Kaiser Health News

Readers Call on Congress to Bolster Medicare and Fix Loopholes in Health Policy

Published

5 months ago

February 29, 2024

Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:00:00 +0000

Letters to the Editor is a periodic feature. We welcome all comments and will publish a selection. We edit for length and clarity and require full names.

Occupational Therapists Change Lives. CMS Must Better Support Them.

Occupational therapists are critical in helping patients adjust to new circumstances, empowering them with the tools they need to overcome barriers and regain control over their lives. Whether you're transitioning from homelessness into a home (“In Los Angeles, Occupational Therapists Tapped to Help Homeless Stay Housed,” Jan. 24) or relearning how to do everyday tasks following a stroke, OTs are key to patients' care plan.

But the critical care provided by OTs is being threatened by another year of payment cuts imposed by Medicare, our nation's health care program for people age 65 and up. Many older patients treated by OTs access insurance coverage through Medicare, which typically reimburses providers at a lower rate than private insurers. And now, with payment cuts that went into effect on Jan. 1 — despite warnings and backlash from lawmakers, patients, and providers — OTs are struggling to deliver care with lower Medicare payment.

Investing in occupational therapy improves health outcomes for patients, has the potential to reduce the burden on hospitals and other health care clinicians, and keeps individuals healthy and independent. Medicare's payment cuts only compromise the ability of providers to deliver comprehensive, compassionate care. Medicare must recognize the long-term patient benefits occupational therapy has to offer.

Luckily, Congress is considering a bill that would reverse these harmful payment cuts. The Preserving Seniors' Access to Physicians Act of 2023 (HR 6683), would reverse the cuts that went into effect on Jan. 1, alleviating financial stress for occupational therapists and preserving patient access. I strongly urge lawmakers to prioritize and protect occupational therapy services and immediately pass HR 6683 for America's Medicare patients.

— Doug Fosco, an occupational therapist practicing at Two Trees Physical Therapy in Ventura, California

An assistant professor at Ontario's Western University weighed in on X.

Great to see the role of #occupationaltherapy with persons who experience #homelessness profiled in @latimes. Thanks #deborahpitts for your work in LA with @USC and #skidrowhousingtrust . Check it out @CAOT_ACE @OSOTvoice ! @CAEHomelessness https://t.co/S5s9jhgoxI
— Carrie Anne Marshall, PhD (@cannemarshall) January 24, 2024

— Carrie Anne Marshall, Sydenham, Ontario

Congress Must Finish the Job on Site-Neutral Payments

There's an obvious solution to rein in government spending and patient out-of-pocket costs: Pay identical prices for identical care (“In Fight Over Medicare Payments, the Hospital Lobby Shows Its Strength,” Feb. 13).

As a community oncologist, it is clear to me how Medicare favors hospitals by paying more for services provided in hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs) than the same care delivered in community-based facilities. For example, last year, Medicare paid over 2.5 times as much in an HOPD as in a free-standing office for drug administration services. It's not just Medicare paying too much; patients also face higher out-of-pocket costs for care provided in HOPDs. If the Lower Costs, More Transparency Act is signed into law, cancer patients would immediately pay less for treatments like chemotherapy.

One unintended consequence of current payment disparities is consolidation. To leverage higher reimbursements, health systems scoop up independent practices — a growing problem that is particularly pronounced in oncology. From 2008 to 2020, 435 community cancer clinics closed, while 722 contracted with or were acquired by hospitals. This consolidation is reducing patient access, particularly in rural areas, where many independent clinics operate small satellite sites that tend to be the first to close when hospitals acquire a community-based practice.

It's time for Congress to finish the job through bills like the Lower Costs, More Transparency Act and the SITE Act, which would help level the playing field once and for all.

— Scott Rushing, Vancouver, Washington

The chief marketing officer of SKYGEN cut to the chase on X.

In the battle to control healthcare costs, hospitals are deploying their political power to protect their bottom lines. https://t.co/97r502KrpM
— Donald H. Polite (@DonaldPolite) February 15, 2024

— Donald H. Polite, Milwaukee

The ‘Gold Card' Shuffle

Prior authorization, by definition, creates delays in care and bureaucratic barriers for physicians — which is why it is so troubling that many insurers now require prior authorization for large categories of procedures with no evidence of overuse or inappropriate use. With health insurers increasingly implementing questionable prior authorization policies, state and federal lawmakers are racing to erect safeguards that ensure patients' access to timely care (“States Target Health Insurers' ‘Prior Authorization' Red Tape,” Feb. 12).

