?  In one of the most developed nations in the world, it seems that there is something wrong when a health insurance company takes in record profits while its citizens are left to pay for healthcare with a tin can.

This past year I interviewed dozens of people and did countless hours of research on “wonky” healthcare policy.  In the end, I have discovered this year was about one thing: social justice.  I’ve met small business owners who are priced out of access, those on the individual market who receive sub-par coverage, full time workers who are forced to remain uninsured, seniors struggling with getting prescriptions and families battling against some of the most egregious practices of the the health insurance industry.  All of them existing in a system that is stacked up against them.  A system of public health policy that allows the insurance industry to take advantage of the the health consumer.

While I have studied the PPACA at great length this year, I can admit it has its share of flaws.  We still have our work ahead of us.  In the end though, it is a big step towards putting the power back in the hands of the health consumer and holding health insurance companies accountable to the services they provide us.  As we move forward in ensuring access to healthcare for those that have been shut out, we need to keep asking ourselves if we want to go back to social policy that comes in the form of a hotdog or policy that puts our personal health on the horizon.

Thank you to all of you that have followed me this past year!  Holly

Looking for a GUEST SPEAKER on healthcare and The New Healthcare Law?  Contact Holly Dolan.  Through the art of storytelling, Holly takes you on her year-long tour around Pennsylvania with an interactive and informative presentation. CLICK HERE for more information.  

Play with the pigskin

Football season is starting early this year.

My one-year tour around Pennsylvania comes to an end next week and it saddens me that it is ending under the looming cloud of misinformation claiming that Medicare will be cut by $716 Billion under the PPACA.  I began this project with a sole mission:  keep the facts about the PPACA straight, apply them to the lives of real people, stay non-political and grounded in public health.  This has often been been a challenge.  

As I have tried to stay beyond the media fray, I am challenged now more than ever as I have watched medicare be used as a political football.  In April 2012 I presented a 5 part series on Medicare featuring Barbara, a senior from Westmoreland County who has struggled with affordable prescription drugs when she reached the “donut hole”.  Many of us know an elderly person that has cut pills in half because they struggle to pay for prescriptions.  

It is a public health fact that each year 4 million seniors reach the “donut hole” in prescription drug coverage and 25% of them will stop taking their prescription drugs when this happens.  It is also a public health fact that prior to the PPACA, 1/2 of medicare beneficiaries did not utilize annual physical exams and other preventive services (flu shots, mammograms, colonsocopy).  

Affordable prescription drugs and access to preventive care are both major public health concerns that not only impact the health and well-being of our seniors, but challenge the financial bottom line of our medicare program.  With the passage of the PPACA, these two major public health issue have been addressed and in the end, save money.

How do we pay for this?  On April 27, 2012 (Is the PPACA killing granny?), I explored how the PPACA implements instruments that reduce waste, fraud and abuse and reallocates the overpayments to Medicare Advantage (a private insurance plan) to closing the “donut hole” and providing preventive health services for our seniors.  At the same time however, the PPACA strengthens Medicare Advantage by subjecting it to basic consumer protections such as Medical Loss Ratio.  In the end, the lifespan of medicare has been expanded 8 years-another cost savings.

Finally, as seen in the Dartmouth Institute’s infamous Atlas Study, 30% of all our healthcare dollars are wasted in things such as duplicated care.  The future of healthcare is calling us to get away from the fee-for-service model, reducing preventable hospital readmission, utilize coordinated care, focus on a patient centered medical home and modernize our record systems.  All of which are cost savings, not $716 Billion in cuts as some politicians who rather use Medicare as a political football are claiming.

As we enter the fall, lets hope these same politicians start playing games with the pigskin instead of Medicare.

The passage of the PPACA has extended the lifespan of Medicare

For more information about Medicare check out the Pennsylvania Health Access Network's site for seniors.

Looking for a GUEST SPEAKER on healthcare and The New Healthcare Law?  Contact Holly Dolan.  Through the art of storytelling, Holly takes you on her year-long tour around Pennsylvania with an interactive and informative presentation. CLICK HERE for more information.  

Summer on the Amish farm

Over the past 11 months, I have interviewed dozens of people and had rewarding opportunities to speak with community audiences about healthcare.  As I have spoken with groups about this issue, I have been amazed that when we connect as citizens the media noise and the political rhetoric disintegrates.  Healthcare is an issue we all care about and we all want clear answers.  Therefore, for the next few weeks I will be doing a series called “Concerns from the Community”.  These are questions and concerns raised to me by people I have met through speaking engagements, e-mails, phone calls and my Facebook page. 

