/PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Senate today rejected an amendment to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that would help make prescription drugs more affordable by allowing for the safe and legal importation of lower priced drugs from abroad. The bipartisan amendment, endorsed by AARP and sponsored by Senators Dorgan, Snowe, McCain, Grassley and Stabenow, would have improved competition and helped to bring down the skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs.
The Senate also rejected a second prescription drug importation amendment sponsored by Sen. Lautenberg, which would have created an unnecessary roadblock for prescription drug importation. In a move designed to block importation, the amendment prohibited importation of prescription drugs unless the Secretary of Health and Human Services can certify that it is safe to do so. Despite the fact that safety provisions are already built into the AARP-endorsed Dorgan-Snowe amendment, this version is designed to create administrative hurdles to effectively prevent importation.
** How a legislator votes on issues is only one factor in evaluating his or her legislative performance, which should also include such things as constituency services and committee work
"While we applaud Senator Specter's support for the Dorgan-Snowe importation amendment, we are disappointed that he also effectively voted to block this provision from ever taking effect," said Dick Chevrefils, AARP Pennsylvania State Director. "The Lautenberg amendment is an unnecessary roadblock that would prevent importation and maintain the status quo of skyrocketing drug prices."
"AARP is also deeply disappointed that Senator Casey voted today for continuing the status quo and against lower prescription drug prices for his constituents," said Chevrefils. "With brand name drug prices rising at alarming rates, we hope he will further review the negative impact on the people of Pennsylvania and reconsider his position."
Making prescription drugs more affordable has long been one of AARP's top priorities. The Dorgan-Snowe-McCain-Grassley-Stabenow importation amendment would have been a first step toward lowering the cost of medications in this country. AARP will continue to fight for this amendment and against the unnecessary roadblocks that could prevent its implementation.
AARP notified the 111th Congress that it was tracking roll call votes on key legislation important to its nearly 40 million members and reporting the outcomes of these votes back to its members and all older Americans. "When Americans understand the issues and where their lawmakers stand, they can make smart decisions," said Chevrefils. "AARP will be there to give our members, as well as all Americans, the most accurate information we can."
AARP members and all older Americans can see how their representatives voted on health care reform by going to www.aarp.org/governmentwatch. AARP's Government Watch is a one-stop online portal that will be tracking and publicizing every designated key vote on issues facing Americans age 50-plus. A "Key Vote Summary" highlighting votes on these issues will be published at the end of each congressional session.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Showing posts with label patients. Show all posts
Showing posts with label patients. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
National Oncologist Group Warns: Current Health Care Reform Legislation Woefully Short in Addressing Cancer Care Crisis
/PRNewswire/ -- The Community Oncology Alliance (COA) today issued a statement warning that oncologists throughout the U.S. may face closing their practices if critical Medicare reimbursement fixes for treating cancer patients are not made as a part of health care reform.
"Current health reform legislation before Congress does not address major inadequacies in Medicare reimbursement and substantial cuts coming in January to cancer care," said Patrick Cobb, M.D., president of COA and managing partner of Hematology-Oncology Centers of the Northern Rockies in Billings, Montana. "These problems are impacting oncologists now. Many have had to let staff go, and some have already closed practices in communities across the U.S."
"Released this week, the Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer highlighted the progress made in treating cancer over the past 30 years. This country's cancer care system deserves much of the credit for helping cancer patients receive high quality treatment near home, in their own communities," continued Dr. Cobb. "But this system is under threat if President Obama and Congress do not act before January. These January cuts threaten the viability of the nation's community cancer care delivery system, where 84% of Americans with cancer are treated, and jeopardize patients' access to care."
In separate letters to President Barack Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, COA president Dr. Cobb submitted a statement approved by the COA Board of Directors, including a six-part recommendation on solving the cancer care crisis. COA noted that the recent financial crisis has exposed the fragility of the health care payment system, with more Americans unable to afford cancer care and falling between the treatment cracks.
In a national call to action, the organization is encouraging oncology professionals and the entire cancer community to contact Members of Congress to request action on these recommendations, starting with the prevention of planned severe Medicare cuts to cancer care. These cuts start in January and continue to increase over the next four years.