Much of the legislation to address this growing problem centers around the use of “Gold Cards” that exempt providers whose previous requests for prior authorization have been approved for a certain period. In general, these laws are important for patients who can't afford to wait for care — especially in the field of gastroenterology where severe abdominal pain or blood in the stool could indicate a serious condition like cancer.

However, some insurance companies are co-opting the “Gold Card” term to justify new prior authorization requirements instead of streamlining existing ones. Consider the case of UnitedHealthcare, which announced it would roll out a “Gold Card” prior authorization program this year for most colonoscopies and endoscopies. No other insurer has levied such a policy, nor does the research suggest there is an overutilization of these vital services. Despite nearly a year of good faith efforts to seek transparency and guidance from UHC, the company has failed to release any data or justification that these services are improperly utilized.

If anything, diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopies and endoscopies may be underutilized. New research from the American Cancer Society shows an alarming spike in the number of younger Americans being diagnosed with and dying from colorectal cancer. Since symptoms of colorectal cancer don't often appear until the disease is at a more advanced stage, early detection is key. Any disruption to surveillance colonoscopies (which follow removal of a precancerous polyp and are part of the screening continuum) caused by UHC's forthcoming prior authorization policy would be dangerous for the company's 27 million commercial beneficiaries.

The American Gastroenterological Association strongly urges UHC to rescind its “Gold Card” prior authorization policy. Policymakers must monitor how insurers are co-opting concepts meant to protect patients, in particular UHC's faux “Gold Card,” which threatens patient access to a procedure proven to save lives.

— Barbara Jung, president of the American Gastroenterological Association, Seattle

In an X post, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute pointed out the value in requiring prior authorization.

Case-by-case prior authorization is never fun, but surely preferable to most other methods of eliminating needless spending (ex post denials of reimbursement, higher cost-sharing, capped global budgets, etc…) https://t.co/nYijeiAUtP
— Chris Pope (@CPopeHC) February 12, 2024

— Chris Pope, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, New York City

Hospice in Prison: A Transformative View

I was so impressed with Markian Hawryluk's exceptionally well-written article “Death and Redemption in an American Prison” (Feb. 21). I was privileged to serve as an inaugural member of the American Hospital Association's Circle of Life Award committee, from 1999 to 2004. The awards were established to recognize the most outstanding hospice and palliative care programs in the U.S. The very first year, we received an application from the country's largest maximum-security prison in Angola, Louisiana, the subject of Mr. Hawryluk's wonderful article. The prison was one of the five finalists chosen for a site visit in 2000. I volunteered to be on team to visit and evaluate the prison's hospice services.

Twenty-four years later, I still remember my conversation with one of the inmate volunteers who had just returned from bathing and feeding a dying prisoner. He told me the inmate said, “I love you.” Then the inmate volunteer stated, “I never heard those words before — not from my father, who I never met, nor from my mother.” In 2000, if one were sentenced to life at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, there was no chance for parole. When we met with the warden, he mentioned there was a waiting list of prisoners who wanted to be hospice volunteers.

Please convey my deep appreciation to Mr. Hawryluk for his outstanding article.

— Paul Hofmann, president of the Hofmann Healthcare Group, Moraga, California

A digital storyteller shared the article on X.

Your one, long read for today – it's beautifully and thoughtfully written and reported”Sometimes when you're in a dark place, you find out who you really are and what you wish you could be,” Steven Garner said. “Even in darkness, I could be a light.”https://t.co/57asjh11ZV
— Ameera B. ا ميرة بت 🪬 (@meerabee) February 19, 2024

— Ameera Butt, Los Angeles

Feeling Insecure Because of Social Security Tactics

When will you continue your series on the overpayments to the Social Security Administration (“Overpayment Outrage”)? People are still suffering without benefits because the agency says people were overpaid and wants the money back. Why is nobody else asking more questions?