This week's concern came from a woman from Pennsylvania's Amish community.

Artwork by Merrill Coffin

   

The humidity of a summer’s afternoon gave way to the relief of a westward moving storm that rolled over the fields of the Pennsylvania country side as I sipped mint tea on Charlotte’s front porch.  As two women from two very different cultures, we came together to discuss something that we all share as common concern-the health and wellbeing of our families and community.

Pennsylvania is blessed with a rich culture that is deeply routed in tradition, our Amish neighbors are a testament to this.  With a lifestyle that has remained unaltered for generations behind the backdrop of a rapidly changing world around them, it goes without saying that a national dialogue on healthcare is a concern to this community and the impact it will have on their way of life.

In our discussion, I alleviated her concerns that under the PPACA, the Amish religion is exempt from the individual responsibility clause (AKA: The Mandate) for the same reason they are exempt from paying and receiving Social Security.  As a self-sustaining culture, a major factor in their religious belief is to depend primarily on their tightly knit community.  Their religious belief calls them to take care of their community and I soon found that the one really learning about healthcare on this day was me.

Charlotte, an Amish woman with a chronic health condition that utilizes modern medical equipment and treatment, explained that as a culture they do not “reject” modern technology and innovation, as many wrongly believe, but embrace it selectively as it becomes life dependent.  Like the cistern that provides them indoor plumbing and the water wheel in the creek that delivers them hydro-power, their healthcare insurance system is self-sustaining and powered from within the Amish community.  Essentially, they “self insure” their community.

She explains that at the age of 18 each Amish adult pays $125 a month (premium) to their district health fund.  They receive treatment from modern physicians and hospitals as needed and are individually responsible for the first $2000 in bills (deductible).  They do have negotiated contract prices with area physicians and hospitals because the providers know that they will receive payment immediately and in cash, whereas with insurance companies they have to wait and may not get reimbursed.  When an individual meets their $2000 or has a serious medical need, they turn to the district health fund.  If the condition calls for care beyond the allowance of the district health fund, they turn to “free will” (charity from the community and neighboring districts).  Above all, their system is non-profit.  Funds are not lost to administrative costs and profit margins.  Furthermore, because the system of this community covers their medical expenses, they therefore do not contribute to the “uncompensated care” that has burdened our healthcare system for decades and increased the cost of care for everyone.   

As I came to understand their system, I also saw that the exemption for this religious group goes beyond religion.  This community is already taking responsibility for its citizens and is not a burden on the system.  Within this small, homogeneous microcosm-it works.  

The late day storm began to subside and carried with it the suffocating heat of the July day.  While the winds began to settle, so did a sense of peace within me.  Like the relief provided by the storm, I too felt refreshed by an open and civil dialogue about healthcare and relished in the opportunity to escape the hostility that surrounds this topic in our national news outlets.  If only our national landscape could be more like 2 women sipping mint tea on the porch of a Pennsylvania farm house.  

Mary's Question

Over the past 11 months, I have interviewed dozens of people and had rewarding opportunities to speak with community audiences about healthcare.  As I have spoken with groups about this issue, I have been amazed that when we connect as citizens the media noise and the political rhetoric disintegrates.  Healthcare is an issue we all care about and we all want clear answers.  Therefore, for the next few weeks I will be doing a series called “Concerns from the Community”.  These are questions and concerns raised to me by people I have met through speaking engagements, e-mails, phone calls and my Facebook page.  

This week's question is from Mary in Southeastern Pennsylvania.

Oil on Canvas:  "The Birthday Party" by Skip Rohde

In 2011 the infamous “Baby Boomers” officially retired.  While we are seeing a growing population of seniors, this is also coupled with the fact that American’s life expectancy has increased 1.4 years over the past decade, according to the Center’s for Disease Control.  As our population is aging and this aging population is growing larger, we are seeing an unusual trend.

After one of my speaking engagements I received a phone call from Mary, an 85 year old senior in assisted living.  She had a question about the provision of long-term care in the PPACA, but it wasn’t for herself.  The question was for her 61 year old daughter, a woman who was also looking to acquire a long-term care facility.  An interesting dynamic is echoing the changing demographics of family:  parent and children living out their “golden years” together!

