Welcome to Monday’s Overnight Health Care.
The “Medicare for All” debate is heating up just in time for the next Democratic debate, Medicaid work requirements got struck down (again), and the Trump administration is requiring more health care price transparency.
We’ll start with the Medicare for All fight…
Harris stirs criticism with new health plan
Looks like there could be some sparks over health care at the debates on Tuesday and Wednesday.
Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisFormer public defender: DOJ plan to resume federal executions a ‘recipe for problems’ New York governor signs bill decriminalizing marijuana use 2020 Democrats renew calls for gun reform after Gilroy shooting MORE (D-Calif.), a 2020 contender, released her health care plan on Monday and immediately took flak from the right and the left, including her primary rivals, Sen. Bernie SandersBernie Sanders2020 Democrats renew calls for gun reform after Gilroy shooting Inslee proposes opening environmental justice office Trump says Sanders should be labeled a racist for remarks on Baltimore MORE (I-Vt.) and former Vice President Joe BidenJoe Biden2020 Democrats renew calls for gun reform after Gilroy shooting Booker qualifies for fall Democratic debates On the debate stage, let it rip, Joe MORE.
ADVERTISEMENT
Harris’s plan seeks to find a path between the total elimination of private insurance under the Sanders version of Medicare for All, and Biden’s public option plan, which would strengthen the Affordable Care Act and keep employer-sponsored insurance in place.
What her plan does:
- Transitions to Medicare for All over 10 years (slower than Sanders’s four years)
- Keeps a role for private insurers to administer tightly regulated plans similar to the current Medicare Advantage program.
- Includes a promise not to raise taxes on those making under $100,000 per year.
Harris has gone back and forth on whether she would eliminate private insurance. Her plan today shows what should be her final answer.
Read more about her plan here
Biden’s response:
“This new, have-it-every-which-way approach pushes the extremely challenging implementation of the Medicare for All part of this plan ten years into the future, meaning it would not occur on the watch of even a two-term administration,” Biden spokeswoman Kate Bedingfield said.
Bedingfield also hit Harris for her “refusal to be straight with the American middle class, who would have a large tax increase forced on them with this plan.”
Read more on Biden’s attack here
Sanders response: “Call it anything you want, but you can’t call this plan Medicare for All. Folding to the interests of the health insurance industry is both bad policy and bad politics,” Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir said in a statement.
The Sanders campaign’s biggest knock against Harris is that her plan still has a role — albeit very limited — for private insurance. But Harris’ supporters say her plan is essentially an expansion of the current Medicare Advantage program, which relies on private companies to administer Medicare programs that provide more services than a traditional, government-run Medicare program.
Read more on the Sanders criticism here
Click Here: watford football shirts
The takeaway: These plans are all moving toward more government-run health insurance and expanding coverage to more people, a far cry from Republican plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act. But it’s the differences between the Democratic plans that will be at the center of the primary debate.
Federal judge strikes New Hampshire’s Medicaid work requirements
If this sounds familiar, that’s because it is. This is now the third state that has had Medicaid work requirements get struck down.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, struck down New Hampshire’s work requirements less than a week after hearing oral arguments.
Boasberg is the same judge who has twice rejected the administration’s approval of similar requirements in Kentucky, and also blocked Arkansas from implementing its Medicaid work requirements.
“In short, we have all seen this movie before,” Boasberg wrote in his opinion.
Just as in Kentucky and Arkansas, Boasberg ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) failed to take into account how many people subject to the work requirements would lose Medicaid coverage.
Read more here.
Trump administration wants to force hospitals to disclose secret negotiated prices
The Trump administration wants to force hospitals to disclose to patients how much they charge for all supplies, tests, and procedures.
A new proposal released Monday aims to make it easier for patients to shop around for the best price by forcing hospitals to disclose what are often secret rates negotiated with insurance companies.
Under the policy, hospitals would be required to post online all charges for all items and services provided by the hospital beginning Jan. 1, 2020.
What’s new: Hospitals are already required to publicly post their list prices for services, but in a call with reporters, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma said the proposal would expand that requirement to include gross charges before discounts as well as the insurer-specific negotiated charges for all items and services. The charges would be linked to the name of the insurance company and the insurance plan, Verma said.
Political optics: While some health experts question the effectiveness of mandatory disclosures, it’s hard to argue with transparency. The proposed rule implements an executive order signed by President TrumpDonald John TrumpSharpton: Trump has ‘particular venom’ for blacks, people of color Trump signs 9/11 compensation fund bill alongside first responders Trump continues assault on Fed: It ‘has made all of the wrong moves’ MORE earlier this year and is a key piece of the administration’s plan to force more price transparency from health providers and drug companies.
The administration is relying on consumer-friendly issues to position the president as a populist champion of transparency and reduced medical bills ahead of the 2020 election, instead of the president who tried to destroy ObamaCare, threatening the health insurance of 20 million people.
Read more on the plan here
What we’re reading
How a Medicare buy-in or public option could threaten ObamaCare (The New York Times)
Why aren’t voters more willing to abandon a health system that’s failing? (Vox.com)
Assailing high drug prices, Bernie Sanders heads to Canada for affordable insulin (The New York Times)
State by state
‘Short-sighted’ decisions in Minnesota’s Medicaid program are harming patients, doctor charges (Minneapolis Star-Tribune)
Medicaid expansion is at the heart of the budget fight. Here’s what it means for North Carolina. (Asheville Citizen-Times)
Philadelphia family hit with $2,500 surprise bill for dental anesthesia (Philadelphia Inquirer)
From The Hill’s opinion page:
Why an ‘America First’ approach won’t work in Ebola pandemic
Immigrant women aren’t getting access to health care due to fears