People in this country worked hard and paid taxes. And when it is time to retire, the Social Security Administration refuses to pay if, all of a sudden, it discovers you have been overpaid. They have told me I owe them $30,000 from over 20 years ago, and I do not know what they are talking about, but they want to take my retirement money until it's paid off. Or they want you to say it is OK to take a percentage out. Doing that would say you're guilty and you owe the money — to me, that's blackmail.

New immigrants get free phones, medical care, debit cards, food assistance, schooling … that comes to more than my little amount of retirement money. It seems the government can afford to take care of them, but not their own. Everyone who has had their Social Security taken away should be entitled to the free services they get, as we are in the same position — now we have nothing either.

— Thomas Troy, New York City

Lifelong Minnesotan and epidemiologist Eric Weinhandl chimed in on X.

Relatively severe incompetency. Social Security Chief Apologizes to Congress for Misleading Testimony on Overpaymentshttps://t.co/HYPcTU5tVW
— Eric Weinhandl (@eric_weinhandl) December 27, 2023

— Eric Weinhandl, Victoria, Minnesota

A Balanced View of the Law Curbing Surprise Bills

KFF Health News' Elisabeth Rosenthal has long advocated for quality, patient-centric medical care. However, her recent article, “The No Surprises Act Comes with Some Surprises” (Feb. 14), falls short in its analysis of surprise medical billing and the federal No Surprises Act (NSA). While she places blame on physicians, the reality is more complicated.

Patients with health insurance should not be burdened with paying more than their normal in-network cost-sharing amount for unexpected out-of-network care. This is not controversial. The legislative debate was never about whether to act on surprise billing, but rather how to act. While insurers favored policies that would allow them to calculate the payment rate medical providers receive, with the NSA, Congress instead chose an approach intended to protect sustainable payment rates that would preserve patients' access to care. The NSA removes patients from payment disputes between insurers and providers and is intended to encourage negotiations between insurers and providers, with an option for neutral arbitration.

Rosenthal's article implies a “greedy doctor” narrative, omitting discussion of insurers as contributing to the problems with the NSA's implementation. While the article notes that many requests for arbitration came from private equity-associated provider organizations, it neglected to note that a single insurance company (UnitedHealthcare) was involved in almost 40% of arbitration disputes. That is more than the rest of the top five insurance organizations combined. The article also quotes and references papers by Zack Cooper, whose undisclosed connections with UnitedHealthcare came to light through litigation. As reported, UnitedHealthcare not only provided data to Cooper, but helped frame the narrative of the work.

NSA rulemaking has financially incentivized insurers to leverage the NSA to unilaterally reduce existing contracted rates and push physicians out-of-network. As for the projected number of requests for arbitration in 2022 (which underestimated “providers' ire by an order of magnitude”), that projection ignored existing data. In just the first six months of 2021, Texas alone had more than twice as many arbitration submissions for its state law as the federal government projected for the nation for a full year. More importantly, the article ignores the issue of why doctors request arbitration. Since arbitration is baseball-style and “loser pays,” there is a strong disincentive to request it without a solid reason. In the second quarter of 2023, providers won nearly 80% of disputes, reflecting the fact that doctors are going to arbitration when insurers' actions are unreasonable.

Further, while it is true that before the NSA too many patients were receiving bills for unexpected out-of-network care, a report from the Department of Health and Human Services noted that out-of-network billing was actually declining prior to the NSA. Physician survey data suggests that post-NSA out-of-network care is now increasing due to some insurers' actions.

The bipartisan NSA is a balanced solution to a complicated problem. Difficulties with the law's implementation, including the volume of dispute submissions and backlog of cases, are due to unintended consequences from rulemaking. Addressing these challenges requires an honest conversation about their cause. Going forward, rulemaking is needed to promote fair network contracting, limit the need for arbitration, and, most importantly, protect patients' access to care.

— Rich Heller, a pediatric radiologist and the associate chief medical officer for health policy, Radiology Partners, Chicago

Anesthetist-emergency physician-family doctor David Moniz, in an X post, warned of the “unseen consequences” of the No Surprises Act.