"As a nation, we have watched the health care reform legislation evolve over the past year. One issue we have not heard much about -- and not through lack of trying -- is legislation for the reform of cancer care," continued Dr. Cobb. "Although there are certain positive aspects of reform relating to insurance coverage, the proposed legislation comes up woefully short in addressing a growing cancer care crisis."
Prior to Congress embarking on health reform legislation, a national team of oncologists spent more than a year researching and developing a plan to improve the Medicare payment system for cancer care. This initiative resulted in collaborating with members of Congress, now embodied in the National Cancer Care Demonstration Project Act of 2009 (H.R. 3675).
Dr. Cobb noted, "Because of the timing of the health care reform debate, we're concerned that progress in funding and implementing this very specific national project is too slow to stop the impact of the upcoming January cuts."
The organization has issued a six-part recommendation, which includes immediate action:
1. Enact real-world solutions to enhancing quality cancer care while
controlling costs by including the National Cancer Care Demonstration
Project Act of 2009 (H.R. 3675) in health care reform legislation.
2. Stop implementation of Medicare reimbursement cuts to cancer care,
especially the payment reduction to cancer drug administration.
3. Stop the 2010 21.2% Medicare reimbursement payment cut affecting all
physician-related services and fix the broken Medicare payment system
based on the SGR formula.
4. Stop cutting cancer care reimbursement further by using cuts to pay for
primary care bonuses.
5. Fix the problem of artificially low Medicare drug reimbursement by
including the "prompt pay" solution in health care reform legislation.
6. Eliminate the 20% Medicare patient co-payment requirement for cancer
drugs.
A full statement is listed the organization's web site (www.communityoncology.org).
"The War on Cancer, declared almost 40 years ago, has resulted in increased survival for Americans with cancer and has transformed many cancers from a death sentence to a chronic disease," continued Dr. Cobb. "However, the cost of cancer is still in excess of $220 billion annually and it claims the life of one American every minute. Congress must act now as health care reform legislation is being debated because the risk of getting this wrong is too great, both as measured in medical costs and the lives of Americans."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
"Current health reform legislation before Congress does not address major inadequacies in Medicare reimbursement and substantial cuts coming in January to cancer care," said Patrick Cobb, M.D., president of COA and managing partner of Hematology-Oncology Centers of the Northern Rockies in Billings, Montana. "These problems are impacting oncologists now. Many have had to let staff go, and some have already closed practices in communities across the U.S."
"Released this week, the Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer highlighted the progress made in treating cancer over the past 30 years. This country's cancer care system deserves much of the credit for helping cancer patients receive high quality treatment near home, in their own communities," continued Dr. Cobb. "But this system is under threat if President Obama and Congress do not act before January. These January cuts threaten the viability of the nation's community cancer care delivery system, where 84% of Americans with cancer are treated, and jeopardize patients' access to care."
In separate letters to President Barack Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, COA president Dr. Cobb submitted a statement approved by the COA Board of Directors, including a six-part recommendation on solving the cancer care crisis. COA noted that the recent financial crisis has exposed the fragility of the health care payment system, with more Americans unable to afford cancer care and falling between the treatment cracks.
In a national call to action, the organization is encouraging oncology professionals and the entire cancer community to contact Members of Congress to request action on these recommendations, starting with the prevention of planned severe Medicare cuts to cancer care. These cuts start in January and continue to increase over the next four years.
"As a nation, we have watched the health care reform legislation evolve over the past year. One issue we have not heard much about -- and not through lack of trying -- is legislation for the reform of cancer care," continued Dr. Cobb. "Although there are certain positive aspects of reform relating to insurance coverage, the proposed legislation comes up woefully short in addressing a growing cancer care crisis."
Prior to Congress embarking on health reform legislation, a national team of oncologists spent more than a year researching and developing a plan to improve the Medicare payment system for cancer care. This initiative resulted in collaborating with members of Congress, now embodied in the National Cancer Care Demonstration Project Act of 2009 (H.R. 3675).
Dr. Cobb noted, "Because of the timing of the health care reform debate, we're concerned that progress in funding and implementing this very specific national project is too slow to stop the impact of the upcoming January cuts."
