Religious business owners and corporations have filed half the lawsuits over health reform mandate to cover contraception

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Some religious business owners are filing suit against the government, saying the health-reform law violates the constitutional freedom of religion by mandating employee contraceptive and abortion-inducing drug coverage; the lawsuits are expected to land in the U.S. Supreme Court, and a case filed by Hobby Lobby is the first of this kind to be heard by a federal appeals court.

Challenges to the mandate that will require businesses with more than 50 employees to provide no-cost coverage of all contraceptives, sterilization procedures, plus education and counseling, are not just coming from Catholic entities with a religious, moral objection to contraception. About half of the cases have been filed by corporations, reports Robert Barnes of The Washington Post.

There are now 60 cases involving 190 individuals representing hospitals, universities, businesses, schools and people opposed to the mandate, says the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. The Becket Fund maps the cases, as shown below; for the interactive version, click here.

Since the law mandates contraceptive coverage, groups such as Catholic bishops have accused the Obama administration of waging war on religious liberty, reports Barnes. In February, the administration announced an exemption for faith-based organizations from covering employees' contraception costs because the conceptions would be covered by a third party. Self-insured organizations like Catholic schools sued, arguing that the accommodation would not apply to them because there is no third-party insurer to cover contraception. But those cases have been dismissed in court because such organizations are given a one-year grace period to comply with the mandate, reports Laura Bassett of the Huffington Post.

Businesses don't qualify for faith-based exemption from mandates

Hobby Lobby's David and Barbara Green

Business do not meet the new exemption either, because they are not religious organizations. However, some businesses like Hobby Lobby, which was founded and is still owned by an evangelical Christian family that believes life begins at conception and already covers contraceptives through existing employee health coverage, are fighting the law's mandate to cover abortion-inducing drugs or devices, like morning-after and week-after pills.

"They ought to be able — just like a church, just like a charity — to have the right to opt out of a provision that infringes on their religious beliefs," said Kyle Duncan, who argued the case Thursday before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of the Green family, and a sister company, Christian booksellers Mardel Inc, reports The Associated Press.

Other suits have been filed by religious business owners of diverse enterprises, from a company that makes wooden cabinets to owners of Panera Bread restaurants, reports Barnes, but all the cases base their arguments on the First Amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion and on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The Hobby Lobby case also specifies that the mandate violates freedom of speech and the Administrative Procedure Act because it was imposed without prior notice or sufficient time for public comment.

In the early stages of litigation, lower courts have split on the issue. Some have rejected Hobby Lobby's request for an exemption to the mandate, and requests by other businesses for a temporary injunction, saying for-profit businesses aren't covered by the faith-based exemption. However, courts in St. Louis and the Seventh Circuit have granted temporary injunctions. (Read more)

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Some religious business owners are filing suit against the government, saying the health-reform law violates the constitutional freedom of religion by mandating employee contraceptive and abortion-inducing drug coverage; the lawsuits are expected to land in the U.S. Supreme Court, and a case filed by Hobby Lobby is the first of this kind to be heard by a federal appeals court.

Challenges to the mandate that will require businesses with more than 50 employees to provide no-cost coverage of all contraceptives, sterilization procedures, plus education and counseling, are not just coming from Catholic entities with a religious, moral objection to contraception. About half of the cases have been filed by corporations, reports Robert Barnes of The Washington Post.

There are now 60 cases involving 190 individuals representing hospitals, universities, businesses, schools and people opposed to the mandate, says the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. The Becket Fund maps the cases, as shown below; for the interactive version, click here.

Since the law mandates contraceptive coverage, groups such as Catholic bishops have accused the Obama administration of waging war on religious liberty, reports Barnes. In February, the administration announced an exemption for faith-based organizations from covering employees' contraception costs because the conceptions would be covered by a third party. Self-insured organizations like Catholic schools sued, arguing that the accommodation would not apply to them because there is no third-party insurer to cover contraception. But those cases have been dismissed in court because such organizations are given a one-year grace period to comply with the mandate, reports Laura Bassett of the Huffington Post.

Businesses don't qualify for faith-based exemption from mandates

Hobby Lobby's David and Barbara Green

Business do not meet the new exemption either, because they are not religious organizations. However, some businesses like Hobby Lobby, which was founded and is still owned by an evangelical Christian family that believes life begins at conception and already covers contraceptives through existing employee health coverage, are fighting the law's mandate to cover abortion-inducing drugs or devices, like morning-after and week-after pills.

"They ought to be able — just like a church, just like a charity — to have the right to opt out of a provision that infringes on their religious beliefs," said Kyle Duncan, who argued the case Thursday before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of the Green family, and a sister company, Christian booksellers Mardel Inc, reports The Associated Press.

Other suits have been filed by religious business owners of diverse enterprises, from a company that makes wooden cabinets to owners of Panera Bread restaurants, reports Barnes, but all the cases base their arguments on the First Amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion and on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. The Hobby Lobby case also specifies that the mandate violates freedom of speech and the Administrative Procedure Act because it was imposed without prior notice or sufficient time for public comment.

In the early stages of litigation, lower courts have split on the issue. Some have rejected Hobby Lobby's request for an exemption to the mandate, and requests by other businesses for a temporary injunction, saying for-profit businesses aren't covered by the faith-based exemption. However, courts in St. Louis and the Seventh Circuit have granted temporary injunctions. (Read more)

Read More

Health insurers could exclude one in four Americans from coverage because they don't have bank accounts

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. graphic

A new study says if corrective action isn't taken, health-insurance companies could exclude 27 percent of qualifying Americans now eligible for premium-assistance tax credits under the health-reform law because they plan to require customers to pay premiums automatically through a bank account. More than 1 in 4 of these people do not have a bank account.

If insurance companies won't do business with them, that will undermine efforts to expand health coverage and equalize access to health care, denying coverage to the more than 8 million "unbanked" Americans, says the report from tax firm Jackson Hewitt.

Unbanked households are those that lack any kind of deposit account, checking or savings, at an insured depository institution, so requiring a checking account for coverage could also worsen the existing disparities in both health-care access and health status of minority groups. African Americans and Hispanics are over 40 percent more likely than whites to be "unbanked," says the report.

Most health plans accept a credit card for the first month’s premium payment and thereafter require monthly payment from a checking account. An estimated 30 percent of U.S. households are "unbanked" or underbanked, with the highest rates among non-Asian minorities and lower-income, younger and unemployed households; underbanked households hold a bank account but also rely on alternative financial services, and one in five households use such check-cashing stores and money lenders instead of a traditional bank, says the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

This all goes against the basic ideals behind the health care law's "comprehensive reforms that improve access to affordable health coverage for everyone and protect consumers from abusive insurance company practices. The law allows all Americans to make health insurance choices that work for them while guaranteeing access to care for our most vulnerable, and provides new ways to bring down costs and improve quality of care," says the White House website.

Law doesn't protect Americans from discrimination

Federal officials are wary taking action that may discourage insurance companies from participating in the exchanges, current and former state health officers who have pressed the U.S Department of Health and Human Services for a ruling told Varney.

“I think there is a dawning awareness that this is a large problem,” Brian Haile told Varney; Haile is senior vice president for health policy at Jackson Hewitt Tax Service and has called on federal official to set a uniform standard requiring all insurers to accept all forms of payment.

Neither the health law nor other laws require insurance companies to accept all forms of payment, says Sarah Varney of Kaiser Health News. Alternative forms of payment include credit cards or pre-paid debit cards that people without bank accounts often use, and although health insurance companies are evaluating these options, they are not required to do so, reports Varney.

“I’ve not seen any specific guidance that says you have to be able to accept these types of payments,” Ray Smithberger, Cigna’s general manager of individual and family plans, told Sarah Kliff of The Washington Post.

Insurance carriers take a risk by accepting credit cards and pre-paid debit cards because transaction fees can run as high as 4 percent and pre-paid cards are popular among low-wage workers, Haile told Varney. 

“If you accept re-loadable debit cards, are you in fact getting folks with lower health status?” Haile told Varney. “That’s a real risk when you’re in the insurance business. So you can’t be the only one picking up those risks.”

The Jackson Hewitt report calls for immediate action by federal policy makers to ensure insurers cannot discriminate against the 'unbanked' through their payment acceptance policies by creating a system-wide rule requiring all forms of payment must be accepted.

"Given the dilemma presented to insurance companies by the strong financial incentives to discourage non-bank payment mechanisms, insurers are unlikely to resolve this issue without federal action," says the report.

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. graphic

A new study says if corrective action isn't taken, health-insurance companies could exclude 27 percent of qualifying Americans now eligible for premium-assistance tax credits under the health-reform law because they plan to require customers to pay premiums automatically through a bank account. More than 1 in 4 of these people do not have a bank account.

If insurance companies won't do business with them, that will undermine efforts to expand health coverage and equalize access to health care, denying coverage to the more than 8 million "unbanked" Americans, says the report from tax firm Jackson Hewitt.

Unbanked households are those that lack any kind of deposit account, checking or savings, at an insured depository institution, so requiring a checking account for coverage could also worsen the existing disparities in both health-care access and health status of minority groups. African Americans and Hispanics are over 40 percent more likely than whites to be "unbanked," says the report.

Most health plans accept a credit card for the first month’s premium payment and thereafter require monthly payment from a checking account. An estimated 30 percent of U.S. households are "unbanked" or underbanked, with the highest rates among non-Asian minorities and lower-income, younger and unemployed households; underbanked households hold a bank account but also rely on alternative financial services, and one in five households use such check-cashing stores and money lenders instead of a traditional bank, says the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

This all goes against the basic ideals behind the health care law's "comprehensive reforms that improve access to affordable health coverage for everyone and protect consumers from abusive insurance company practices. The law allows all Americans to make health insurance choices that work for them while guaranteeing access to care for our most vulnerable, and provides new ways to bring down costs and improve quality of care," says the White House website.

Law doesn't protect Americans from discrimination

Federal officials are wary taking action that may discourage insurance companies from participating in the exchanges, current and former state health officers who have pressed the U.S Department of Health and Human Services for a ruling told Varney.

“I think there is a dawning awareness that this is a large problem,” Brian Haile told Varney; Haile is senior vice president for health policy at Jackson Hewitt Tax Service and has called on federal official to set a uniform standard requiring all insurers to accept all forms of payment.

Neither the health law nor other laws require insurance companies to accept all forms of payment, says Sarah Varney of Kaiser Health News. Alternative forms of payment include credit cards or pre-paid debit cards that people without bank accounts often use, and although health insurance companies are evaluating these options, they are not required to do so, reports Varney.

“I’ve not seen any specific guidance that says you have to be able to accept these types of payments,” Ray Smithberger, Cigna’s general manager of individual and family plans, told Sarah Kliff of The Washington Post.

Insurance carriers take a risk by accepting credit cards and pre-paid debit cards because transaction fees can run as high as 4 percent and pre-paid cards are popular among low-wage workers, Haile told Varney. 

“If you accept re-loadable debit cards, are you in fact getting folks with lower health status?” Haile told Varney. “That’s a real risk when you’re in the insurance business. So you can’t be the only one picking up those risks.”

The Jackson Hewitt report calls for immediate action by federal policy makers to ensure insurers cannot discriminate against the 'unbanked' through their payment acceptance policies by creating a system-wide rule requiring all forms of payment must be accepted.

"Given the dilemma presented to insurance companies by the strong financial incentives to discourage non-bank payment mechanisms, insurers are unlikely to resolve this issue without federal action," says the report.

Read More

Ky. is already short of doctors, dentists; how will its health-care system handle expansion of Medicaid and private insurance?

By Molly Burchett and Al Cross
Kentucky Health News

In the wake of Gov. Steve Beshear’s recent decision to expand Medicaid under federal health reform, there is concern that Kentucky's health-care system will not be able to care for the newly insured.