Check out the surprising outcomes of the No Surprises Act, designed to protect patients from unexpected medical bills. While it's successfully shielded many patients, there are unseen consequences. Read the full article here: https://t.co/YFa0xweRe7 #health, #healthpolicy, #he…
— David Moniz (@DavidMoniz15) February 14, 2024
Advertisement

— David Moniz, Chilliwack, British Columbia

——————————
Title: Readers Call on Congress to Bolster Medicare and Fix Loopholes in Health Policy
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/reader-response-congress-medicare-health-policy-loopholes-letters-to-editor/
Published Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:00:00 +0000

Post Views: 174

Related Topics:Featured Health Kaiser Health News News

Up Next

Bathroom Bills Are Back — Broader and Stricter — In Several States

Don't Miss

Hacking at UnitedHealth Unit Cripples a Swath of the US Health System: What to Know

Kaiser Health News

Union With Labor Dispute of Its Own Threatens to Cut Off Workers’ Health Benefits

Published

17 hours ago

July 26, 2024

Staff Editor

Phil Galewitz, KFF Health News
Fri, 26 Jul 2024 09:00:00 +0000

The National Education Association, the nation's largest union, is threatening to cut off health insurance to about 300 Washington, D.C.-based workers on Aug. 1 in an effort to end a bitter contract dispute.

It's a tactic some private employers have used as leverage against unionized workers that has drawn scrutiny from congressional Democrats and is prohibited for state employers in California. Experts on labor law say they've never seen a union make the move against its own workers.

“This is like a man-bites-dog situation where the union is now in a position as the employer,” said Paul Clark, a professor of labor and employment relations at Penn State University. “It's not a good look for a union.”

NEA workers with pressing health needs are worried but say they won't fold. Joye Mercer Barksdale, a writer on the NEA's government relations team, said she needs coverage for a medical procedure to address atrial fibrillation, a cardiac disorder. “This is insane for the NEA to use our health benefits as a bargaining chip,” she said.

But Barksdale said the threat isn't enough to force her to agree to an unacceptable contract. “I am not ready to give in,” she said.

The NEA Staff Organization, the union representing workers at the NEA's headquarters, launched a strike on July 5 in Philadelphia, during the union's annual delegate assembly. It was its second walkout this summer as the two parties negotiate a new contract, navigating sticking points such as wages and remote work.

In response, the NEA ended the conference early. President Joe Biden was supposed to speak at the event but withdrew, refusing to cross the picket line. The NEA on July 24 endorsed Kamala Harris for president.

On July 8, the day after the conference had been scheduled to end, the NEA locked out workers. In a letter the day before, the NEA informed its unionized workers that they would not be paid, effective immediately, and their health benefits would expire at the end of July unless a new deal were reached.

“NEA cannot allow NEASO to act again in a way that will bring such lasting harm to our members and our organization,” Kim Anderson, the NEA's executive director, wrote in the letter, obtained by KFF Health News. “We are, and have always been, committed both to our union values and to the importance of conducting ourselves as a model employer.”

Democrats in Congress, including Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, introduced legislation last year to protect striking workers from losing their health benefits, after several large companies, including General Motors, John Deere, RTX (formerly Raytheon Technologies), and the maker of Kellogg's cereals, threatened to or did cut off coverage during labor disputes.

“Workers shouldn't have to choose between their family's health and a fair contract,” Brown said in a statement to KFF Health News.

The legislation was endorsed by large labor unions including the Service Employees International Union and United Steelworkers, according to a press release from Brown's office. The NEA wasn't among them.

“This tactic is immoral, and it should be illegal,” United Steelworkers' president at the time, Thomas Conway, said in the release.

Officials at the NEA, which represents teachers and other administrators, declined an interview request. In a statement, the organization's president, Becky Pringle, said “we are making every effort to reach an agreement as quickly as possible” with its staff union.

“As union leaders who have been on strike, we recognize the significance and impact of these important decisions on a personal and family level. We truly value our employees and look forward to continued collaboration with NEASO to develop a new contract that benefits us all,” she said.

Kate Hilts, a digital strategist who works for the NEA, said she fears losing her coverage will leave her unable to afford treatment for a rare autoimmune disease that attacks her kidneys. Her next treatment was slated for August.

