Ryan recently headlined a Washington media event for the re-release of this bucket of right-wing hash. It includes turning Medicare into a “WeDon’tCare” privatized voucher scheme that would deliver seniors into the tender clutches of giant insurance corporations, forcing the elderly to pay more for less.
Video: Medicare Nevada- 1.800.643.7544
How Medicare is Improving Coordination of Your Care
No sorry. I went to ER last year and they wanted me to sign an 8 page contract, which I could not read at the time due to my injury, but would not treat me unless I signed it. I waited until my wife could come in and I was able to read it after an hour, also she brought my reading glasses. It said they can share my medical records with ‘anyone they feel needs to know, including family, friends, employers,police, military, ANYONE. This was at county hospital. I would not sign it and they would not treat me even though I had internal bleeding from a fall. I stood my ground and suffered for it. I could post it here. Read it. Anytime you are treated, or get insurance, or any medical care, read what you sign and tell me. People just sign away their rights to privacy. Insurance companies are the worst, trading your medical records, and as I said, you have no way to set the record strait if there is false information. It may even say you are an alcoholic or smoke cigarettes and you are not, don’t, and when you try to get new health coverage they will have that information and either hit you with huge premiums or deny you, true or not, because people are allowed to give away your records without even notifying you. And speaking of records, do you know you are not even allowed to see all your own records? Medical records or any other records, information about you? You are not allowed to even see your own records the authorities have and can see. They don’t want you to know.
Nevada Daily Mail: Local News: Officials urge legislators to reconsider Medicaid issue (04/05/13)
Really people, who pays for the uninsured? You do (you being the reader of this post) and me. One way or the other somebody pays for those that can’t pay or in some cases won’t. You pay either by higher insurance premiums (including existing Medicare and Medicaid insured) or in higher costs at the provider level for those self insured (ie wealthy enough to pay without insurance). The alternative… rural hospitals in areas of high poverty go away (go broke) then no more local hospitals. Why? Because as stated in the article, hospitals can not refuse treatment. Or, picture this alternative where hospitals CAN refuse care…… there’s a traffic accident, and the victims roll in to the hospital on a gurney the first thing the hospital has to know is, are you insured or if not, can you pay (by the way we’ll need a credit card now)? If you are insured or you can pay, you get treated. If not, sorry you’re out of luck, you’ll need to go elsewhere. In that world what do you say and who gets to tell the heart attack victim “nope we can’t help you”.
Medicare ensures no interruption in services as UHC and UHIC plans terminate
Affected beneficiaries can choose to enroll in another Medicare Advantage or Prescription Drug Plan if they do not want to remain in Original Medicare or the newly assigned PDP. They have been granted a special election period during which they may make one change in their Medicare health care and prescription drug plan coverage. This special election period is in effect now through May 31. Coverage in the new plan is effective the first of the month following their plan selection. If a beneficiary calls 1-800-MEDICARE by March 31 and enrolls in a plan, the beneficiary’s coverage in the plan will be effective on April 1.
Viewpoints: Looking For The Budget’s True Bottom Line; The Debate On Plan B Reignited; Medicare Cuts Have Impact
The Wall Street Journal: A Primer For Understanding Obama’s Budget President Obama will release his overdue budget on Wednesday. It will doubtless project a reduction in the federal budget deficit—a projection that journalists, commentators and policy makers should ignore. To do otherwise is to be complicit in fraud. Strong statement? Not really. … Fortunately, some years ago the CBO began to present “alternative scenario” budget projections, in which differences from current-law projections are explained in detail. In its early February update, one example is that the 25% cut in physician Medicare reimbursements scheduled for next Jan. 1 will not occur. That adjustment increases the projected deficit in 2023 by $16 billion, and cumulatively by $138 billion from 2014-23. Congress has overridden the scheduled cut in physician reimbursements every year since 2003, in a legislative provision known as the “doc fix” (William Poole, 4/8).
Nevada Senate Candidate Shelley Berkley on Medicare, the economy and the Affordable Care Act
On a recent trip to Nevada, Up host Chris Hayes sat down with Rep. Shelley Berkley, the Democratic candidate for Senate there. Berkley is challenging Republican Sen. Dean Heller. Chris asked Berkley about the unemployment rate in Nevada — the highest in the nation — Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan’s proposed cuts to Medicare, and Berkley’s vote in Congress for the Affordable Care Act.