However, this dynamic also presents an ongoing struggle and financial burden on our healthcare system as we try to provide this much needed long-term care for our aging population.  Under current policy, Medicare will only cover a skilled nursing facility for up to 100 days, after that, it does not cover long term care.  The only alternative for many people is to “spend down” their life savings on long term care until they are deemed impoverished and therefore qualify for medicaid.  Two-thirds of nursing home residents are financed through medicaid, whereas, 7% are financed through private insurance.

It is quite obvious that our current policy is a harsh one:  impoverish our seniors so that they can receive the care they need.  In the original drafting of the PPACA in 2010, there was a provision called The CLASS Program which was scheduled to begin in 2014.  This program would have been a voluntary insurance program established to help people pay for long-term care and services.  It was an attempt on the part of the PPACA to tackle this overwhelming public health issue.

Unfortunately, in response to Mary’s concern, I had to inform her that in October of 2011, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, announced that the program was deemed unsustainable and therefore repealed.  From the announcement put out by the Secretary, the program was susceptible to a phenomenon known as “Adverse Selection”.  This means that higher risk people and those with already existing disabilities were more likely to enroll in the program as opposed to younger and healthier people.  As a result, more money would be paid out for services than paid in from premiums.

As mentioned before, the PPACA has made a lot of progress towards giving unprecedented access to healthcare for millions and provided much needed consumer protections to others, it is a constant reminder that we still have work to be done.  While the dynamic of mother and daughter sharing their “golden years” together may be a quaint scene, seeing them do so in poverty is not.

To expand or not to expand......

Over the past 11 months, I have interviewed dozens of people and had rewarding opportunities to speak with community audiences about healthcare.  As I have spoken with groups about this issue, I have been amazed that when we connect as citizens the media noise and the political rhetoric disintegrates.  Healthcare is an issue we all care about and we all want clear answers.  Therefore, for the next few weeks I will be doing a series called “Concerns from the Community”.  These are questions and concerns raised to me by people I have met through speaking engagements, e-mails, phone calls and my Facebook page.  

This week’s question for the ongoing series comes from Christine.  Her concern is:

 "What are the next steps for PA in order to effectively implement the PPACA? How does the Supreme Court's decision on the medicaid expansion mean for PA?"

Recently, a study done at the Harvard School of Public Health concluded that when states expand medicaid, they discovered a 6.1% decrease in the percent of deaths in the state.  Of course this is good news for public health and a validation to the recommendation in the PPACA to expand medicaid for individuals up to 133% of the Federal Poverty Level.  However, the questions of cost remain as Pennsylvania and many other states grapple with the Supreme Court’s decision to make the expansion of medicaid optional.  Furthermore, with the Supreme Court’s upholding of the PPACA, Pennsylvania needs to seriously begin the process of implementing the state based insurance exchanges.

The next step for Pennsylvania is to implement the PPACA as it was designed.  According to a 2011 study done by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute, with the implementation of the PPACA states are looking at a $90 Billion cost savings.  In the state of Pennsylvania, the study determined that without the PPACA the state spends $7,098,000 on the uncompensated care of the uninsured.  With implementation of the reform as it was designed, Pennsylvania is looking at reducing its uncompensated care costs to $3,811,000. 

In order to see these savings, states need to expand medicaid and set up the state based exchanges.  By doing this roughly 32 million more people will gain access to health insurance (17 million from the expansion of medicaid) and states will see significant savings from the decrease in the amount of uncompensated care that has been accrued from the uninsured/underinsured.  With the expansion of medicaid, the federal government will pay for 95% until 2019 and 90% in 2020 and beyond.  Even with the reduction in federal money, the study still projects that savings will outweigh costs for the state.  However, with the opening of the exchanges, those currently uninsured that will see the private insurance industry beginning to flip the bill through the new policies they will be purchasing.  Prior to reform, this tab was being picked up by state budgets, providers and increased premium costs ($900 a family in PA) from the insured.

Another overlooked cost savings for states is in the area of mental health.  According to the study, in fiscal year 2008 states spent $16.7 Billion on mental health services.  With mental health services now being one of the essential benefits under the PPACA, private insurance companies that participate on the exchanges will now pick up a significant portion of that cost for those that will acquire insurance on the exchange.  Medicaid expansion will also now cover mental health services instead of other state sources that are currently being used.

Finally, with the improved coordination of services through the use of electronic medical records, our public health programs (medicaid and medicare) will see cost savings with the reduction of duplicated care and catching costly medical errors.