Health reform means that an estimated 308,000 new Kentuckians will qualify for Medicaid, and 332,000 more will qualify for subsidies to buy private insurance through the state insurance exchange that will start taking enrollments Oct. 1.

But Kentucky already has a health care provider shortage, especially in rural areas. A study for the state estimates that it needs 3,790 more doctors just to meet current demand, to say nothing of what will be needed to care for those who haven't been a regular part of the health-care system, reports Laura Ungar of The Courier-Journal.

The report by Deloitte Consulting made 11 recommendations, including authority for nurse practitioners to prescribe less risky drugs without a written agreement with a doctor, and one that would be even more controversial, putting limits on medical malpractice awards, said Ungar.

The report also recommended expanding and increasing Medicaid reimbursements in rural areas, to encourage more physicians to take Medicaid patients.

It did not mention complaints by health-care  providers about getting paid by the managed-care Medicaid system that the state began in November 2011; Gov. Steve Beshear said when he announced Medicaid expansion that those problems are being worked out.

"Consultants said 61 percent of the 3,790 'full-time equivalent' physicians needed (which includes primary care doctors and specialists) were in rural counties," reports Ungar. Jonathan Felix of Deloitte said, “Primary care, dental care and behavioral health are all big needs in the state.”

The report said the state needed 183 more primary-care doctors, even before Medicaid expansion, but a 2012 Kentucky Physician Workforce Needs Assessment report by the University of Kentucky said the state needs 557 more primary-care physicians and 1,655 more total physicians to meet the national ratios for physicians to population.

The consultants said the state already needs 612 more dentists. It now has 1,711.

Complicated provider shortage problem, no easy answer

About 192 federally identified areas in Kentucky — including 47 counties — have shortages of health professionals, Ungar reports. Kentucky counties who will have the most non-elderly residents eligible for Medicaid often have fewer primary-care doctors per person, according to data analyzed by The Courier-Journal. Ungar notes that Casey County, for example, ranks in the bottom third for doctors per capita, but it has the highest portion of newly eligible residents at 13.5 percent.

“We can’t grow physicians fast enough to meet the need, in the rural areas especially,” Susan Zepeda, president and chief executive officer for the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, told Ungar.

Nationally, there is a primary-care shortage, partly because such doctors make less money than most, and low reimbursement rates exacerbate that. A 2012 study in the journal Health Affairs said 21 percent of office-based physicians in Kentucky did not accept new Medicaid patients in 2011, Ungar notes.

The health reform law will raise the Medicaid fees to match what Medicare pays primary-care doctors, but only for two years. Kentucky's Medicare rates are about 72 percent of the Medicare rates, compared to a national average of 59 percent, says an Urban Institute study. But the time limit leaves some practitioners wary.

“If I choose to increase the number of Medicaid patients, and two years down the road that payment drops back to two-thirds, all of a sudden I’m going to have an awful lot of trouble keeping my doors open,” Reid Blackwelder, a family practitioner and incoming president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, told Michael Ollove of Stateline. 

A report last year by the non-partisan Center for Studying Health System Change said the temporary nature of the pay raise could limit its effectiveness, particularly in Kentucky and other states that are expecting the largest percentage increases in Medicaid enrollees and that have low numbers of primary-care physicians.

“I’m not sure who’s going to pick up all those patients into their practices,” Julianne Ewen, a nurse practitioner in Lexington and president of the Kentucky Coalition of Nurse Practitioners and Nurse Midwives, told Ungar. Legislation to let nurse practitioners prescribe non-scheduled drugs without a doctor agreement failed in the state Senate this year.

While some policy analysts have touted nurse practitioners as a solution to the rural primary-care shortage because they often provide primary care in rural and isolated areas that do not have doctors nearby, they would not be covered by the two-year reimbursement increase. Ewen said the reimbursement is only $23 for a lower-level visit by an established patient.

A possible long-term solution includes greater reliance on community health centers, some say. And hospital officials said they plan to continue expanding primary care and employ telemedicine. Ruth Brinkley, president and chief executive officer of KentuckyOne Health, said her system is looking to open new primary care offices and hire more staff.

Dr. David Dunn, vice president for health affairs at the University of Louisville, said the university is increasing physician training in such areas as family medicine and geriatrics and using funds from its new partner, KentuckyOne, to expand the nursing work force with professionals, such as advanced nurse practitioners.

Health providers and advocates agree that getting more people insured should produce a healthier population in the end. But they said much remains unknown, including how many of those eligible for coverage under health reform will sign up for it. The state estimates that 188,000 of the 308,000 newly eligible will enroll, but some think that estimate is low.

By Molly Burchett and Al Cross
Kentucky Health News

In the wake of Gov. Steve Beshear’s recent decision to expand Medicaid under federal health reform, there is concern that Kentucky's health-care system will not be able to care for the newly insured.

Health reform means that an estimated 308,000 new Kentuckians will qualify for Medicaid, and 332,000 more will qualify for subsidies to buy private insurance through the state insurance exchange that will start taking enrollments Oct. 1.

But Kentucky already has a health care provider shortage, especially in rural areas. A study for the state estimates that it needs 3,790 more doctors just to meet current demand, to say nothing of what will be needed to care for those who haven't been a regular part of the health-care system, reports Laura Ungar of The Courier-Journal.

The report by Deloitte Consulting made 11 recommendations, including authority for nurse practitioners to prescribe less risky drugs without a written agreement with a doctor, and one that would be even more controversial, putting limits on medical malpractice awards, said Ungar.

The report also recommended expanding and increasing Medicaid reimbursements in rural areas, to encourage more physicians to take Medicaid patients.

It did not mention complaints by health-care  providers about getting paid by the managed-care Medicaid system that the state began in November 2011; Gov. Steve Beshear said when he announced Medicaid expansion that those problems are being worked out.

"Consultants said 61 percent of the 3,790 'full-time equivalent' physicians needed (which includes primary care doctors and specialists) were in rural counties," reports Ungar. Jonathan Felix of Deloitte said, “Primary care, dental care and behavioral health are all big needs in the state.”

The report said the state needed 183 more primary-care doctors, even before Medicaid expansion, but a 2012 Kentucky Physician Workforce Needs Assessment report by the University of Kentucky said the state needs 557 more primary-care physicians and 1,655 more total physicians to meet the national ratios for physicians to population.

The consultants said the state already needs 612 more dentists. It now has 1,711.

Complicated provider shortage problem, no easy answer

About 192 federally identified areas in Kentucky — including 47 counties — have shortages of health professionals, Ungar reports. Kentucky counties who will have the most non-elderly residents eligible for Medicaid often have fewer primary-care doctors per person, according to data analyzed by The Courier-Journal. Ungar notes that Casey County, for example, ranks in the bottom third for doctors per capita, but it has the highest portion of newly eligible residents at 13.5 percent.

“We can’t grow physicians fast enough to meet the need, in the rural areas especially,” Susan Zepeda, president and chief executive officer for the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, told Ungar.

Nationally, there is a primary-care shortage, partly because such doctors make less money than most, and low reimbursement rates exacerbate that. A 2012 study in the journal Health Affairs said 21 percent of office-based physicians in Kentucky did not accept new Medicaid patients in 2011, Ungar notes.

The health reform law will raise the Medicaid fees to match what Medicare pays primary-care doctors, but only for two years. Kentucky's Medicare rates are about 72 percent of the Medicare rates, compared to a national average of 59 percent, says an Urban Institute study. But the time limit leaves some practitioners wary.

“If I choose to increase the number of Medicaid patients, and two years down the road that payment drops back to two-thirds, all of a sudden I’m going to have an awful lot of trouble keeping my doors open,” Reid Blackwelder, a family practitioner and incoming president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, told Michael Ollove of Stateline. 

A report last year by the non-partisan Center for Studying Health System Change said the temporary nature of the pay raise could limit its effectiveness, particularly in Kentucky and other states that are expecting the largest percentage increases in Medicaid enrollees and that have low numbers of primary-care physicians.

“I’m not sure who’s going to pick up all those patients into their practices,” Julianne Ewen, a nurse practitioner in Lexington and president of the Kentucky Coalition of Nurse Practitioners and Nurse Midwives, told Ungar. Legislation to let nurse practitioners prescribe non-scheduled drugs without a doctor agreement failed in the state Senate this year.

While some policy analysts have touted nurse practitioners as a solution to the rural primary-care shortage because they often provide primary care in rural and isolated areas that do not have doctors nearby, they would not be covered by the two-year reimbursement increase. Ewen said the reimbursement is only $23 for a lower-level visit by an established patient.

A possible long-term solution includes greater reliance on community health centers, some say. And hospital officials said they plan to continue expanding primary care and employ telemedicine. Ruth Brinkley, president and chief executive officer of KentuckyOne Health, said her system is looking to open new primary care offices and hire more staff.

Dr. David Dunn, vice president for health affairs at the University of Louisville, said the university is increasing physician training in such areas as family medicine and geriatrics and using funds from its new partner, KentuckyOne, to expand the nursing work force with professionals, such as advanced nurse practitioners.

Health providers and advocates agree that getting more people insured should produce a healthier population in the end. But they said much remains unknown, including how many of those eligible for coverage under health reform will sign up for it. The state estimates that 188,000 of the 308,000 newly eligible will enroll, but some think that estimate is low.

Read More

Beshear announces launch of Kynect, the state's new online shop for health insurance; open enrollment starts Oct. 1

Gov. Steve Beshear has announced the launch of Kentucky’s Healthcare Connection, which is referred to as Kynect and is Kentucky's one-stop onlineshop for the state's new health insurance exchange.

Beginning next year, most Americans will be required to have health insurance, and Kynect is designed to help an estimated 640,000 uninsured Kentuckians get coverage through private insurance plans, Medicaid or the Kentucky Children’s Health Insurance Program. The online service is also aimed to promote public education and awareness about the health benefit exchange, says a recent press release.

“When I issued an executive order last year creating a state-based health benefit exchange, I did so to ensure that our health benefit exchange would be designed to best meet the unique needs of Kentuckians,” Beshear said. “Individuals, families and small businesses will be able to use kynect for one-stop shopping to find health coverage and determine if they are eligible for payment assistance or tax credits to help cover costs.”

During open enrollment, which begins Oct. 1, Kentuckians and small businesses can compare and select health insurance plans using the Kynect website, a toll-free contact center, a mail-in application or in person, says the release. People can also use the website to find out if they qualify for payment assistance and special discounts on deductibles, co-pays and co-insurance.

For example, the website indicates that a family of four making $48,000 will receive a tax credit that can be used to pay insurance premiums, which is estimated to be $252 per month, in addition to government subsidies for medical care. A family of four making $80,000 will a receive tax credit too, and insurance premiums are estimated to be $634 per month. Small businesses can also use the website to see if they qualify for specific tax credits (Click here for a PDF fact sheet about payment assistance)

“Starting today, we are undertaking a major education and awareness campaign to ensure that all uninsured Kentuckians understand how Kynect can help them and their families find affordable health coverage,” said Audrey Haynes, secretary for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, which will oversee Kynect along with the Kentucky Office of the Health Benefit Exchange.

Beshear created the health exchange by an executive order in July 2012. A recent lawsuit alleges this action was not authorized and should first be approved by the General Assembly. To date, Kentucky has received about $250 million in federal grants to cover the initial costs of exchange, but the state will be responsible for all funding for the exchange beginning in 2015. Kentuckians can visit the service's website or watch the video below to learn more about the program. 

Gov. Steve Beshear has announced the launch of Kentucky’s Healthcare Connection, which is referred to as Kynect and is Kentucky's one-stop onlineshop for the state's new health insurance exchange.

Beginning next year, most Americans will be required to have health insurance, and Kynect is designed to help an estimated 640,000 uninsured Kentuckians get coverage through private insurance plans, Medicaid or the Kentucky Children’s Health Insurance Program. The online service is also aimed to promote public education and awareness about the health benefit exchange, says a recent press release.