Medicare Supplement Plans In Nevada, Colorado, and Utah
Typically the healthier the state the lower the rates. All of these states boast a very good health rating. When a Medicare Supplement Company has lower health claims they also have lower costs which they usually pass along to the consumer as lower rates for there plans. Actually these companies are able to look in years past to try to determine there future costs for claims, when they see that in years past claims costs have been comparably lower than other states they are able to keep prices lower because of that. These rocky mountain area states thus are benefiting from a healthy life style, All of these states have lots of outdoor activities which aide in preserving a great health rating.
Obama’s Social Security, Medicare Cuts
Photo: Courtesy USC Roybal Institute on Aging Traducción al español WASHINGTON, D.C.–The Social Security and Medicare cuts President Obama included in his proposed budget would disproportionately harm Latino Americans and are deeply unpopular in our community. Rather than being part of a “Grand Bargain” offered to Republicans in exchange for possible tax increases, these cuts are a great betrayal of a group that proved essential to the president’s victory in the 2012 election. President Obama won an unprecedented 71 percent of the Latino vote nationwide, allowing him to edge out Mitt Romney in the key swing states of Colorado, Florida, Nevada and New Mexico. What many may not know is that like most Obama supporters, Latinos voted for the president in no small part, because they believed they could rely on him to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Latinos Depend More on Social Security Latino voters believed President Obama in his 2011 State of the Union speech when he said we must “strengthen Social Security . . . without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.” Social Security matters to Latinos, because we depend on it more than any other group. Three in four (77 percent) Latino households ages 65 or older rely on Social Security for a majority of their income, and over half (55 percent) rely on it for 90 percent of their income. That means Latino seniors are 18 percent more likely than the overall U.S. population to rely on Social Security for a majority of their income and 52 percent more likely to rely on it for 90 percent of their income. A major benefit cut in the president’s proposal would be to switch the formula for calculating annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in Social Security and other programs. This so-called chained-Consumer Price Index (chained-CPI), would allow inflation to erode program benefits over time—and would hit Latinos especially hard. Because we are more likely to have lower career earnings, our Social Security benefits tend to be more modest to begin with—$12,491 each year for the average Latino senior and only and $10,438 per year for the average Latina senior. After 20 years receiving benefits under the chained-CPI—when they would be in their 80s–the average older Latino would lose an accumulated $7,774 in benefits, and the average Latina elder would lose $6,307. After 30 years, the cuts would grow, resulting in total benefit cuts of $17,049 for average Latino seniors and $13,832 for average Latina seniors. Change Would Increase Poverty Worse still, the chained-CPI punishes Latinos for being blessed with higher-than-average life expectancy, often combined with greater levels of chronic illness. Because the chained-CPI cuts benefits more as beneficiaries age, it would hit long-living Latinos harder than most. It’s no coincidence then that some experts fear that the chained-CPI will increase poverty among Latino seniors. More than one in four Latino seniors already lives in poverty—nearly twice the rate among white seniors. The White House claims it will protect “the most vulnerable” chained-CPI, with a special “birthday bump” increase for those seniors at age 76. But in the past, such carve-outs have proven inadequate. An analysis by Social Security Works showed that protecting all vulnerable groups from the chained-CPI would erase half of the budget savings from the measure. Even if significant numbers of Latinos were shielded from the chained-CPI due to their lower incomes, this birthday bump might have unintended consequences. Carve-outs—special treatment–of any kind are likely to be misconstrued as handouts for ethnic groups. We already have to deal with enough nasty stereotypes portraying us as recipients of “welfare” or “government handouts.” Proposed Medicare ‘Pain’ The Medicare benefit cuts President Obama proposes are also a step in the wrong direction that would cause Latino seniors real pain. Rather than dealing with the high costs of health care, the budget shifts health costs to beneficiaries by increasing deductibles, premiums and co-payments. The president’s plan would also create a new surcharge. The White House claims these cuts will make Medicare beneficiaries better health care consumers, but this is a flawed argument. Doctors–not beneficiaries—make medical decisions, so the idea that seniors can shop around for health care is ludicrous. As a result, Latino seniors who cannot afford the higher out-of-pocket costs are liable to forego needed care—until their conditions become more acute and costly to treat. So-called means testing of Medicare