- Marionville mayor ‘kind of agreed’ with Kansas City shooter’s views
- Rev. Al Sharpton’s Easter message: Politically ‘crucified’ Obama has risen again
- Supreme Court to weigh challenge to ban on campaign lies
- UNICEF launches ‘Mr. Poo’ mascot in India to curb public defecation
- Teen taking selfie by train: ‘Wow, that guy just kicked me in the head’
- Goodbye, Afghanistan — hello, Africa: Air Force to shift as U.S. exits Middle East
- Iran mulls ban on vasectomies, decrease on abortions to bolster population
- CNN op-ed claims right-wingers ‘more deadly than jihadists’
- Classes resume at high school rocked by stabbings
- ABC News accuses Center for Public Integrity of stealing Pulitzer-winning work
Bipartisan bill seeks to alter Obamacare
Would eliminate ‘gimmick’
A Republican and a Democrat teamed up Wednesday to announce a bill to dissolve part of President Obama’s health care law that critics say skews some of the benefits to hospitals in Massachusetts, at the expense of other states.
The legislation was written by Sens. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, and Claire McCaskill, Missouri Democrat. It’s the first in what is expected to be a host of bills designed to tweak rather than repeal the health care law, which the Supreme Court upheld last year and which voters have given Mr. Obama a chance to see into fruition.
This bill would eliminate a money-shifting “gimmick” that resulted from the use of rural hospitals as the wage floor for Medicare reimbursements — a system that went askew because the Bay State’s benchmark hospital happens to be on Nantucket, the well-to-do island off the Atlantic Coast.
Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, any state’s urban hospitals have to be reimbursed under Medicare for wages paid to doctors and staff at a level that is at least as much as in rural hospitals. Because the only hospital classified as “rural” in Massachusetts is located on the wealthy island, wage reimbursement rates are inflated for the state’s 81 other hospitals and would drain resources from the other states, Ms. McCaskill and Mr. Coburn said.
The senators arrived at the issue from opposing sides of the political aisle, a rarity when it comes to amending Obamacare. Nearly every attempt to kill or chip away at the law has come from conservative factions in Congress, even if the Democrat-controlled Senate and Mr. Obama’s re-election effectively eliminate any hopes of a repeal.
Ms. McCaskill reiterated her support for Mr. Obama’s law in a press release on the legislation, but said the reforms always could be strengthened.
The bipartisan bill would sunset the provision Oct. 1. Because the portion of the health care law in question requires Medicare reimbursements for hospital wages to come from a national pool of money, “any increase for one particular state means a decrease for other states,” her office said.
Ms. McCaskill’s office said nine states benefit from the system and 41 states lose out in the deal. Her state, Missouri, is slated to lose $15 million dollars this year, she said.
The Boston Globe highlighted the issue in a Jan. 14 article about the reimbursements for Nantucket Cottage Hospital and its resulting ripple effect.
The newspaper reported that Sen. John F. Kerry — the Massachusetts Democrat who bade farewell to his colleagues Wednesday to become secretary of state — had led the charge for the Medicare arrangement that drew from a national pool of funds.
“Obviously different states and regions see these issues differently,” a spokesman for the departing senator said Wednesday. “Medicare’s old discriminatory formula had robbed Massachusetts of as much as $500 million, and Sen. Kerry’s effort in the Affordable Care Act simply required that all states were treated the same. Sen. Kerry remains proud of the fight he led for Massachusetts.”
On Jan. 16, the National Rural Health Association and 20 state hospital associations urged Mr. Obama in a Jan. 16 letter to correct the situation through his fiscal 2014 budget proposal, arguing it has allowed Massachusetts “to manipulate the federal Medicare program, reaping an estimated $367 million annually from the other 49 states.”
The associations said the problem would reduce funding for hospitals in 49 states by $3.5 billion in the next decade.
“Scarce Medicare funding should reward value and efficiency in health care,” the letter said, “not be diverted based on manipulation of obscure payment formulas.”
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Tom Howell Jr. covers politics for The Washington Times. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
- Uninsured rates lower in states that embraced Obamacare
- Pelosi to speak at Bard commencement, Bachmann at Oral Roberts
- Minnesota the latest to employ Deloitte to fix Obamacare tech issues
- Law firm that cleared N.J. Gov. Christie in 'Bridgegate' gave 10K to RGA, which he heads
- New debate: Should Congress use technology to spend less time in D.C.?
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
By John R. Bolton
Reality calls for attaching Gaza to Egypt and the West Bank to Jordan
- 'Culture of intimidation' seen in Nevada ranch standoff
- FISHER: Shades of Berlin in the South China Sea
- HURT: Wilson and Obama ... 100 years apart, but so alike
- Rand and Ron Paul ride to the rescue for Bundy in Nevada standoff with feds
- Atheists rush to stage Easter display: 'Jesus Christ is a myth'
- Secret U.S. assessments show Afghanistan not ready to govern on own
- U.S. military on high alert as Ukraine troops trade gunfire with pro-Russian militants
- Nevada Bundy ranch standoff could leave dirt on Harry Reid reputation
- CNN op-ed claims right-wingers 'more deadly than jihadists'
- IRS emails reveal discussion with Justice about suing nonprofits for election activities
Celebrity deaths in 2014
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.