“When I issued an executive order last year creating a state-based health benefit exchange, I did so to ensure that our health benefit exchange would be designed to best meet the unique needs of Kentuckians,” Beshear said. “Individuals, families and small businesses will be able to use kynect for one-stop shopping to find health coverage and determine if they are eligible for payment assistance or tax credits to help cover costs.”

During open enrollment, which begins Oct. 1, Kentuckians and small businesses can compare and select health insurance plans using the Kynect website, a toll-free contact center, a mail-in application or in person, says the release. People can also use the website to find out if they qualify for payment assistance and special discounts on deductibles, co-pays and co-insurance.

For example, the website indicates that a family of four making $48,000 will receive a tax credit that can be used to pay insurance premiums, which is estimated to be $252 per month, in addition to government subsidies for medical care. A family of four making $80,000 will a receive tax credit too, and insurance premiums are estimated to be $634 per month. Small businesses can also use the website to see if they qualify for specific tax credits (Click here for a PDF fact sheet about payment assistance)

“Starting today, we are undertaking a major education and awareness campaign to ensure that all uninsured Kentuckians understand how Kynect can help them and their families find affordable health coverage,” said Audrey Haynes, secretary for the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, which will oversee Kynect along with the Kentucky Office of the Health Benefit Exchange.

Beshear created the health exchange by an executive order in July 2012. A recent lawsuit alleges this action was not authorized and should first be approved by the General Assembly. To date, Kentucky has received about $250 million in federal grants to cover the initial costs of exchange, but the state will be responsible for all funding for the exchange beginning in 2015. Kentuckians can visit the service's website or watch the video below to learn more about the program. 

Read More

Medicaid expansion could change Kentucky's course, big time

NEWS ANALYSIS

By Al Cross

Kentucky Health News

"Today we change the course of Kentucky's history."

It is not often that a public official can say such a thing with a large measure of credibility, but Gov. Steve Beshear legitimately raised that hope Thursday, as he announced that he would expand Kentucky's Medicaid program under federal health reform.

Beshear with graph predicting positive impact on budget

If Beshear's vision is fulfilled, Kentucky will no longer have one of the unhealthiest populations of any state, a change that will make it more attractive to employers, and any Kentuckian who wants health insurance will be able to get it.

It is in large measure the realization, in the state where all President Harry Truman's grandparents were born, of his 68-year-old dream of national health insurance. The statue of Truman's vice president, Alben Barkley of Paducah, seemed to shine a little more brightly than usual in the Capitol rotunda as the press-conference crowd dispersed.

But this is a project with many moving parts -- billions of dollars, thousands of health-care providers, hundreds of thousands of Medicaid beneficiaries, and scores of political and bureaucratic decisions -- and much could go wrong.

Skeptics point to the problems with the managed-care Medicaid system that Beshear implemented too hurriedly, apparently to avoid complicating his November 2011 re-election, and argue that the program needs fixing before adding 300,000 new enrollees to the 825,000 already on the rolls. Beshear says he's tackling the problems, the program is "working pretty well" and the managed-care companies can handle the influx.

The skeptics also question whether the state can afford the match for the federal funds. "Broad and vague anxieties," Beshear called them, and he came armed with two studies concluding that expansion would actually gain the state money -- mainly because of the billions it will send to the state's health-care providers, creating more jobs, but also because many of the 300,000 or so newly eligible people are not expected to enroll, based on a Price Waterhouse Coopers study drawing on research by the Congressional Budget Office.

University of Louisville research

Preliminary estimates were that expansion would add 400,000 Kentuckians to the Medicaid rolls. However, the study estimated that only 308,000 will become eligible and that only 188,000 will enroll, thus costing the state much less than some expected when it has to match federal funds beginning in January 2017. The initial match will be 5 percent, rising to 10 percent in 2020. The estimated cost for the newly eligible in fiscal 2020-21 is $151 million, in a state budget that is likely to exceed $10 billion. (The state's current share of Medicaid costs, 29.5 percent, is about $1.5 billion a year.)

Those are just estimates. "I believe reality will dwarf those numbers on the spending side," Tea Party activist David Adams, who says he plans to challenge the plan in court, told reporters. But for the time being at least, Beshear has the numbers on his side, and he said they are "very conservative."

The governor said opponents of the plan "fall back on national politics" and say expansion means that Kentucky, a state that President Obama lost big both times, will be "supporting Obamacare. To them I say, 'Get over it.' . . . I'm going to do what's best for Kentucky's people, period." Asked why so many governors have rejected expansion, he said it was mostly "partisan politics."

Conservative columnist John David Dyche cites an Oregon study saying Medicaid is ineffective, but a Harvard School of Public Health study in three other states showed that expansion of Medicaid improves health and saves lives.

Beshear said the expansion, along with health insurance and subsidies available through a state-run exchange that is also part of health reform, would give the state a healthier workforce because studies show that people with health insurance are less likely to skip exams and let health conditions worsen and become costlier and more difficult to treat. "The lack of early care is one reason that Kentucky's health picture is so horrendous," he said.

Kentucky's workforce is one of the nation's least healthy, and the state has a disproportionate number of working-age people who are not in the workforce because of health problems. The state ranks first in smoking, cancer deaths and preventable hospitalizations; second in heart disease and poor physical-health days; third in heart attacks and poor mental-health days; and in the top 10 in diabetes,  cholesterol and sedentary lifestyles. That hurts the state's image as well as its economy, Beshear said. "There will be a huge economic effect for a healthier Kentucky."

He said most of the newly eligible people are not "freeloaders asking for a handout," but people who are working at jobs without health insurance. He said another 332,000 Kentuckians will get insurance through the state exchange, 276,000 of them with subsidies available to people with incomes up to 400 percent of the poverty level. Without Medicaid expansion, he said, 206,000 would not be eligible for Medicaid or a subsidy, and "We cannot leave those people stranded."

The health-reform law tried to force states into expanding Medicaid, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the states should make the choice without fear of financial penalties. The law calls for expansion to cover people under 65 in households up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level -- currently $15,856 for an individual or $32,499 for a family of four.

Republicans can do little to stop the expansion. They control the state Senate, but Medicaid eligibility and benefit decisions belong to the executive branch, and even if a bipartisan legislative committee were to block the implementing regulations, Beshear could override it.

Or perhaps we should say he would override it. Emotional at times, Beshear called the move "the single most important decision of our lifetime for improving the health of Kentuckians" but said it was easy to make. As a governor who has failed to win his main campaign promise, expanded gambling, and has had relatively little money to spend because of the Great Recession, this is likely to be his largest legacy.

For details and background from the governor's office, click here. For Beshear's YouTube commentary on the issue, click here.

NEWS ANALYSIS

By Al Cross

Kentucky Health News

"Today we change the course of Kentucky's history."

It is not often that a public official can say such a thing with a large measure of credibility, but Gov. Steve Beshear legitimately raised that hope Thursday, as he announced that he would expand Kentucky's Medicaid program under federal health reform.

Beshear with graph predicting positive impact on budget

If Beshear's vision is fulfilled, Kentucky will no longer have one of the unhealthiest populations of any state, a change that will make it more attractive to employers, and any Kentuckian who wants health insurance will be able to get it.

It is in large measure the realization, in the state where all President Harry Truman's grandparents were born, of his 68-year-old dream of national health insurance. The statue of Truman's vice president, Alben Barkley of Paducah, seemed to shine a little more brightly than usual in the Capitol rotunda as the press-conference crowd dispersed.

But this is a project with many moving parts -- billions of dollars, thousands of health-care providers, hundreds of thousands of Medicaid beneficiaries, and scores of political and bureaucratic decisions -- and much could go wrong.

Skeptics point to the problems with the managed-care Medicaid system that Beshear implemented too hurriedly, apparently to avoid complicating his November 2011 re-election, and argue that the program needs fixing before adding 300,000 new enrollees to the 825,000 already on the rolls. Beshear says he's tackling the problems, the program is "working pretty well" and the managed-care companies can handle the influx.

The skeptics also question whether the state can afford the match for the federal funds. "Broad and vague anxieties," Beshear called them, and he came armed with two studies concluding that expansion would actually gain the state money -- mainly because of the billions it will send to the state's health-care providers, creating more jobs, but also because many of the 300,000 or so newly eligible people are not expected to enroll, based on a Price Waterhouse Coopers study drawing on research by the Congressional Budget Office.

University of Louisville research

Preliminary estimates were that expansion would add 400,000 Kentuckians to the Medicaid rolls. However, the study estimated that only 308,000 will become eligible and that only 188,000 will enroll, thus costing the state much less than some expected when it has to match federal funds beginning in January 2017. The initial match will be 5 percent, rising to 10 percent in 2020. The estimated cost for the newly eligible in fiscal 2020-21 is $151 million, in a state budget that is likely to exceed $10 billion. (The state's current share of Medicaid costs, 29.5 percent, is about $1.5 billion a year.)

Those are just estimates. "I believe reality will dwarf those numbers on the spending side," Tea Party activist David Adams, who says he plans to challenge the plan in court, told reporters. But for the time being at least, Beshear has the numbers on his side, and he said they are "very conservative."

The governor said opponents of the plan "fall back on national politics" and say expansion means that Kentucky, a state that President Obama lost big both times, will be "supporting Obamacare. To them I say, 'Get over it.' . . . I'm going to do what's best for Kentucky's people, period." Asked why so many governors have rejected expansion, he said it was mostly "partisan politics."

Conservative columnist John David Dyche cites an Oregon study saying Medicaid is ineffective, but a Harvard School of Public Health study in three other states showed that expansion of Medicaid improves health and saves lives.

Beshear said the expansion, along with health insurance and subsidies available through a state-run exchange that is also part of health reform, would give the state a healthier workforce because studies show that people with health insurance are less likely to skip exams and let health conditions worsen and become costlier and more difficult to treat. "The lack of early care is one reason that Kentucky's health picture is so horrendous," he said.

Kentucky's workforce is one of the nation's least healthy, and the state has a disproportionate number of working-age people who are not in the workforce because of health problems. The state ranks first in smoking, cancer deaths and preventable hospitalizations; second in heart disease and poor physical-health days; third in heart attacks and poor mental-health days; and in the top 10 in diabetes,  cholesterol and sedentary lifestyles. That hurts the state's image as well as its economy, Beshear said. "There will be a huge economic effect for a healthier Kentucky."

He said most of the newly eligible people are not "freeloaders asking for a handout," but people who are working at jobs without health insurance. He said another 332,000 Kentuckians will get insurance through the state exchange, 276,000 of them with subsidies available to people with incomes up to 400 percent of the poverty level. Without Medicaid expansion, he said, 206,000 would not be eligible for Medicaid or a subsidy, and "We cannot leave those people stranded."

The health-reform law tried to force states into expanding Medicaid, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the states should make the choice without fear of financial penalties. The law calls for expansion to cover people under 65 in households up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level -- currently $15,856 for an individual or $32,499 for a family of four.

Republicans can do little to stop the expansion. They control the state Senate, but Medicaid eligibility and benefit decisions belong to the executive branch, and even if a bipartisan legislative committee were to block the implementing regulations, Beshear could override it.

Or perhaps we should say he would override it. Emotional at times, Beshear called the move "the single most important decision of our lifetime for improving the health of Kentuckians" but said it was easy to make. As a governor who has failed to win his main campaign promise, expanded gambling, and has had relatively little money to spend because of the Great Recession, this is likely to be his largest legacy.

For details and background from the governor's office, click here. For Beshear's YouTube commentary on the issue, click here.

Read More

Medicaid expansion would have 'a big health impact,' and critical-access hospitals need to change, rural-health expert says

Expansion of the Medicaid program under federal health-care reform would have a major beneficial impact on the health of Kentucky, a doctor who ran the state and national rural-health agencies told a rural-health meeting in Louisville Tuesday.