“I wake up every day and can't believe this is happening,” she said. “You would expect this from an employer that is antiworker or has a terrible labor record, but I am totally flabbergasted that a labor union would do this that bills itself as pro-worker, pro-family, pro-education, and pro-children.”

The NEA staff union has filed multiple charges with the National Labor Relations Board this year, including allegations that the NEA withheld holiday overtime pay and failed to provide information on the outsourcing of millions of dollars in bargaining unit work.

California is one of the only states that protect striking workers from losing health coverage. The state legislature passed a law in 2021 that blocks the tactic from being used against public employees and another law in 2022 that allows any striking workers who lose their insurance to immediately get heavily discounted coverage through the state's Affordable Care Act marketplace.

If they remain locked out, the NEA workers would be eligible for coverage under COBRA, a federal program that allows people who are fired or laid off to maintain their employer-sponsored insurance for 18 months.

But the coverage can be a financial hardship, as individuals often must pay the entire cost of their insurance premiums, plus a 2% administrative fee.

Another option for workers would be coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace, though that also could be costly. And it may be unclear how soon that coverage would begin or whether insurers would cover their existing doctors.

“I'm hoping the NEA will be so ashamed of what they are doing that, at the very least, they will not take away our health benefits,” Barksdale said.

——————————
By: Phil Galewitz, KFF Health News
Title: Union With Labor Dispute of Its Own Threatens to Cut Off Workers' Health Benefits
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/nea-national-education-association-union-threatens-health-insurance-benefit-lockout/
Published Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/the-cdcs-test-for-bird-flu-works-but-it-has-issues/

Post Views: 37

Kaiser Health News

The CDC’s Test for Bird Flu Works, but It Has Issues

Published

19 hours ago

July 26, 2024

Staff Editor

Arthur Allen and Amy Maxmen
Fri, 26 Jul 2024 09:00:00 +0000

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says a glitch in its bird flu test hasn't harmed the agency's outbreak response. But it has ignited scrutiny of its go-it-alone approach in testing for emerging pathogens.

The agency has quietly worked since April to resolve a nagging issue with the test it developed, even as the virus swept through dairy farms and chicken houses across the country and infected at least 13 farmworkers this year.

At a congressional hearing July 23, Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) asked about the issue. “Boy, that rings of 2020,” he said, referring to when the nation was caught off guard by the covid-19 pandemic, in part because of dysfunctional tests made by the CDC. Demetre Daskalakis, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, responded that the agency rapidly developed a workaround that makes its bird flu test reliable.

“The tests are 100% usable,” he later told KFF Health News, adding that the FDA studied the tests and came to the same conclusion. The imperfect tests, which have a faulty element that sometimes requires testing a sample again, will be replaced soon. He added, “We have made sure that we're offering a high-quality product.”

Still, some researchers were unnerved by the news coming four months after the government declared a worrisome bird flu outbreak among cattle. The CDC's test is the only one available for clinical use. Some researchers say its flaws, though manageable, underscore the risk of relying on a single entity for testing.

The problem came to light in April as the agency prepared to distribute its test to about 100 public health labs around the country. CDC officials detected the issue through a quality control system put in place after the covid test catastrophe of 2020.

Daskalakis said the CDC's original test design was fine, but a flaw emerged when a company contracted by the agency manufactured the tests in bulk. In these tests, one of two components that recognize proteins called H5 in the H5N1 bird flu virus was unreliable, eliminating an important safeguard. By targeting the same protein twice, tests have a built-in backup in case one part fails.

The agency developed a fix to ensure a reliable result: If only one of the two parts detected H5, the test was considered inconclusive and would be run again. With the FDA's blessing, the CDC distributed the tests — with workaround instructions — to public health labs.

Kelly Wroblewski, director of infectious diseases at the Association of Public Health Laboratories, said the results of the tests have not been ambiguous, and there is no need to discard the tests.

Still, the agency has asked a different manufacturer to remake the faulty component so that 1.2 million improved tests will be available soon, Daskalakis said. Some of the updated tests are already in stock at the CDC, but the FDA hasn't yet signed off on their use. Daskalakis declined to name the manufacturers.

Meanwhile, the outbreak has grown. Farmworkers continue to lack information about the virus and gear to protect them from it. Rural clinics may miss cases if they don't catch a person's connection to a farm and notify health officials rather than their usual diagnostic testing laboratories.