The organization has issued a six-part recommendation, which includes immediate action:
1. Enact real-world solutions to enhancing quality cancer care while
controlling costs by including the National Cancer Care Demonstration
Project Act of 2009 (H.R. 3675) in health care reform legislation.
2. Stop implementation of Medicare reimbursement cuts to cancer care,
especially the payment reduction to cancer drug administration.
3. Stop the 2010 21.2% Medicare reimbursement payment cut affecting all
physician-related services and fix the broken Medicare payment system
based on the SGR formula.
4. Stop cutting cancer care reimbursement further by using cuts to pay for
primary care bonuses.
5. Fix the problem of artificially low Medicare drug reimbursement by
including the "prompt pay" solution in health care reform legislation.
6. Eliminate the 20% Medicare patient co-payment requirement for cancer
drugs.
A full statement is listed the organization's web site (www.communityoncology.org).
"The War on Cancer, declared almost 40 years ago, has resulted in increased survival for Americans with cancer and has transformed many cancers from a death sentence to a chronic disease," continued Dr. Cobb. "However, the cost of cancer is still in excess of $220 billion annually and it claims the life of one American every minute. Congress must act now as health care reform legislation is being debated because the risk of getting this wrong is too great, both as measured in medical costs and the lives of Americans."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
NCPA Backs New Amendments to Senate Health Reform Bill; Expresses Concern over Revised Public Option’s Pharmacy Benefit
(BUSINESS WIRE)--The National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA) today endorsed three amendments recently proposed to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and raised questions about an emerging public insurance option that would be administered by the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM). NCPA Executive Vice President and CEO Bruce T. Roberts, RPh, issued the following statement:
“NCPA strongly supports an amendment by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) that allows pharmacies to continue providing Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) and Part B drugs to Medicare beneficiaries without purchasing a surety bond. Like the 14 other types of medical professionals that Medicare exempted from the surety bond requirement, pharmacists are licensed and regulated by the states. Requiring surety bonds is duplicative and may lead to loss of patient access to valuable health care services, such as diabetes testing supplies, canes and crutches.
“We continue to work with Congress on both a permanent pharmacy exemption from DMEPOS accreditation requirements, as well as an extension of the current moratorium, which is scheduled to expire on Dec. 31, 2009.
“Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) added important language to the Senate ‘Freshmen Value and Innovation Package’ amendment to codify Medicare’s medication therapy management (MTM) program. MTM utilizes community pharmacists to help patients adhere to, and maximize the benefits of, their medicine. The programs have been shown to improve outcomes while lowering health care costs.
“An amendment by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) would require the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct the first detailed study in more than 10 years of pharmacists’ cost of dispensing in the Medicaid program. Private studies have shown community pharmacists to be compensated well below their cost of dispensing and a GAO study could give Congress and the states needed information for measuring the adequacy of the dispensing fees they pay and the impact upon patient access to pharmacy services.
“Various news reports indicate Senators are considering an OPM-administered health plan for the uninsured. Under such a model, we urge lawmakers to utilize a pharmacy benefit administrator (PBA) to manage drug coverage, rather than a pharmacy benefit manager (PBM).
“PBMs have a history of inflating health care costs through bloated administrative fees and questionable practices that are hidden from patients and plan sponsors. OPM’s inspector general told a House subcommittee investigating the PBMs’ effect on the federal employee health plan that ‘there’s a good chance we’re not getting a good deal because of the lack of transparency.’
“A PBA, such as those employed by Medicaid and the Pentagon, would give patients and taxpayers the best bang for their buck by passing through all rebates, discounts, and price concessions. PBM transparency requirements in the current bill should continue to apply to any plan that operates within the exchange, including the public option.
“NCPA is grateful for Congress’ bipartisan support of community pharmacy in health care reform and we will continue to work with lawmakers as the legislative process continues.”
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“NCPA strongly supports an amendment by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) that allows pharmacies to continue providing Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) and Part B drugs to Medicare beneficiaries without purchasing a surety bond. Like the 14 other types of medical professionals that Medicare exempted from the surety bond requirement, pharmacists are licensed and regulated by the states. Requiring surety bonds is duplicative and may lead to loss of patient access to valuable health care services, such as diabetes testing supplies, canes and crutches.