"Medicaid expansion has a big health impact," Dr. Wayne Myers, left, told those at "Doing Care Differently in Rural Kentucky," a seminar sponsored by the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky and the Kentucky Rural Health Association in Louisville, just before the opening of the National Rural Health Association's three-day conference in the city.

Myers said that in the three states that expanded Medicaid eligibility since 2000, one life was saved for every 176  people added to the program, according to a study by the Harvard University School of Public Health, published in the New England Journal of Medicine. If that figure were extrapolated to the entire nation, the number of lives saved would be greater than if breast, prostate and stomach cancer were eliminated, Myers said.

Skeptics argue that Kentucky can't afford the estimated 6.3 percent annual cost increase for expanding Medicaid eligibility up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, but Myers said, "It would be nice to shift that argument from dollars to health impact." He said that if the three cancers were curable with a certain amount of money, and you argued that the nation should not spend it because of the cost, "You'd have an uphill argument."


Myers also said Eastern Kentucky would be an ideal place for Medicaid and Medicare to start rewarding small, rural hospitals for increasing their role in health promotion and disease prevention.

The federal designation of "critical access hospital" has kept open many rural hospitals, which get greater Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements in return for limiting beds, procedures and patient stays, but President Obama's proposed budget calls for revoking the CAH status of some hospitals, and rural political clout has declined with the rural share of the nation's population, Myers noted.

"The old models aren't working too well," Myers argued, saying "What people don't realize is that [critical-access] hospitals get three-fourths of their money from the outpatient department" and have relatively few traditional admissions. He said half of them have fewer than four acute-care patients per day, and fewer than two patients who are recuperating or getting skilled-nursing care.

Then he displayed maps showing that life expectancies of rural Americans are not keeping pace with the rest of the country, and in some areas, including Eastern Kentucky, are declining. "That's really scary," he said.

Myers said those trends mean that CAHs should add health promotion and disease prevention to their job description, and Medicare and Medicaid -- which provide 85 percent of their revenue -- should pay them for performing that function.

He said hospitals have space, expertise and equipment to serve as exercise and medical-education centers, while most rural health departments are "overwhelmed" with a wide array of duties.

The federal payments for disease prevention and health promotion could be limited to hospitals in counties that have a certain percentage of their population on government-subsidized insurance, he said.

"If it makes sense anywhere, does it not make sense in Kentucky?" Myers asked, reiterating the question to focus on the state's Fifth Congressional District, which he said has the nation's lowest life expectancy. When a questioner mentioned the district's congressman, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, Myers suggested the program could be named for the Somerset Republican.

Other speakers at the seminar called for new approaches in rural health, despite obstacles.

"Change is not easy. . . . Almost all federal policy tends to shortchange rural, at least initially," said Craig Blakely, dean of the University of Louisville's School of Public Health and Information Sciences.

He said two important targets for prevention activities in rural America are smoking and obesity, which he said is exacerbated by high soft-drink consumption. Soft drinks are a $57-billion-a-year industry, jhe said, "so there's a lot of pushback we're going to be facing if we want to take that on."

Blakely added that much of rural America is poor, and that is associated with poor health, so rural health providers also need to focus on education and employment opportunities for their communities.

Expansion of the Medicaid program under federal health-care reform would have a major beneficial impact on the health of Kentucky, a doctor who ran the state and national rural-health agencies told a rural-health meeting in Louisville Tuesday.

"Medicaid expansion has a big health impact," Dr. Wayne Myers, left, told those at "Doing Care Differently in Rural Kentucky," a seminar sponsored by the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky and the Kentucky Rural Health Association in Louisville, just before the opening of the National Rural Health Association's three-day conference in the city.

Myers said that in the three states that expanded Medicaid eligibility since 2000, one life was saved for every 176  people added to the program, according to a study by the Harvard University School of Public Health, published in the New England Journal of Medicine. If that figure were extrapolated to the entire nation, the number of lives saved would be greater than if breast, prostate and stomach cancer were eliminated, Myers said.

Skeptics argue that Kentucky can't afford the estimated 6.3 percent annual cost increase for expanding Medicaid eligibility up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, but Myers said, "It would be nice to shift that argument from dollars to health impact." He said that if the three cancers were curable with a certain amount of money, and you argued that the nation should not spend it because of the cost, "You'd have an uphill argument."


Myers also said Eastern Kentucky would be an ideal place for Medicaid and Medicare to start rewarding small, rural hospitals for increasing their role in health promotion and disease prevention.

The federal designation of "critical access hospital" has kept open many rural hospitals, which get greater Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements in return for limiting beds, procedures and patient stays, but President Obama's proposed budget calls for revoking the CAH status of some hospitals, and rural political clout has declined with the rural share of the nation's population, Myers noted.

"The old models aren't working too well," Myers argued, saying "What people don't realize is that [critical-access] hospitals get three-fourths of their money from the outpatient department" and have relatively few traditional admissions. He said half of them have fewer than four acute-care patients per day, and fewer than two patients who are recuperating or getting skilled-nursing care.

Then he displayed maps showing that life expectancies of rural Americans are not keeping pace with the rest of the country, and in some areas, including Eastern Kentucky, are declining. "That's really scary," he said.

Myers said those trends mean that CAHs should add health promotion and disease prevention to their job description, and Medicare and Medicaid -- which provide 85 percent of their revenue -- should pay them for performing that function.

He said hospitals have space, expertise and equipment to serve as exercise and medical-education centers, while most rural health departments are "overwhelmed" with a wide array of duties.

The federal payments for disease prevention and health promotion could be limited to hospitals in counties that have a certain percentage of their population on government-subsidized insurance, he said.

"If it makes sense anywhere, does it not make sense in Kentucky?" Myers asked, reiterating the question to focus on the state's Fifth Congressional District, which he said has the nation's lowest life expectancy. When a questioner mentioned the district's congressman, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, Myers suggested the program could be named for the Somerset Republican.

Other speakers at the seminar called for new approaches in rural health, despite obstacles.

"Change is not easy. . . . Almost all federal policy tends to shortchange rural, at least initially," said Craig Blakely, dean of the University of Louisville's School of Public Health and Information Sciences.

He said two important targets for prevention activities in rural America are smoking and obesity, which he said is exacerbated by high soft-drink consumption. Soft drinks are a $57-billion-a-year industry, jhe said, "so there's a lot of pushback we're going to be facing if we want to take that on."

Blakely added that much of rural America is poor, and that is associated with poor health, so rural health providers also need to focus on education and employment opportunities for their communities.

Read More

Half-day seminars on health reform's impact on business Wed. and Thur.; journalists invited

Experts on the impact of federal health-care reform on business will give advice to Kentucky companies at half-day seminars in Lexington and Louisville on Wednesday and Thursday of this week. Presentations about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will include discussions of expected cost increases and tax implications for businesses.

The Kentucky Health Care Reform Seminar will be presented by The Iasis Group, The Lane Report and the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce. The seminar is part of a statewide partnership that includes Commerce Lexington, Greater Louisville Inc., the Kentucky Society for Human Resource Management and the Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce.

The Lexington seminar will be held Wednesday, May 8, at the Griffin Gate Marriott Resort, with registration starting at 12:30 p.m. The Louisville seminar will be held Thursday, May 9, at the Louisville Marriott Downtown, with registration beginning at 8 a.m.

Members of the news media are invited to attend the seminars at no cost. For more information or details about covering the event, contact the Kentucky Chamber's Jessica Fletcher at 502-848-8731.

Experts on the impact of federal health-care reform on business will give advice to Kentucky companies at half-day seminars in Lexington and Louisville on Wednesday and Thursday of this week. Presentations about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will include discussions of expected cost increases and tax implications for businesses.

The Kentucky Health Care Reform Seminar will be presented by The Iasis Group, The Lane Report and the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce. The seminar is part of a statewide partnership that includes Commerce Lexington, Greater Louisville Inc., the Kentucky Society for Human Resource Management and the Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce.

The Lexington seminar will be held Wednesday, May 8, at the Griffin Gate Marriott Resort, with registration starting at 12:30 p.m. The Louisville seminar will be held Thursday, May 9, at the Louisville Marriott Downtown, with registration beginning at 8 a.m.

Members of the news media are invited to attend the seminars at no cost. For more information or details about covering the event, contact the Kentucky Chamber's Jessica Fletcher at 502-848-8731.

Read More

Weekly paper in Hazard says Beshear should expand Medicaid

Gov. Steve Beshear should expand the Medicaid program for the poor under federal health reform to improve the health and welfare of Kentuckians, The Hazard Herald said in its editorial this week.

"We’re tired of reading report after report listing the health of Kentucky’s people at the bottom nationally," the weekly newspaper said. "That is especially the case in Eastern Kentucky, where here in Perry County we ranked as the 119th unhealthiest county out of 120, according to a recent study. In fact, the vast majority of the bottom 20 counties are here in Eastern Kentucky. There are many dire needs in our region of the state, from jobs to education to better access to health care. Here is one instance where our government, which the people fund, can opt to very possibly improve the lives of its citizens."

The federal government would pay the costs of expanding Medicaid to people in households with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level from 2014 through 2016. The state would pay 3 percent in 2017, rising to 10 percent in 2020. The editorial noted critics' warnings about costs, and a study predicting that expansion would increase the state's total Medicaid costs only 6.3 percent. "But, in truth, this is simply a monetary argument from interests on both sides of the debate," the paper said. "We feel the greatest interest belongs to the people of Kentucky. We feel the greatest priority should be placed on improving the health and welfare of our people." (Read more)

Gov. Steve Beshear should expand the Medicaid program for the poor under federal health reform to improve the health and welfare of Kentuckians, The Hazard Herald said in its editorial this week.

"We’re tired of reading report after report listing the health of Kentucky’s people at the bottom nationally," the weekly newspaper said. "That is especially the case in Eastern Kentucky, where here in Perry County we ranked as the 119th unhealthiest county out of 120, according to a recent study. In fact, the vast majority of the bottom 20 counties are here in Eastern Kentucky. There are many dire needs in our region of the state, from jobs to education to better access to health care. Here is one instance where our government, which the people fund, can opt to very possibly improve the lives of its citizens."

The federal government would pay the costs of expanding Medicaid to people in households with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level from 2014 through 2016. The state would pay 3 percent in 2017, rising to 10 percent in 2020. The editorial noted critics' warnings about costs, and a study predicting that expansion would increase the state's total Medicaid costs only 6.3 percent. "But, in truth, this is simply a monetary argument from interests on both sides of the debate," the paper said. "We feel the greatest interest belongs to the people of Kentucky. We feel the greatest priority should be placed on improving the health and welfare of our people." (Read more)

Read More

Business leaders discuss possibility of expanding Medicaid through private insurance

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Some Kentucky business leaders are discussing a possible endorsement of expanding Medicaid through private insurance, in a plan similar to one the federal government approved for Arkansas.

The Health Policy Council of the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce discussed the idea last Friday. A talking paper for the meeting highlighted presumed benefits of the approach, in which people newly eligible for Medicaid could use federal funds to buy private insurance through the insurance exchange that the state is constructing.

The health council has yet to decide the chamber's position on Medicaid expansion, but the council's talking paper said expanding Medicaid privately might be a better option than expansion of traditional Medicaid, considering the state's tight budget and already problematic managed care system.

The paper says a private plan would be beneficial to Kentucky because it would allow market forces to control costs and ultimately result in better health care. Private expansion would also prevent a flood of newly eligible people from entering the managed care system. "If Kentucky accepts the traditional Medicaid expansion, everyone that qualifies would be put into the already struggling managed care system, which until changes are made, cannot support the influx," the paper asserted.

The Obama administration has encouraged states to consider the Arkansas approach, the paper says.  To do so, states need to apply for a waiver, and the administration has provided information on how a state would apply. "Florida, Ohio, Louisiana, Maine and Pennsylvania are all looking into this option," the paper said.

An estimated 181,000 uninsured adults would become eligible for Medicaid in 2014, if Kentucky decides to accept the funds offered by the health law to provide coverage to those earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level.