Those clinical labs remain unauthorized to test for the bird flu. Several of those labs have spent months working through analyses and red tape so that they can run the CDC's tests. As part of the licensing process, the CDC alerted them to the workaround with the current test, too.

But outside select circles, the news was largely overlooked. “I'm totally surprised by this,” Alex Greninger, assistant director of the University of Washington Clinical Virology Laboratory, told KFF Health News this week. Greninger's lab is developing its own test and has been trying to obtain CDC test kits to evaluate.

“It's not a red alarm,” he said, but he's worried that as the CDC and the FDA spend months developing and evaluating an updated test, the only one available relies on a single component. If the genetic code underlying that fragment of the H5 protein mutates, the test could give false results.

It's not uncommon for academic and commercial diagnostic labs to make mistakes and catch them during quality control checks, as the CDC did. Still, this isn't the agency's first mishap. In 2016, well before the covid debacle, CDC officials for months directed public health labs to use a Zika test that failed about a third of the time.

The CDC caught and worked to remediate the situation far more quickly and effectively in this case. Nonetheless, the mishap raises concern. Michael Mina, chief science officer of the telemedicine company eMed.com, said diagnostic companies may be better suited to the task.

“It's a reminder that CDC is not a robust manufacturer of tests” and lacks the resources that industry can marshal for their production, Mina said. “We do not ask CDC to make vaccines and pharmaceuticals, and we do not ask the Pentagon to manufacture missiles.”

The CDC has licensed its updated test design to at least seven clinical diagnostic labs. Such labs are the foundation of testing in the U.S. But none have FDA clearance to use them.

Diagnostic labs are developing their own tests, too. But that has been slow-going. One reason is the lack of guaranteed sales. Another is regulatory uncertainty. Recent FDA guidance could make it harder for nongovernmental laboratories to issue new tests in the early phase of pandemics, said Susan Van Meter, president of the American Clinical Laboratory Association, in a July 1 letter to the FDA.

Transparency is also critical, scientists said. Benjamin Pinsky, medical director of the clinical virology laboratory at Stanford University, said as a public agency the CDC should make its protocol — its recipe for making the test — easily accessible online.

The World Health Organization does so for its bird flu tests, and with that information in hand, Pinsky's lab has developed an H5 bird flu test suited to the strain circulating this year in the U.S. The lab published its approach this month but doesn't have FDA authorization for its broad use.

The CDC's test recipe is available in a published patent, Daskalakis said.

“We have made sure that tests are out there, and that they work,” he added.

As the CDC came under fire at the July 23 congressional hearing, Daniel Jernigan, director of the CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, noted that testing is just one tool. The agency needs money for another promising area — looking for the virus in wastewater. Its current program uses supplemental funds, he said: “It is not in the current budget and will go away without additional funding.”

——————————
By: Arthur Allen and Amy Maxmen
Title: The CDC's Test for Bird Flu Works, but It Has Issues
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/article/bird-flu-test-cdc-flaws/
Published Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Post Views: 27

Kaiser Health News

KFF Health News’ ‘What the Health?’: Harris in the Spotlight

Published

1 day ago

July 25, 2024

Staff Editor

Thu, 25 Jul 2024 18:45:00 +0000

The Host

Julie Rovner
KFF Health News

@jrovner

Read Julie's stories.

Julie Rovner is chief Washington correspondent and host of KFF Health News' weekly health policy news podcast, “What the Health?” A noted expert on health policy issues, Julie is the author of the critically praised reference book “Health Care Politics and Policy A to Z,” now in its third edition.

As Vice President Kamala Harris appears poised to become the Democratic Party's presidential nominee, health policy in general and reproductive health issues in particular are likely to have a higher profile. Harris has long been the Biden administration's point person on abortion rights and reproductive health and was active on other health issues while serving as California's attorney general.

Meanwhile, Congress is back for a brief session between presidential conventions, but efforts in the GOP-led House to pass the annual spending bills, due by Oct. 1, have run into the usual roadblocks over abortion-related issues.