“We continue to work with Congress on both a permanent pharmacy exemption from DMEPOS accreditation requirements, as well as an extension of the current moratorium, which is scheduled to expire on Dec. 31, 2009.
“Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) added important language to the Senate ‘Freshmen Value and Innovation Package’ amendment to codify Medicare’s medication therapy management (MTM) program. MTM utilizes community pharmacists to help patients adhere to, and maximize the benefits of, their medicine. The programs have been shown to improve outcomes while lowering health care costs.
“An amendment by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) would require the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct the first detailed study in more than 10 years of pharmacists’ cost of dispensing in the Medicaid program. Private studies have shown community pharmacists to be compensated well below their cost of dispensing and a GAO study could give Congress and the states needed information for measuring the adequacy of the dispensing fees they pay and the impact upon patient access to pharmacy services.
“Various news reports indicate Senators are considering an OPM-administered health plan for the uninsured. Under such a model, we urge lawmakers to utilize a pharmacy benefit administrator (PBA) to manage drug coverage, rather than a pharmacy benefit manager (PBM).
“PBMs have a history of inflating health care costs through bloated administrative fees and questionable practices that are hidden from patients and plan sponsors. OPM’s inspector general told a House subcommittee investigating the PBMs’ effect on the federal employee health plan that ‘there’s a good chance we’re not getting a good deal because of the lack of transparency.’
“A PBA, such as those employed by Medicaid and the Pentagon, would give patients and taxpayers the best bang for their buck by passing through all rebates, discounts, and price concessions. PBM transparency requirements in the current bill should continue to apply to any plan that operates within the exchange, including the public option.
“NCPA is grateful for Congress’ bipartisan support of community pharmacy in health care reform and we will continue to work with lawmakers as the legislative process continues.”
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Americans Fear the Consequences of a New Government-Run "Public" Health Plan
Democrats who support a government takeover of health care are citing the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, which they claim shows support for a government-run system. Yet that very same poll shows widespread concern about potential consequences of a government-run health plan on the relationship Americans have with their doctor and the quality of care they receive – facts which have been reflected in other polls. For example, the New York Times/CBS News poll shows that:
63 percent were concerned that their own health care would get worse under a government-run system of health care;
68 percent believed a government-run system would limit their access to treatments and quality care; and
53 percent were concerned they would have to give up their own doctor under a government-run system.
What’s clear is that Americans overwhelmingly oppose the consequences of a government-run health system. They want access to their doctor, they want access to the quality care they are accustomed to, and they want access to the medical treatments they need when they need it rather than being subject to the whims of a government bureaucrat that makes health care decisions at the expense of patients and doctors. All would be jeopardized under a government-run scheme being proposed by congressional Democrats.
Here are the Top 10 facts about the House Democrats’ health care proposal and the consequences it will have for the American people and their health care:
Costs Middle-Class Families and Small Businesses Billions
Forces Tens of Millions Out of their Current Health Care Coverage
Destroys Millions of American Jobs
Puts Bureaucrats in Charge of Key Medical Decisions
Costs Future Generations Money They Don’t Have
Cuts Seniors’ Key Medicare Benefits and Limits Choices
Places a New Mandate on Individuals
Raises Taxes on Families, Small Businesses
A Missed Opportunity to Reduce Health Care Costs
Harms Small Businesses, Costs Jobs
Congressional Democrats can continue to ignore these consequences if they choose, but the facts are not on their side. The House Democrats’ plan could force more than 100 million Americans off of their current health care plan and onto the government rolls, according to a Lewin Group study published earlier this year. A Congressional Budget Office report said a similar plan authored by Senate Democrats that would force at least 23 million Americans off of their current plans. And according to the Associated Press, even the White House admits that the President’s promises about allowing the American people to keep their health care shouldn’t be taken literally.
House Republicans have a better solution: a plan that ensures all Americans who like their health care coverage can actually keep it. The plan outlined by the House GOP Health Care Reform Solutions Group, led by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), is designed to:
Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions.
Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan that would eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million Americans currently receive through their job.
Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs.
Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats.
Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
63 percent were concerned that their own health care would get worse under a government-run system of health care;
68 percent believed a government-run system would limit their access to treatments and quality care; and
53 percent were concerned they would have to give up their own doctor under a government-run system.
What’s clear is that Americans overwhelmingly oppose the consequences of a government-run health system. They want access to their doctor, they want access to the quality care they are accustomed to, and they want access to the medical treatments they need when they need it rather than being subject to the whims of a government bureaucrat that makes health care decisions at the expense of patients and doctors. All would be jeopardized under a government-run scheme being proposed by congressional Democrats.
Here are the Top 10 facts about the House Democrats’ health care proposal and the consequences it will have for the American people and their health care:
Costs Middle-Class Families and Small Businesses Billions
Forces Tens of Millions Out of their Current Health Care Coverage
Destroys Millions of American Jobs
Puts Bureaucrats in Charge of Key Medical Decisions
Costs Future Generations Money They Don’t Have
Cuts Seniors’ Key Medicare Benefits and Limits Choices
Places a New Mandate on Individuals
Raises Taxes on Families, Small Businesses
A Missed Opportunity to Reduce Health Care Costs
Harms Small Businesses, Costs Jobs
Congressional Democrats can continue to ignore these consequences if they choose, but the facts are not on their side. The House Democrats’ plan could force more than 100 million Americans off of their current health care plan and onto the government rolls, according to a Lewin Group study published earlier this year. A Congressional Budget Office report said a similar plan authored by Senate Democrats that would force at least 23 million Americans off of their current plans. And according to the Associated Press, even the White House admits that the President’s promises about allowing the American people to keep their health care shouldn’t be taken literally.
House Republicans have a better solution: a plan that ensures all Americans who like their health care coverage can actually keep it. The plan outlined by the House GOP Health Care Reform Solutions Group, led by Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), is designed to:
Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American, regardless of pre-existing health conditions.
Protect Americans from being forced into a new government-run health care plan that would eliminate the health care coverage that more than 100 million Americans currently receive through their job.
Let Americans who like their health care coverage keep it, and give all Americans the freedom to choose the health plan that best meets their needs.
Ensure that medical decisions are made by patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats.
Improve Americans’ lives through effective prevention, wellness, and disease management programs, while developing new treatments and cures for life-threatening diseases.
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
AMA Supports Health System Reform Alternatives Consistent With Principles
AMA Supports Health System Reform Alternatives Consistent With Principles of Pluralism, Freedom of Choice, Freedom of Practice and Universal Access for Patients
/PRNewswire/ -- As the American Medical Association (AMA) works for health reform this year that provides all Americans with affordable, high-quality health coverage, new policy states that the AMA "support health system reform alternatives that are consistent with AMA principles of pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of practice, and universal access for patients."
"The AMA is committed to health reform this year, and we are focused on ending our nation's uninsured crisis," said AMA Immediate-Past President Nancy H. Nielsen, M.D. "We will stay engaged with Congress and the administration to ensure that health reform proposals meet the AMA's criteria so that health reform makes a positive difference in the lives of our patients."
"We welcome and will thoughtfully consider all proposals consistent with AMA principles to provide Americans with affordable, high-quality health coverage," said Dr. Nielsen. "We look forward to the day when all Americans have health care coverage."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
/PRNewswire/ -- As the American Medical Association (AMA) works for health reform this year that provides all Americans with affordable, high-quality health coverage, new policy states that the AMA "support health system reform alternatives that are consistent with AMA principles of pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of practice, and universal access for patients."
"The AMA is committed to health reform this year, and we are focused on ending our nation's uninsured crisis," said AMA Immediate-Past President Nancy H. Nielsen, M.D. "We will stay engaged with Congress and the administration to ensure that health reform proposals meet the AMA's criteria so that health reform makes a positive difference in the lives of our patients."
"We welcome and will thoughtfully consider all proposals consistent with AMA principles to provide Americans with affordable, high-quality health coverage," said Dr. Nielsen. "We look forward to the day when all Americans have health care coverage."
-----
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)