Gov. Steve Beshear has said he will make his decision about Medicaid expansion no later than July 1. His office has declined to say whether the privatized option is under consideration, saying, "The governor is considering multiple issues as he determines whether Kentucky will expand Medicaid eligibility.  Along with affordability for the state, he is also looking at potential economic impact through jobs and investment created by possible expansion, as well anticipated changes in health outcomes for newly-eligible Kentuckians."

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Some Kentucky business leaders are discussing a possible endorsement of expanding Medicaid through private insurance, in a plan similar to one the federal government approved for Arkansas.

The Health Policy Council of the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce discussed the idea last Friday. A talking paper for the meeting highlighted presumed benefits of the approach, in which people newly eligible for Medicaid could use federal funds to buy private insurance through the insurance exchange that the state is constructing.

The health council has yet to decide the chamber's position on Medicaid expansion, but the council's talking paper said expanding Medicaid privately might be a better option than expansion of traditional Medicaid, considering the state's tight budget and already problematic managed care system.

The paper says a private plan would be beneficial to Kentucky because it would allow market forces to control costs and ultimately result in better health care. Private expansion would also prevent a flood of newly eligible people from entering the managed care system. "If Kentucky accepts the traditional Medicaid expansion, everyone that qualifies would be put into the already struggling managed care system, which until changes are made, cannot support the influx," the paper asserted.

The Obama administration has encouraged states to consider the Arkansas approach, the paper says.  To do so, states need to apply for a waiver, and the administration has provided information on how a state would apply. "Florida, Ohio, Louisiana, Maine and Pennsylvania are all looking into this option," the paper said.

An estimated 181,000 uninsured adults would become eligible for Medicaid in 2014, if Kentucky decides to accept the funds offered by the health law to provide coverage to those earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level.

Gov. Steve Beshear has said he will make his decision about Medicaid expansion no later than July 1. His office has declined to say whether the privatized option is under consideration, saying, "The governor is considering multiple issues as he determines whether Kentucky will expand Medicaid eligibility.  Along with affordability for the state, he is also looking at potential economic impact through jobs and investment created by possible expansion, as well anticipated changes in health outcomes for newly-eligible Kentuckians."

Read More

Will Kentucky expand Medicaid, and if so, how?

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Kentucky is one of the last states to decide whether to expand Medicaid under federal health reform, and now that the General Assembly has gone home, Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear can turn his attention to the many questions that linger. Some Republican legislators think he will expand the program, but they worry about the cost when the state would have to start helping cover the new expenses, beginning in 2017.

Republican Gov. Bill Haslam of Tennessee decided Wednesday that he will not pursue Medicaid expansion, saying that it could put hospitals in financial jeopardy by giving them more patients on which they lose money, reports Michelle Kaske of Bloomberg. If he is right and the same logic applies to Kentucky, Medicaid expansion in the state could harm the rural hospitals and providers -- some of whom are already squeezed by the issues with the new managed-care system.

Along with Kentucky, 10 other states are undecided about Medicaid expansion: Alaska, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. The map by The Advisory Board Company shows the lay of the land; for an interactive picture that outlines the research behind the map, click here.

Red=Not participating; Pink=Leaning toward not participating;
Gray=Undecided; Blue=Participating; Light Blue=Leaning toward participating

Only three states with Democratic governors are undecided; 18 Republican governors have rejected expansion. Kentucky is shown as leaning for it because Beshear has repeatedly said that he will expand Medicaid if the state can afford it. He has also mentioned that the state can reserve the right to pull out of the deal in 2017, when it must paying 3 percent of the cost of covering the newly insured, reaching 10 percent in 2020. Still, the questions about cost and affordability remain, and Beshear could be considering another option.

Tennessee has joined Ohio and Arkansas in negotiating with the Obama administration over plans to use federal Medicaid money to purchase private insurance for those who can't afford it but don't qualify for Medicaid now. However, Haslam's plan has been held up because the administration placed too many conditions on the money, writes Kaske. Republicans in other states, including Florida, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Texas, have expressed interest in this option since Gov. Mike Beebe of Arkansas, a Democrat, ignited the wildfire of creating a hybrid of the two alternatives, reports Robert Pear of The New York Times.

The idea of privatizing Medicaid expansion appeals to many doctors and hospitals because they typically receive higher payments from commercial insurance than from Medicaid. However, many Kentucky hospitals and providers are concerned about the managed-care program that is run by three private organizations, and are calling for immediate action. Beshear has not said whether he will sign or veto a bill that would subject the managed-care firms to the prompt-payments and dispute-resolution rules of the state Department of Insurance.

"Action is needed to address the problems that patients and hospitals are experiencing with Medicaid managed care and to make the system work properly," wrote Harold "Bud" Warman, chair of the Kentucky Hospital Association, and Charles Lovell, chair-elect of the association, in a recent Herald-Leader article that laid out the various problems with the system. "And with the possibility that Medicaid will be expanded in Kentucky to include an additional 350,000 people, it is critical that these issues be addressed right away to avoid even greater problems in the future."

Either using federal dollars to buy private insurance in order to cover newly qualified individuals (the hybrid plan) under the health law's expansion  or expanding in the "traditional" way will not change the current managed care structure of Medicaid in Kentucky. Yet, it would mean that 350,000 more Kentuckians would be covered under managed care; Medicaid would cover those earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, currently up to $15,856 a year for an individual.

The money that the federal government offers for expansion is very tempting. The question then may be, how will it be used?

Kentucky Health News is an independent news service of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky, with support from the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky.

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

Kentucky is one of the last states to decide whether to expand Medicaid under federal health reform, and now that the General Assembly has gone home, Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear can turn his attention to the many questions that linger. Some Republican legislators think he will expand the program, but they worry about the cost when the state would have to start helping cover the new expenses, beginning in 2017.

Republican Gov. Bill Haslam of Tennessee decided Wednesday that he will not pursue Medicaid expansion, saying that it could put hospitals in financial jeopardy by giving them more patients on which they lose money, reports Michelle Kaske of Bloomberg. If he is right and the same logic applies to Kentucky, Medicaid expansion in the state could harm the rural hospitals and providers -- some of whom are already squeezed by the issues with the new managed-care system.

Along with Kentucky, 10 other states are undecided about Medicaid expansion: Alaska, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. The map by The Advisory Board Company shows the lay of the land; for an interactive picture that outlines the research behind the map, click here.

Red=Not participating; Pink=Leaning toward not participating;
Gray=Undecided; Blue=Participating; Light Blue=Leaning toward participating

Only three states with Democratic governors are undecided; 18 Republican governors have rejected expansion. Kentucky is shown as leaning for it because Beshear has repeatedly said that he will expand Medicaid if the state can afford it. He has also mentioned that the state can reserve the right to pull out of the deal in 2017, when it must paying 3 percent of the cost of covering the newly insured, reaching 10 percent in 2020. Still, the questions about cost and affordability remain, and Beshear could be considering another option.

Tennessee has joined Ohio and Arkansas in negotiating with the Obama administration over plans to use federal Medicaid money to purchase private insurance for those who can't afford it but don't qualify for Medicaid now. However, Haslam's plan has been held up because the administration placed too many conditions on the money, writes Kaske. Republicans in other states, including Florida, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Texas, have expressed interest in this option since Gov. Mike Beebe of Arkansas, a Democrat, ignited the wildfire of creating a hybrid of the two alternatives, reports Robert Pear of The New York Times.

The idea of privatizing Medicaid expansion appeals to many doctors and hospitals because they typically receive higher payments from commercial insurance than from Medicaid. However, many Kentucky hospitals and providers are concerned about the managed-care program that is run by three private organizations, and are calling for immediate action. Beshear has not said whether he will sign or veto a bill that would subject the managed-care firms to the prompt-payments and dispute-resolution rules of the state Department of Insurance.

"Action is needed to address the problems that patients and hospitals are experiencing with Medicaid managed care and to make the system work properly," wrote Harold "Bud" Warman, chair of the Kentucky Hospital Association, and Charles Lovell, chair-elect of the association, in a recent Herald-Leader article that laid out the various problems with the system. "And with the possibility that Medicaid will be expanded in Kentucky to include an additional 350,000 people, it is critical that these issues be addressed right away to avoid even greater problems in the future."

Either using federal dollars to buy private insurance in order to cover newly qualified individuals (the hybrid plan) under the health law's expansion  or expanding in the "traditional" way will not change the current managed care structure of Medicaid in Kentucky. Yet, it would mean that 350,000 more Kentuckians would be covered under managed care; Medicaid would cover those earning up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, currently up to $15,856 a year for an individual.

The money that the federal government offers for expansion is very tempting. The question then may be, how will it be used?

Kentucky Health News is an independent news service of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky, with support from the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky.

Read More

Feds letting Arkansas privatize Medicaid expansion; idea could spread like wildfire, as in Florida, but cost questions remain

Arkansas has turned heads nationally with its preliminary plan to expand Medicaid using the private insurance market, showing that the Obama administration is willing to give states more flexibility than expected in expanding the program.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has agreed to a proposal by Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe to reject the Medicaid expansion but use federal money to buy private health insurance for the 200,000 people who would have been covered under ordinary expansion, reports Sandhya Somashekhar of The Washington Post.

States that have come down on either sides of the Medicaid-expansion issue may reconsider their decision in light of the Arkansas proposal, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law professor at George Washington University. "If Arkansas is allowed to do this, I expect it to spread like wildfire," Rosenbaum told the Post.

The first place could be Florida, where a state Senate committee rejected Republican Gov. Rick Scott's expansion plan and proposed a privatization plan like that in Arkansas. Last week, a House committee voted to reject any expansion of the program. Scott "made it clear he was not going to lobby the Legislature on Medicaid," preferring to emphasize other issues, The New York Times' Lizette Alvarez reports. For coverage from the Tampa Bay Times and The Miami Herald, click here.

Could the wildfire spread all the way up to Kentucky?

Gov. Steve Beshear has said he wants to expand Medicaid in Kentucky if the state can afford it, but many Republican lawmakers oppose the idea, saying it would not be fiscally responsible. On the national level, 26 states and the District of Columbia have expressed a desire to expand Medicaid, 17 have said they reject it and seven are undecided, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.

A more flexibile arrangement could be a game changer because it makes expansion more appealing, especially for states where expanding Medicaid has been politically unpopular and polarizing. in Arkansas, which has a Democratic governor and a Republicna legislature, officials say that from an ideological standpoint, using private insurance appeals to lawmakers from both parties, reports Somashekhar. She reports that even Democratic-led states might prefer this arrangement because it gets rid of some bureaucratic hurdles.

However, there are questions about cost. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that private insurance plans cost $3,000 more per person than Medicaid, reports Somashekhar. On the other hand, Arkansas officials say the move could ultimately save money in administrative charges along with other cost-control measures.

Although the Arkansas proposal is not concrete, it provides proof that the Department for Health and Human Services encourages innovative, state-based approaches to promote expansion. Many states may develop a new route best suited to their specific needs, without having to leave federal money on the table. (Read more)

Arkansas has turned heads nationally with its preliminary plan to expand Medicaid using the private insurance market, showing that the Obama administration is willing to give states more flexibility than expected in expanding the program.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has agreed to a proposal by Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe to reject the Medicaid expansion but use federal money to buy private health insurance for the 200,000 people who would have been covered under ordinary expansion, reports Sandhya Somashekhar of The Washington Post.

States that have come down on either sides of the Medicaid-expansion issue may reconsider their decision in light of the Arkansas proposal, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law professor at George Washington University. "If Arkansas is allowed to do this, I expect it to spread like wildfire," Rosenbaum told the Post.

The first place could be Florida, where a state Senate committee rejected Republican Gov. Rick Scott's expansion plan and proposed a privatization plan like that in Arkansas. Last week, a House committee voted to reject any expansion of the program. Scott "made it clear he was not going to lobby the Legislature on Medicaid," preferring to emphasize other issues, The New York Times' Lizette Alvarez reports. For coverage from the Tampa Bay Times and The Miami Herald, click here.

