House Health Care Bill released

Yoou are not reading the same bill I am. The section I refer to is the operational expenses and the monies to be put in. If the premiums and the money are insufficient then the secretary may increase premiums or cut benefits or creat weait lists dffor services. You can spin it all you want but that is what it says. No where is it about while inplemented, it is about the high risk pool, (i.e th elderly and chronically ill) and payment for thosse services.

Winki has proposed health plan outlined--click link then subject line

America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009

Since I'm involved in community and home health services, pleased to see these additions:

Considering expanding Home Infusion therapy under Medicare to decrease hospital costs: Sec. 1143. Home Infusion Therapy Report to Ccongress.

Changing period of open enrollment in Medicare Sec. 1164. Simplification of Annual Beneficiary Election Periods. This way I have from 12/15-12/31 to figure out who changed insurance plans effective 1/1 each year so we can do all the blasted paperwork involved in changing payors and get preauths needed.



Infusion $$$$$ for TITLE I—COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS --most in Philadelphia are NP developed and managed.
National Nursing Centers Consortium

Advancing nurse-led health care through policy, consultation, programs and applied research to reduce health disparities and meet people’s primary care and wellness needs.

Medicare Part D eliminates drug plan donut hole (lack of payment period) Sec. 1181. Elimination of Coverage Gap.


WIN WIN for nursing under DIVISION C—PUBLIC HEALTH AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Part 1—National Health Service Corps

TITLE II—WORKFORCE Subtitle B—Nursing Workforce increased funding through 2019



TITLE V—OTHER PROVISIONS

Continuation of Subtitle B—School-Based Health Clinics

Subtitle D—Grants for Comprehensive Programs to Provide Education to Nurses and Create a Pipeline to Nursing
[quote]establish a partnership grant program to award grants to eligible entities to carry out comprehensive programs to provide education to nurses and create a pipeline to nursing for incumbent ancillary health care workers who wish to advance their careers....

Additional Requirements for Health Care Employer Described in Subsection (c).—
To be eligible for a grant under this section, a health care employer described in subsection (c) shall demonstrate that it— (1) has an established program within their facility to encourage the retention of existing nurses; (2) provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization; and (3) supports programs funded under this section through 1 or more of the following: (A) The provision of paid leave time and continued health coverage to incumbent health care workers to allow their participation in nursing career ladder programs, including certified nurse assistants, licensed practical nurses, licensed vocational nurses, and registered nurses. (B) Contributions to a joint labor-management training fund which administers the program involved. (C) The provision of paid release time, incentive compensation, or continued health coverage to staff nurses who desire to work full- or part-time in a faculty position. (D) The provision of paid release time for staff nurses to enable them to obtain a bachelor of science in nursing degree, other advanced nursing degrees, specialty training, or certification program. (E) The payment of tuition assistance which is managed by a joint labor-management training fund or other jointly administered program.
[/QUOTE]

You can keep saying all you want that it is transitional care only but the section I am refering to is further down at the bottom of page 25 and top of page 26 of the bill. It clearly states that if there are not enough aggtreagate funds available in any fiscal year ( not during the transitional period only) that the secretary may cut benefits, increasse premiums and establish waiting lists.

The language is clear precise about that

It's probably better just to leave people uncovered like and fend for themselves like they are doing now.

What would be better, Tweety, is for our politicians to be honest about the contents of the bill.

Why does one have to wade thru 1900 pages to learn that over-spending or under-funding will lead to wait lists and denials of care?

The very things that are deemed unacceptable in private plans.

I don't get it . . . .and the link doesn't work for me.

His back hurts . . . . maybe he needs to lie down.


steph

It may not be perfect, but it's a start.

With something as complex as healthcare, I would expect nothing less than 1900 pages. This is major, major legislation requiring attention to detail and thoroughness.

Steph,
I think it's meant to indicate that Harry Reid is growing a spine. Lame. Humor neds an element of truth to be funny.

Snoopy,

How many pages is your current insurance policy? Less than 10 I bet. Have you ever read it to know precisely what it covers and what it doesn't. I sincerely hope you have. But most people haven't, and then are surprised and outraged when something isn't covered.

Our politicians are deliberately creating an unnecessarily complex bill so that no-one will be able to read and understand what is in it and what isn't. So they can sneak in wording like Kyrshamarks posted above.

Just how surprised would you be to find that your "Public Option" plan, with premiums higher than most private coverage (as per CBO estimates) is going to place you on a waiting list or deny coverage for something you expect to have covered because they are short on funds for the year?

No private plan can do that. If your policy states that XYZ is a covered service, they must pay for it. They can't unilaterally change the terms of your policy and start refusing payment for covered services because they ran short of money. If they tried to do that, you would have the opportunity to appeal to your State Department of Insurance or sue in a court of law. Only the government can get away with that. How is that "better" for any consumer?

If that's not jumping from the frying pan into the fire, I don't know what is.

October 29, 2009
Categories:House .CBO: Public option premiums higher than private plans
The public insurance option would typically charge higher premiums than private plans available in the exchange, according to the Congressional Budget Office analysis of the House bill.

That surprising conclusion raises doubts about Democratic promises that a government-run insurance plan would provide a lower-cost alternative to consumers.

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/10...s.html?showall