will not only affect the rich—over time, it would increase premiums for Latino seniors making up to $47,000 a year. Seniors already spend three times more of their incomes on their direct health care costs as the rest of the population. Under the president’s budget, the reduction in Latino seniors’ income would be two-fold: They would be hit by the chained-CPI, and their out-of-pocket health care costs would increase on top of that. In addition, the president’s budget provision requiring a $100 co-payment per episode for home health care services could severely impact those who depend on home health aides to treat their diabetes and other chronic diseases. This would disproportionately affect Latino seniors who have higher rates of diabetes than the overall population. For example, in Chicago, where diabetes is the most prevalent in the country, 25.8 percent of Latinos over 65 suffered from diabetes compared with 15 percent of non-Hispanic whites. The White House has defended the proposed Social Security and Medicare reductions as “not ideal” measures needed to achieve a compromise with Republicans in Congress. Not the Problem—But a Solution There is no question that the president faces difficult choices as he navigates unprecedented Republican obstruction. But at times, President Obama appears to have adopted the Republican framing as well: That our budget problems are due to over-generous Social Security and Medicare benefits. In fact, Social Security does not and legally cannot contribute one penny to the annual deficit and cumulative national debt. Medicare’s rising costs are due to skyrocketing private health care costs. In fact, Medicare has proven far more effective at controlling medical inflation than its counterparts in the private insurance market. Latinos voted for a president bold enough to start a new conversation about the challenges of aging, health care and economic security, not someone beholden to the same old Republican talking points. A real “adult” conversation on our aging boomer population would begin by acknowledging that America has a retirement security and health care crisis. Social Security and Medicare are the solutions to those crises, not the problem. The Latino community appreciates President Obama’s leadership on immigration rights and health care reform. Now it is time for him to honor his promise to Latinos and other vulnerable elders to protect and strengthen Social Security and Medicare. Eva Dominguez is the executive director of Latinos for a Secure Retirement, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C.
Supporter of federal funding of Medicaid
As the owner of a family of multi-state businesses that employs almost 13,000 people — including more than 450 in Nevada — I am a strong supporter of the decision being made by states to accept the increased federal funding that will be available to expand Medicaid eligibility in 2014. I want to thank Governor Sandoval for including a plan to implement expanded Medicaid eligibility in his proposed budget. In addition to providing valuable healthcare coverage to thousands of uninsured Nevadans, Medicaid expansion will directly benefit Nevada businesses by helping to reduce and contain the costs they incur for health insurance for their employees. States that decide not to expand Medicaid — and reject the federal funds that will pay for most of it — are in essence making a choice to shift the future cost of the uncompensated healthcare that will be provided to those who remain uninsured to local businesses in the form of higher premiums. In addition to the impact of uncompensated care, the cost of providing employer-sponsored health insurance to employees who would have been Medicaid eligible will be shifted to their employers if Medicaid expansion is not adopted. I strongly urge the Nevada Legislature to support businesses by adopting the Governor’s Medicaid expansion proposal. It’s clearly a policy that will benefit Nevada workers and the people who employ them. William F. Woody Owner and Chairman of the Board
Southern Nevada Medicare patients told to find a new insurance provider
Hundreds of Medicare recipients in Southern Nevada have been forced to change insurance carriers after their provider was liquidated amid fraud allegations. Universal Health Care Insurance Co., which had about 1,800 customers in Clark County, was placed into receivership last month and liquidated Monday. Members were automatically enrolled in a government-run Medicare program and will not face a gap in coverage, federal officials said. However, the cost of their medical care could change under the new program. Las Vegas Sun Stories: Business and Economy
Nevada governor first Republican to support Medicaid expansion under Obamacare
FILE – In this Jan. 18, 2012, file photo, Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval speaks in his office in Carson City, Nev. Don’t mistake Sandoval’s invitations to the Republican presidential contenders as anything more than a hospitable gesture. The governor is staying out of the nomination fight despite his rising stature in the GOP, or perhaps because of it. Sandoval has invited the candidates to his office this week as they campaign ahead of Saturday’s caucuses. If they make the trip to Carson City, they can count on a smile and a firm handshake but no public stamp of approval. (AP Photo/Cathleen Allison, File)