Could the wildfire spread all the way up to Kentucky?

Gov. Steve Beshear has said he wants to expand Medicaid in Kentucky if the state can afford it, but many Republican lawmakers oppose the idea, saying it would not be fiscally responsible. On the national level, 26 states and the District of Columbia have expressed a desire to expand Medicaid, 17 have said they reject it and seven are undecided, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.

A more flexibile arrangement could be a game changer because it makes expansion more appealing, especially for states where expanding Medicaid has been politically unpopular and polarizing. in Arkansas, which has a Democratic governor and a Republicna legislature, officials say that from an ideological standpoint, using private insurance appeals to lawmakers from both parties, reports Somashekhar. She reports that even Democratic-led states might prefer this arrangement because it gets rid of some bureaucratic hurdles.

However, there are questions about cost. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that private insurance plans cost $3,000 more per person than Medicaid, reports Somashekhar. On the other hand, Arkansas officials say the move could ultimately save money in administrative charges along with other cost-control measures.

Although the Arkansas proposal is not concrete, it provides proof that the Department for Health and Human Services encourages innovative, state-based approaches to promote expansion. Many states may develop a new route best suited to their specific needs, without having to leave federal money on the table. (Read more)

Read More

Essential-benefits rule expands mental-health and substance-abuse coverage; Ky. needs more facilities to treat newly eligible

The Department of Health and Human Services has defined the 10 "essential health benefits" insurance plans must provide, and it included benefits for mental health and treatment of substance-abuse disorders..

Nearly 20 percent of Americans don't have access to mental-health services and over 30 percent have no coverage for substance-abuse treatment. This rule will expand mental health and substance-abuse treatment benefits to 62 million Americans, according to HHS.

Expanded coverage for mental health and substance abuse treatment programs in Kentucky could bring about a dramatic shift in the delivery of these services. There is already a shortage of treatment options and centers for Kentuckians, and those suffering from addiction have not had coverage for such treatment; the proposed rule will change that.

Recovery Kentucky, a public-private partnership with residential facilities, was created to help Kentuckians recover from substance abuse. It has 10 centers, in Campbellsville, Erlanger, Florence, Harlan, Henderson, Hopkinsville, Morehead, Owensboro, Paducah, and Richmond, according to the 2012 Justice & Public Safety Cabinet report, which included the map below. 

Health-insurance plans must cover the 10 essential benefits beginning in 2014, so the state must prepare for the newly insured in addition to newly covered services. The rule defines what must be covered in insurance plans and bans discrimination based on age or pre-existing conditions. Among the core package of items and services, known as “essential health benefits" are items and services in the following categories:

1. Ambulatory patient services
2. Emergency services
3. Hospitalization
4. Maternity and newborn care
5. Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment
6. Prescription drugs
7. Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices
8. Laboratory services
9. Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
10. Pediatric services, including oral and vision care

States are given flexibility in implementing the federal health-care reform law with a benchmark approach. The Kentucky Department of Insurance has recommended that the Anthem Preferred Provider Organization plan serve as the “benchmark” plan for the Kentucky Health Benefit Exchange. HHS will review the recommendation and accept public comments prior to making a final decision. (Read more)

The Department of Health and Human Services has defined the 10 "essential health benefits" insurance plans must provide, and it included benefits for mental health and treatment of substance-abuse disorders..

Nearly 20 percent of Americans don't have access to mental-health services and over 30 percent have no coverage for substance-abuse treatment. This rule will expand mental health and substance-abuse treatment benefits to 62 million Americans, according to HHS.

Expanded coverage for mental health and substance abuse treatment programs in Kentucky could bring about a dramatic shift in the delivery of these services. There is already a shortage of treatment options and centers for Kentuckians, and those suffering from addiction have not had coverage for such treatment; the proposed rule will change that.

Recovery Kentucky, a public-private partnership with residential facilities, was created to help Kentuckians recover from substance abuse. It has 10 centers, in Campbellsville, Erlanger, Florence, Harlan, Henderson, Hopkinsville, Morehead, Owensboro, Paducah, and Richmond, according to the 2012 Justice & Public Safety Cabinet report, which included the map below. 

Health-insurance plans must cover the 10 essential benefits beginning in 2014, so the state must prepare for the newly insured in addition to newly covered services. The rule defines what must be covered in insurance plans and bans discrimination based on age or pre-existing conditions. Among the core package of items and services, known as “essential health benefits" are items and services in the following categories:

1. Ambulatory patient services
2. Emergency services
3. Hospitalization
4. Maternity and newborn care
5. Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment
6. Prescription drugs
7. Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices
8. Laboratory services
9. Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
10. Pediatric services, including oral and vision care

States are given flexibility in implementing the federal health-care reform law with a benchmark approach. The Kentucky Department of Insurance has recommended that the Anthem Preferred Provider Organization plan serve as the “benchmark” plan for the Kentucky Health Benefit Exchange. HHS will review the recommendation and accept public comments prior to making a final decision. (Read more)

Read More

Medicaid expansion brings primary care access to the forefront

The federal health reform law will usher at least seven million more Americans into Medicaid, and as states like Kentucky debate Medicaid expansion, policymakers are struggling with the question of whether there will even be enough primary care doctors to provide care, reports Michael Ollove of Stateline.

The country is already short of primary-care doctors. Although many primary-care physicians would take on new Medicare or privately-insured patients, only two out of three primary-care physicians surveyed in 2011 were willing to accept new Medicaid patients.

Why? Poor compensation is one reason; on average, Medicaid pays physicians 59 percent of the amount Medicare pays for primary care services, reports Ollove. Many Kentucky primary-care providers are also deterred by existing Medciaid problems. Providers report being burdened by a lack of or delayed payments from the new managed-care system.

Congress hopes to lure practitioners to primary care with a provision that raises primary-care providers' Medicaid fees to Medicare levels. This is only a temporary fix, which went into effect at the beginning of the year and will remain in effect for two years, reports Ollove.

The impact in Kentucky remains uncertain. Lawrence Kissner, Kentucky's commissioner for health and family services, says the state’s Medicaid pay raise in 2005 resulted in a 36 percent increase in the number of primary care doctors accepting Medicaid patients, reports Ollove. This is precisely what the health-law authors hope will happen now.

Kentucky is addressing the health coverage issue in other ways.  The General Assembly is considering a bill that would repeal a burdensome supervision requirement and encourage more independent physician assistants to remain in Kentucky to serve medically underserved areas.

Although Kentucky already allows nurse practitioners to practice independently, the Medicaid rate increase applies only to physicians who provide primary care services. It does not apply to nurse practitioners, who have been touted as a potential solution to the primary care problem and often provide care in underserved areas of the state. (Read more)

The federal health reform law will usher at least seven million more Americans into Medicaid, and as states like Kentucky debate Medicaid expansion, policymakers are struggling with the question of whether there will even be enough primary care doctors to provide care, reports Michael Ollove of Stateline.

The country is already short of primary-care doctors. Although many primary-care physicians would take on new Medicare or privately-insured patients, only two out of three primary-care physicians surveyed in 2011 were willing to accept new Medicaid patients.

Why? Poor compensation is one reason; on average, Medicaid pays physicians 59 percent of the amount Medicare pays for primary care services, reports Ollove. Many Kentucky primary-care providers are also deterred by existing Medciaid problems. Providers report being burdened by a lack of or delayed payments from the new managed-care system.

Congress hopes to lure practitioners to primary care with a provision that raises primary-care providers' Medicaid fees to Medicare levels. This is only a temporary fix, which went into effect at the beginning of the year and will remain in effect for two years, reports Ollove.

The impact in Kentucky remains uncertain. Lawrence Kissner, Kentucky's commissioner for health and family services, says the state’s Medicaid pay raise in 2005 resulted in a 36 percent increase in the number of primary care doctors accepting Medicaid patients, reports Ollove. This is precisely what the health-law authors hope will happen now.

Kentucky is addressing the health coverage issue in other ways.  The General Assembly is considering a bill that would repeal a burdensome supervision requirement and encourage more independent physician assistants to remain in Kentucky to serve medically underserved areas.

Although Kentucky already allows nurse practitioners to practice independently, the Medicaid rate increase applies only to physicians who provide primary care services. It does not apply to nurse practitioners, who have been touted as a potential solution to the primary care problem and often provide care in underserved areas of the state. (Read more)

Read More

If Republican governors are agreeing to expand Medicaid after lobbying by hospitals, can Beshear be far behind?

By Al Cross
Kentucky Health News

Florida Gov. Rick Scott's surprising announcement that he would use federal health-care reform money to expand the Medicaid program to households earning up to 138 percent of the poverty level "means the dominoes are falling," says Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a consumer group that lobbied for the law. And another domino seems likely to be Democratic Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear, without involvement by the state legislature.

Beshear has said he will expand Medicaid if Kentucky can afford it, and has mentioned that the state can reserve the right to pull out of the deal in 2017, when it must start paying a small but increasing share of the cost, reaching 10 percent in 2020. Scott used the same qualification.

Pollack told The New York Times that the message sent by seven Republican governors' acceptance of the deal is  “Even though I may not have supported and even strongly opposed the Affordable Care Act, it would be harmful to the citizens of my state if I didn’t opt into taking these very substantial federal dollars to help people who truly need it.” The GOP governors (of states outlined in Times map below) have said they will expand the program partly to protect rural hospitals and the poor.

"The change of heart for some Republican governors has come after vigorous lobbying by health industry players, particularly hospitals," the Times notes. "Hospital associations around the country signed off on Medicaid cuts under the health care law on the assumption that their losses would be more than offset by new paying customers, including many insured by Medicaid. . . . Every few days, state hospital associations and advocates for poor people issue reports asserting that the economic benefits of expanding Medicaid would outweigh the costs." (Read more)

Kentucky Hospital Association President Michael Rust said the trade group is for "universal coverage" by whatever means but is not lobbying Beshear for Medicaid expansion. "We assume he is" going to expand it, Rust said in an interview today. He said the association has not taken a position on bills that would require legislative approval of expansion and the health-insurance exchange being set up under the reform law. The legislation, Senate Bill 39 and SB40, passed the Republican-controlled Senate on party-line votes today, and are expected to die in the Democratic-majority House.

Senate Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer said the bills were aimed at reining in "big daddy government." Here's a video from cn|2:

Kentucky Health News is an independent news service of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky, with support from the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky.

By Al Cross
Kentucky Health News

Florida Gov. Rick Scott's surprising announcement that he would use federal health-care reform money to expand the Medicaid program to households earning up to 138 percent of the poverty level "means the dominoes are falling," says Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a consumer group that lobbied for the law. And another domino seems likely to be Democratic Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear, without involvement by the state legislature.

Beshear has said he will expand Medicaid if Kentucky can afford it, and has mentioned that the state can reserve the right to pull out of the deal in 2017, when it must start paying a small but increasing share of the cost, reaching 10 percent in 2020. Scott used the same qualification.

Pollack told The New York Times that the message sent by seven Republican governors' acceptance of the deal is  “Even though I may not have supported and even strongly opposed the Affordable Care Act, it would be harmful to the citizens of my state if I didn’t opt into taking these very substantial federal dollars to help people who truly need it.” The GOP governors (of states outlined in Times map below) have said they will expand the program partly to protect rural hospitals and the poor.

"The change of heart for some Republican governors has come after vigorous lobbying by health industry players, particularly hospitals," the Times notes. "Hospital associations around the country signed off on Medicaid cuts under the health care law on the assumption that their losses would be more than offset by new paying customers, including many insured by Medicaid. . . . Every few days, state hospital associations and advocates for poor people issue reports asserting that the economic benefits of expanding Medicaid would outweigh the costs." (Read more)

Kentucky Hospital Association President Michael Rust said the trade group is for "universal coverage" by whatever means but is not lobbying Beshear for Medicaid expansion. "We assume he is" going to expand it, Rust said in an interview today. He said the association has not taken a position on bills that would require legislative approval of expansion and the health-insurance exchange being set up under the reform law. The legislation, Senate Bill 39 and SB40, passed the Republican-controlled Senate on party-line votes today, and are expected to die in the Democratic-majority House.