This week's panelists are Julie Rovner of KFF Health News, Stephanie Armour of KFF Health News, Rachel Cohrs Zhang of Stat, and Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico.

Panelists

Stephanie Armour
KFF Health News

@StephArmour1

Read Stephanie's stories.

Rachel Cohrs Zhang
Stat News

@rachelcohrs

Read Rachel's stories.

Alice Miranda Ollstein
Politico

@AliceOllstein

Read Alice's stories.

Among the takeaways from this week's episode:

President Joe Biden's decision to drop out of the presidential race has turned attention to his likely successor on the Democratic ticket, Vice President Kamala Harris. At this late hour in the campaign, she is expected to adopt Biden's health policies, though many anticipate she'll take a firmer stance on restoring Roe v. Wade. And while abortion rights supporters are enthusiastic about Harris' candidacy, opponents are eager to frame her views as extreme.
As he transitions from incumbent candidate to outgoing president, Biden is working to frame his legacy, including on health policy. The president has expressed pride that his signature domestic achievement, the Inflation Reduction Act, took on the pharmaceutical industry, including by forcing the makers of the most expensive drugs into negotiations with Medicare. Yet, as with the Affordable Care Act's delayed implementation and results, most Americans have yet to see the IRA's potential effect on drug prices.
Lawmakers continue to be hung up on federal government spending, leaving appropriations work undone as they prepare to leave for summer recess. Fights over abortion are, once again, gumming up the works.
In abortion news, Iowa's six-week limit is scheduled to take effect next week, causing rippling problems of abortion access throughout the region. In Louisiana, which added the two drugs used in medication abortions to its list of controlled substances, doctors are having difficulty using the pills for other indications. And doctors who oppose abortion are pushing higher-risk procedures, like cesarean sections, in lieu of pregnancy termination when the mother's life is in danger — as states with strict bans, like Texas and Louisiana, are reporting a rise in the use of surgeries, including hysterectomies, to end pregnancies.
The Government Accountability Office reports that many states incorrectly removed hundreds of thousands of eligible people from the Medicaid rolls during the “unwinding” of the covid-19 public health emergency's coverage protections. The Biden administration has been reluctant to call out those states publicly in an attempt to keep the process as apolitical as possible.

Also this week, Rovner interviews Anthony Wright, the new executive director of the consumer health advocacy group Families USA. Wright spent the past two decades in California, working with, among others, now-Vice President Kamala Harris on various health issues.

Plus, for “extra credit,” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too:

Julie Rovner: NPR's “A Study Finds That Dogs Can Smell Your Stress — And Make Decisions Accordingly,” by Rachel Treisman.

Alice Miranda Ollstein: Stat's “A Pricey Gilead HIV Drug Could Be Made for Dramatically Less Than the Company Charges,” by Ed Silverman, and Politico's “Federal HIV Program Set To Wind Down,” by Alice Miranda Ollstein and David Lim.

Stephanie Armour: Vox's “Free Medical School Won't Solve the Doctor Shortage,” by Dylan Scott.

Rachel Cohrs Zhang: Stat's “How UnitedHealth Harnesses Its Physician Empire To Squeeze Profits out of Patients,” by Bob Herman, Tara Bannow, Casey Ross, and Lizzy Lawrence.

Also mentioned on this week's podcast:

States Newsroom's “Anti-Abortion Researchers Back Riskier Procedures When Pregnancy Termination Is Needed, Experts Say,” by Sofia Resnick.
KFF Health News' “Louisiana Reclassifies Drugs Used in Abortions as Controlled Dangerous Substances,” by Rosemary Westwood, WWNO.
The New York Times' “Biden and Georgia Are Waging a Fight Over Medicaid and the Future of Obamacare,” by Noah Weiland.

Credits

Francis Ying
Audio producer

Emmarie Huetteman
Editor

To hear all our podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to KFF Health News' “What the Health?” on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

USE OUR CONTENT

This story can be republished for free (details).

——————————
Title: KFF Health News' ‘What the Health?': Harris in the Spotlight
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/podcast/what-the-health-357-kamala-harris-campaign-health-policy-july-25-2024/
Published Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 18:45:00 +0000

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/montana-looks-to-become-latest-state-to-boost-nonprofit-hospital-oversight/

Post Views: 29