Audits and investigations into the effects of ObamaCare from congressional committees, government auditors, advocacy groups, and others.
“The new health care law is supposed to fix the problem by guaranteeing access to affordable coverage for all. But many nursing homes and home care agencies, alarmed at the cost of providing health insurance to hundreds of thousands of health care workers, have started a lobbying effort seeking some kind of exemption or special treatment.”
“Basically, hospitals will not be able to provide seniors with the same kind of services they provide younger patients. To survive, we may see hospitals specialize in Medicare patients and provide far fewer amenities. In some cases, they may offer reduced access to expensive technology. A private room paid for by Medicare may be replaced by four- or six-bed wards. Menu choices may be replaced by the civilian equivalent of meals-ready-to-eat. Hospitals that accept Medicare patients may have access to MRI scanners, but not PET scanners.”
“An astounding 93 percent of physician group practices surveyed by a key trade organization warned that they would not join a new healthcare reform program to reward quality of care unless it’s thoroughly reworked.”
“The nation’s highest-profile health care centers—think of the Cleveland Clinic, the Mayo Clinic, Intermountain Healthcare or the Geisinger Health System—are the models for the Obama administration’s accountable care organization (ACO) proposal. But officials at those tightly organized institutions have so many concerns with the proposed rule to create ACOs that they doubt that they will participate.”
“Thanks to ObamaCare, we’re going to end up subsidizing those folks anyway, through Medicaid. And Medicaid won’t reduce the use of emergency room care, which tends to be far more expensive than regular visits to the doctor. Just the opposite. Expanding coverage, especially through Medicaid, will almost certainly increase the total number of visits to the emergency room. That’s because Medicaid recipients use emergency room services more than any other class of individual.”
“A variety of research shows that Americans enrolled in Medicaid have less access to health care, and when they do receive care, the quality is often inferior to the care provided to other similar patients. This Heritage Foundation paper lays out the research, and shows how Medicaid is failing current enrollees and taxpayers and must be fundamentally reformed. The Medicaid expansion contained in ObamaCare will further weaken the program—hurting those who really need it, as well as unduly burdening the taxpayers who pay for it.”
“The real problem, according to a new survey from the American College of Emergency Physicians, isn’t caused by people who don’t have insurance — it’s caused by people who do, but still can’t find a doctor to treat them.
A full 97 percent of ER doctors who responded to the ACEP survey said they treated patients ‘daily’ who have Medicaid (the federal-state health plan for the low-income), but who can’t find a doctors who will accept their insurance.”
“The health reform bill signed into law last year is expected to significantly increase the number of Americans with health insurance or participating in the Medicaid program. Meanwhile, an aging population will increase participation in Medicare. This means a greater demand for physician services.
But at the same, the bill may drive physicians out of practice.”
“For years, doctors have urged patients over the age of 50 to get colonoscopies to check for colorectal cancer, which kills 50,000 Americans a year. Their efforts were boosted last year by the federal health care law, which requires that key preventive services, including colonoscopies, be provided to patients at no out-of-pocket cost.
But there’s a wrinkle in the highly touted benefit. If doctors find and remove a polyp, which can be cancerous, some private insurers and Medicare hit the patient with a surprise: charges that could run several hundred dollars.”
“So, I’d like the advocates of IPAB to tell me two things: (1) Can they formulate an objective way for the government to determine how much Lucentis should cost? (2) Why shouldn’t individuals get to decide for themselves how much they would be willing to pay to see out of both of their eyes, instead of just one?”