Senate Majority Floor Leader Damon Thayer said the bills were aimed at reining in "big daddy government." Here's a video from cn|2:

Kentucky Health News is an independent news service of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky, with support from the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky.

Read More

Frontier Nursing University in Hyden helps bring better family health care to rural America with distance learning

Midwives and nurse practitioners who recently graduated from Frontier Nursing University in Hyden address the unique challenges of rural areas, including shortages of health care providers, by bringing local health care to rural communities across the country. FNU was featured in a recent report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

FNU, a graduate program that offers distance education to nurses with an interest in nurse-midwifery and family nurse practitioner and women’s health specialties, aims to build a pipeline of highly educated nurses serving in rural or underserved areas, reports RWJF, one of its funders.  Many scholars and grantees sponsored by RWJF go on to spearhead projects to improve access to high quality nursing care in remote areas, the foundation says.

“We’re trying to introduce primary care providers into rural areas in such a way that they can provide high quality care and preventive services too,” says Suzan Ulrich, associate dean of midwifery and women’s health at FNU and an RWJF executive nurse fellow.

Demand for health care is rising nationwide because of an aging population that is living longer, but sicker, with multiple chronic conditions. The need for health care providers will intensify next year, when millions of new patients will become eligible for health insurance under the health-reform law.

Rural parts of the country face unique challenges and shortages of health providers, including nurses, can be particularly acute in rural areas, said Alan Morgan, CEO of the National Rural Health Association. These nurses and other providers have less access to education programs, which tend to be located in more densely populated areas. Programs that offer advanced degrees, from the baccalaureate to the doctorate, can be especially difficult to access for students living in rural areas, according to RWJF.

Identifying and educating nurses from rural areas is a key goal of FNU, which offers distance education programs that enable students to remain in their home communities and a “bridge” program that allows nurses with associate’s degrees to move more easily into master’s and doctorate programs. “These students really love where they live,” Ulrich said. “If we can educate them to stay within their communities, then those communities are going to have a provider who’s going to be there a long time." (Read more)

Midwives and nurse practitioners who recently graduated from Frontier Nursing University in Hyden address the unique challenges of rural areas, including shortages of health care providers, by bringing local health care to rural communities across the country. FNU was featured in a recent report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

FNU, a graduate program that offers distance education to nurses with an interest in nurse-midwifery and family nurse practitioner and women’s health specialties, aims to build a pipeline of highly educated nurses serving in rural or underserved areas, reports RWJF, one of its funders.  Many scholars and grantees sponsored by RWJF go on to spearhead projects to improve access to high quality nursing care in remote areas, the foundation says.

“We’re trying to introduce primary care providers into rural areas in such a way that they can provide high quality care and preventive services too,” says Suzan Ulrich, associate dean of midwifery and women’s health at FNU and an RWJF executive nurse fellow.

Demand for health care is rising nationwide because of an aging population that is living longer, but sicker, with multiple chronic conditions. The need for health care providers will intensify next year, when millions of new patients will become eligible for health insurance under the health-reform law.

Rural parts of the country face unique challenges and shortages of health providers, including nurses, can be particularly acute in rural areas, said Alan Morgan, CEO of the National Rural Health Association. These nurses and other providers have less access to education programs, which tend to be located in more densely populated areas. Programs that offer advanced degrees, from the baccalaureate to the doctorate, can be especially difficult to access for students living in rural areas, according to RWJF.

Identifying and educating nurses from rural areas is a key goal of FNU, which offers distance education programs that enable students to remain in their home communities and a “bridge” program that allows nurses with associate’s degrees to move more easily into master’s and doctorate programs. “These students really love where they live,” Ulrich said. “If we can educate them to stay within their communities, then those communities are going to have a provider who’s going to be there a long time." (Read more)

Read More

Beshear will expand Medicaid, Democrat and Republican say; D says governor believes the state can opt out if it's not affordable

State legislators in both parties say they expect Gov. Steve Beshear to expand Medicaid to cover several hundred thousand more Kentuckians who earn up to 138 percent of the federal poverty rate.

Rep. Tom Burch, chairman of the House Health and Welfare Committee, told Ryan Alessi of cn|2’s "Pure Politics" that the governor told him exactly that last week. And Sen. Tom Buford, R-Nicholasville, told Kentucky Health News that he expects Beshear to do the deed.

Burch told Alessi that Beshear has decided to move forward with the expansion because he believes the state would be able to opt out if state officials discover that Kentucky can’t afford it after 2017.

Beshear didn’t mention expansion in his State of the Commonwealth Address last week, and the governor’s office said the official decision hadn’t been made yet but didn’t dispute Burch’s statement, Alessi reports. Here is the salient part of his interview with Burch:



Buford said Beshear will be under much political pressure to expand Medicaid because it is President Obama's signature program and expansion will create jobs. However, Republican legislators generally  have opposed the expansion of Medicaid because the state can’t afford it. The federal government will cover the cost of covering the extra people from 2014 through 2016. Kentucky would have to kick in 5 percent of the costs starting in 2017 and 10 percent by 2020.  

The federal government covers roughly 70 percent of Kentucky’s $6 billion Medicaid program. It covers more than 800,000 Kentuckians and with the expansion, that number could grow to more than 1 million — or roughly a quarter of all Kentuckians, reports Alessi.

“I think it’s critical that we take a look at those to see how we achieve that. I’m not sure that this would be the way that would be best-suited to Kentucky and be fiscally responsible for the state of Kentucky,” Sen. Julie Denton, R-Louisville and chairman of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, told Alessi in December (at 4:10 of the interview below). “Frankly, I don’t think we can afford to do it,” she said.

State legislators in both parties say they expect Gov. Steve Beshear to expand Medicaid to cover several hundred thousand more Kentuckians who earn up to 138 percent of the federal poverty rate.

Rep. Tom Burch, chairman of the House Health and Welfare Committee, told Ryan Alessi of cn|2’s "Pure Politics" that the governor told him exactly that last week. And Sen. Tom Buford, R-Nicholasville, told Kentucky Health News that he expects Beshear to do the deed.

Burch told Alessi that Beshear has decided to move forward with the expansion because he believes the state would be able to opt out if state officials discover that Kentucky can’t afford it after 2017.

Beshear didn’t mention expansion in his State of the Commonwealth Address last week, and the governor’s office said the official decision hadn’t been made yet but didn’t dispute Burch’s statement, Alessi reports. Here is the salient part of his interview with Burch:



Buford said Beshear will be under much political pressure to expand Medicaid because it is President Obama's signature program and expansion will create jobs. However, Republican legislators generally  have opposed the expansion of Medicaid because the state can’t afford it. The federal government will cover the cost of covering the extra people from 2014 through 2016. Kentucky would have to kick in 5 percent of the costs starting in 2017 and 10 percent by 2020.  

The federal government covers roughly 70 percent of Kentucky’s $6 billion Medicaid program. It covers more than 800,000 Kentuckians and with the expansion, that number could grow to more than 1 million — or roughly a quarter of all Kentuckians, reports Alessi.

“I think it’s critical that we take a look at those to see how we achieve that. I’m not sure that this would be the way that would be best-suited to Kentucky and be fiscally responsible for the state of Kentucky,” Sen. Julie Denton, R-Louisville and chairman of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, told Alessi in December (at 4:10 of the interview below). “Frankly, I don’t think we can afford to do it,” she said.

Read More

Kasich of Ohio is fifth Republican governor to accept Medicaid expansion; he and others cite need to protect rural hospitals, poor

Several Republican governors have decided to expand Medicaid under federal health-care reform, saying their conservative principles were outweighed by a need to protect their state's rural hospitals and low-income people. Yesterday, the governor of one of the biggest states got on the bandwagon.

John Kasich of Ohio joined Jan Brewer of Arizona, Brian Sandoval of Nevada, Susana Martinez of New Mexico and Jack Dalrymple of North Dakota in saying they will take heavy federal subsidies to expand the program to households with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty threshold.

Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear of Kentucky has said he wants to expand Medicaid if Kentucky can afford it, and he expects to get cost estimates around the end of March.

While Kasich is not an "Obamacare" supporter, he said expanding Medicaid “makes great sense for Ohio” because it would save $235 million over the next two years and free about $100 million in local funds for mental-health and addiction services, reports The Columbus Dispatch.

Kasich said the decision could extend health coverage to as many as 578,000 uninsured Ohio residents, and could keep everyone else’s health insurance premiums down because there won’t be so many uninsured people going to emergency rooms for their medical care, reports David Nather of Politico.

Kasich emphasized that he would like to see the 2010 law repealed, but the federal money it would pump into the state — about $13 billion over the next seven years — was too much to pass up, reports Stateline. The federal government will pay the full cost of expansion through 2016; then  states will have to pitch in, rising to a limit of 10 percent by 2020.

Brewer likewise said it doesn't make sense for Arizona to pass up federal dollars, reports Howard Fischer of the Arizona Daily Sun. "We will protect rural and safety-net hospitals from being pushed to the brink by growing their cost in caring for the uninsured," Brewer said. She also said the expansion will create enormous economic benefit, inject $2 billion into the Arizona economy, save and create thousands of jobs and provide health care to hundreds of thousands of low-income individuals, reports Fischer.

Brewer said going along with expansion will save Arizona money because the costs of providing care to the uninsured are not simply absorbed by hospitals but passed along through increased insurance premiums. Supporters of the expansion hope the five Republicans' decisions will prompt more GOP governors to follow suit. Twenty governors from both political parties are still undecided. (Read more)

Several Republican governors have decided to expand Medicaid under federal health-care reform, saying their conservative principles were outweighed by a need to protect their state's rural hospitals and low-income people. Yesterday, the governor of one of the biggest states got on the bandwagon.

John Kasich of Ohio joined Jan Brewer of Arizona, Brian Sandoval of Nevada, Susana Martinez of New Mexico and Jack Dalrymple of North Dakota in saying they will take heavy federal subsidies to expand the program to households with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty threshold.

Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear of Kentucky has said he wants to expand Medicaid if Kentucky can afford it, and he expects to get cost estimates around the end of March.

While Kasich is not an "Obamacare" supporter, he said expanding Medicaid “makes great sense for Ohio” because it would save $235 million over the next two years and free about $100 million in local funds for mental-health and addiction services, reports The Columbus Dispatch.

Kasich said the decision could extend health coverage to as many as 578,000 uninsured Ohio residents, and could keep everyone else’s health insurance premiums down because there won’t be so many uninsured people going to emergency rooms for their medical care, reports David Nather of Politico.

Kasich emphasized that he would like to see the 2010 law repealed, but the federal money it would pump into the state — about $13 billion over the next seven years — was too much to pass up, reports Stateline. The federal government will pay the full cost of expansion through 2016; then  states will have to pitch in, rising to a limit of 10 percent by 2020.

Brewer likewise said it doesn't make sense for Arizona to pass up federal dollars, reports Howard Fischer of the Arizona Daily Sun. "We will protect rural and safety-net hospitals from being pushed to the brink by growing their cost in caring for the uninsured," Brewer said. She also said the expansion will create enormous economic benefit, inject $2 billion into the Arizona economy, save and create thousands of jobs and provide health care to hundreds of thousands of low-income individuals, reports Fischer.

Brewer said going along with expansion will save Arizona money because the costs of providing care to the uninsured are not simply absorbed by hospitals but passed along through increased insurance premiums. Supporters of the expansion hope the five Republicans' decisions will prompt more GOP governors to follow suit. Twenty governors from both political parties are still undecided. (Read more)

Read More

Invisible health panel could help Ky., if it had money and met

A panel charged with helping devise solutions to the nation’s health-care workforce crisis, which includes ensuring rural areas have enough health-care providers, is having a workforce crisis of its own: It hasn’t been funded, and it’s never met, writesKyle Cheney of Politico. 

The National Health Care Workforce Commission was created by Congress nearly three years ago under the Affordable Care Act, the panelists were appointed, but that’s about it. The lack of action was noted at a hearing Tuesday of a subcommittee of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, convened by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging.

Sanders issued a report estimating that 57 million Americans lack ready access to primary care. Since  millions are expected to gain coverage when the reform law goes into full effect next year, there is a looming concern over whether there are enough doctors, physicians' assistants, nurse practitioners, nurses and so on. Most of the worry relates to the lack of primary-care providers in underserved areas, which could be a huge problem for Kentucky.

In addition to exploring the health workforce needs in rural and “medically underserved” settings, the commission was supposed to address the capacity of the nursing workforce, graduate medical education policies, education and loan programs for health-care professionals and the “mental and behavioral health care workforce capacity,” writes Cheney.

Since the 15-member panel was appointed in September 2010 by the U.S. comptroller general, 10 members’ terms have expired, and they’ve been reappointed for another three years each, Cheney reports. No funding has been approved, although both Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama have proposed $3 million funding packages.

“In order for the promise of expanded coverage passed into law by ACA to become a reality, the provisions designed to reach those goals must be fully funded and implemented,” Sanders said. “We need to make sure that our health care system has the infrastructure in place to provide the care necessary to prevent diseases and improve the health of all Americans.” (Read more)

A panel charged with helping devise solutions to the nation’s health-care workforce crisis, which includes ensuring rural areas have enough health-care providers, is having a workforce crisis of its own: It hasn’t been funded, and it’s never met, writesKyle Cheney of Politico. 

The National Health Care Workforce Commission was created by Congress nearly three years ago under the Affordable Care Act, the panelists were appointed, but that’s about it. The lack of action was noted at a hearing Tuesday of a subcommittee of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, convened by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging.

Sanders issued a report estimating that 57 million Americans lack ready access to primary care. Since  millions are expected to gain coverage when the reform law goes into full effect next year, there is a looming concern over whether there are enough doctors, physicians' assistants, nurse practitioners, nurses and so on. Most of the worry relates to the lack of primary-care providers in underserved areas, which could be a huge problem for Kentucky.

In addition to exploring the health workforce needs in rural and “medically underserved” settings, the commission was supposed to address the capacity of the nursing workforce, graduate medical education policies, education and loan programs for health-care professionals and the “mental and behavioral health care workforce capacity,” writes Cheney.

Since the 15-member panel was appointed in September 2010 by the U.S. comptroller general, 10 members’ terms have expired, and they’ve been reappointed for another three years each, Cheney reports. No funding has been approved, although both Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama have proposed $3 million funding packages.

“In order for the promise of expanded coverage passed into law by ACA to become a reality, the provisions designed to reach those goals must be fully funded and implemented,” Sanders said. “We need to make sure that our health care system has the infrastructure in place to provide the care necessary to prevent diseases and improve the health of all Americans.” (Read more)

Read More

Feds plan to let states impose co-payments on Medicaid patients above poverty level to encourage them to expand the program

By Molly Burchett and Al Cross
Kentucky Health News

If Kentucky expands its Medicaid program, it will probably be able to reduce the cost by requiring patients whose incomes are above the federal poverty level to help pay for their care. That could make it more feasible for the state to expand the program to people with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty line.

A proposed federal policy will let states charge co-payments and increased premiums for doctor visits and some prescription drugs and hospital care. Robert Pear of The New York Times reports that the policy is designed to encourage states to expand Medicaid under the federal health-care reform law, with generous federal help. By shifting costs to patients, the state and federal governments would pay less.

That adds a new perspective to the cost consideration in Kentucky's debate over expansion of Medicaid. It could influence the state's decision, Republican state Sen. Julie Denton of Louisville said Friday during a legislative panel at the Kentucky Press Association convention.

Denton cautioned that the state needs to fix its problems with Medicaid managed care before it expands the program. Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear has said he wants to expand Medicaid if the state can afford it, and since there is no deadline for deciding whether to participate in the expansion, the debate may carry over into 2014.

Some Republicans have said Kentucky can't afford the expansion. If the state expands Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of poverty from its current threshold of 70 percent, the federal government would pay all the cost of the expansion until 2017, when the state would begin helping out, with its share reaching 10 percent in 2020. The federal share of the state's current program is 72 percent.

This proposed rule could have important implications not just for state finances, but for Medicaid patients. It means that a family of three with an annual income of $30,000 could be required to pay $1,500 in premiums and co-payments, Pear reports in the Times.

As published in the Federal Register last week, the rule proposes to "update and simplify Medicaid premium and cost sharing requirements, to promote the most effective use of services and to assist states in identifying cost-sharing flexibilities." It proposes "new options for states to establish higher cost sharing for nonpreferred drugs and to propose higher cost sharing for non-emergency use" of emergency rooms.

Barbara K. Tomar, director of federal affairs at the American College of Emergency Physicians, told Pear that the administration had not adequately defined the “nonemergency services” for which the poor might have to pay. "In many cases, she said, patients legitimately believe they need emergency care, but the final diagnosis does not bear that out," Pear writes.

The proposed rule has no limit on emergency department charges for "non-emergency use." It says the hospital will have responsibility to assess the individual clinically and ensure access to other sources of care before requiring payment, which could pose problems for hospitals.

The public has until Feb. 13 to comment on the proposed rule, which can be submitted at www.regulations.gov.

By Molly Burchett and Al Cross
Kentucky Health News

If Kentucky expands its Medicaid program, it will probably be able to reduce the cost by requiring patients whose incomes are above the federal poverty level to help pay for their care. That could make it more feasible for the state to expand the program to people with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty line.

A proposed federal policy will let states charge co-payments and increased premiums for doctor visits and some prescription drugs and hospital care. Robert Pear of The New York Times reports that the policy is designed to encourage states to expand Medicaid under the federal health-care reform law, with generous federal help. By shifting costs to patients, the state and federal governments would pay less.

That adds a new perspective to the cost consideration in Kentucky's debate over expansion of Medicaid. It could influence the state's decision, Republican state Sen. Julie Denton of Louisville said Friday during a legislative panel at the Kentucky Press Association convention.

Denton cautioned that the state needs to fix its problems with Medicaid managed care before it expands the program. Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear has said he wants to expand Medicaid if the state can afford it, and since there is no deadline for deciding whether to participate in the expansion, the debate may carry over into 2014.

Some Republicans have said Kentucky can't afford the expansion. If the state expands Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of poverty from its current threshold of 70 percent, the federal government would pay all the cost of the expansion until 2017, when the state would begin helping out, with its share reaching 10 percent in 2020. The federal share of the state's current program is 72 percent.

This proposed rule could have important implications not just for state finances, but for Medicaid patients. It means that a family of three with an annual income of $30,000 could be required to pay $1,500 in premiums and co-payments, Pear reports in the Times.

As published in the Federal Register last week, the rule proposes to "update and simplify Medicaid premium and cost sharing requirements, to promote the most effective use of services and to assist states in identifying cost-sharing flexibilities." It proposes "new options for states to establish higher cost sharing for nonpreferred drugs and to propose higher cost sharing for non-emergency use" of emergency rooms.

Barbara K. Tomar, director of federal affairs at the American College of Emergency Physicians, told Pear that the administration had not adequately defined the “nonemergency services” for which the poor might have to pay. "In many cases, she said, patients legitimately believe they need emergency care, but the final diagnosis does not bear that out," Pear writes.

The proposed rule has no limit on emergency department charges for "non-emergency use." It says the hospital will have responsibility to assess the individual clinically and ensure access to other sources of care before requiring payment, which could pose problems for hospitals.

The public has until Feb. 13 to comment on the proposed rule, which can be submitted at www.regulations.gov.

Read More

Health reform will let insurers charge smokers up to 50 percent higher premiums, which is likely to have a big impact in Kentucky

"Millions of smokers could be priced out of health insurance" because the health-care reform law will let health-insurance companies charge smokers as much as 50 percent more starting next year on individual policies, according to experts who are just now teasing out the potential impact of a little-noted provision in the massive legislation," The Associated Press reports.

The provision is likely to have a major impact in Kentucky, where 29 percent of adults are smokers, a figure exceeded by no other state, and where 25 to 30 percent of people under 65 are estimated to have no health insurance.

"For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year" AP reports. "A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums. Younger smokers could be charged lower penalties under rules proposed last fall by the Obama administration."

A state health insurance exchange, now being created under the law, will be a place to buy insurance with tax credits depending on income. Gov. Steve Beshear has said he wants to expand the state Medicaid program to cover people in households with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, but many Republicans in the legislature are opposed to that because the state would ultimately have to pay 10 percent of the expansion's cost.

The provisions to discourage smoking would allow employees covered by employer plans to avoid penalties by joining smoking-cessation programs,"but experts say that option is not guaranteed to smokers trying to purchase coverage individually," AP reports.

There is concern about the provision's effect on older smokers who "could face a heavy hit on their household budgets at a time in life when smoking-related illnesses tend to emerge. . . . Several provisions in the federal health care law work together to leave older smokers with a bleak set of financial options," AP reports, citing Karen Pollitz, a health-insurance expert with the Kaiser Family Foundation and former deputy director of the Office of Consumer Support in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Pollitz notes that the reform law lets insurers charge older customers up to three times as much as their youngest customers; charge the full 50 percent penalty on older smokers while charging less to younger ones; and does not allow smokers to use tax credits to offset the cost of the penalty.

And there's a good argument to charge the full penalty, insurance consultant Robert Laszewski told AP: "If you don’t charge the 50 percent, your competitor is going to do it, and you are going to get a disproportionate share of the less-healthy older smokers,” said Laszewski. “They are going to have to play defense." (Read more)

"Millions of smokers could be priced out of health insurance" because the health-care reform law will let health-insurance companies charge smokers as much as 50 percent more starting next year on individual policies, according to experts who are just now teasing out the potential impact of a little-noted provision in the massive legislation," The Associated Press reports.

The provision is likely to have a major impact in Kentucky, where 29 percent of adults are smokers, a figure exceeded by no other state, and where 25 to 30 percent of people under 65 are estimated to have no health insurance.

"For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year" AP reports. "A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums. Younger smokers could be charged lower penalties under rules proposed last fall by the Obama administration."

A state health insurance exchange, now being created under the law, will be a place to buy insurance with tax credits depending on income. Gov. Steve Beshear has said he wants to expand the state Medicaid program to cover people in households with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, but many Republicans in the legislature are opposed to that because the state would ultimately have to pay 10 percent of the expansion's cost.

The provisions to discourage smoking would allow employees covered by employer plans to avoid penalties by joining smoking-cessation programs,"but experts say that option is not guaranteed to smokers trying to purchase coverage individually," AP reports.

There is concern about the provision's effect on older smokers who "could face a heavy hit on their household budgets at a time in life when smoking-related illnesses tend to emerge. . . . Several provisions in the federal health care law work together to leave older smokers with a bleak set of financial options," AP reports, citing Karen Pollitz, a health-insurance expert with the Kaiser Family Foundation and former deputy director of the Office of Consumer Support in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Pollitz notes that the reform law lets insurers charge older customers up to three times as much as their youngest customers; charge the full 50 percent penalty on older smokers while charging less to younger ones; and does not allow smokers to use tax credits to offset the cost of the penalty.

And there's a good argument to charge the full penalty, insurance consultant Robert Laszewski told AP: "If you don’t charge the 50 percent, your competitor is going to do it, and you are going to get a disproportionate share of the less-healthy older smokers,” said Laszewski. “They are going to have to play defense." (Read more)

Read More