Doctors Ask Congress for Freedom, Not Bigger Reimbursements

/PRNewswire/ -- Once again, the American Medical Association is begging Congress to postpone a fee cut for doctors under Medicare's "sustained growth rate" (SGR) method. Unless Congress acts, doctors' Medicare payments will be slashed 23% on Dec 1, then another 6% on Jan 1. The formula automatically kicks in when Medicare spending exceeds a certain amount.

On what the AMA calls White Coat Wednesday, Nov 17, doctors are urged to call Congress. But the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) advises a different message.

"The AMA and Congress have been playing this game of 'chicken' for more than 8 years," says Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of AAPS. [See: http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/001097] The AMA threatens doctors will quit seeing Medicare patients unless Congress stops the cuts.

"Meanwhile, the AMA and the government collude on a dictatorial system of price controls."

The values for thousands of medical procedures are set by a secretive 29-member panel called the RUC, the Relative Value Scale Update Committee, convened by the AMA. [See Wall Street Journal, Oct 26, 2010. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657304575540440173772102.html?KEYWORDS=Relative+Value+Scale+Update] Once the RUC determines the formula for divvying up $60 billion for physician fees, the government accepts most of the recommendations and applies a "conversion factor" to give each fee a dollar amount.

Doctors who charge a different amount are heavily fined or sent to prison. Because of the price controls or ban on "balance billing," if the Medicare-allowed fee doesn't cover the cost, doctors simply can't provide the service. Patients who are willing and able to pay are not permitted to make up the difference. It amounts to a form of covert rationing.

"In a free-market system, patients and doctors decide on the fee," states Dr. Orient. "That is not necessarily the same as the insurance reimbursement."

Doctors who opt out of Medicare set their own fees, but patients cannot collect Medicare reimbursement for their services.

Instead of asking for more taxpayer money, AAPS asks Congress to restore the freedom of patients and physicians to make their own decisions, including the amount of the fee. Without all the expensive Medicare hassles, fees are often lower.

-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
Twitter: @FayetteFP

House Committee Approves Arthritis Bill

/PRNewswir/ -- The Arthritis Foundation announces a major step in passing bi-partisan arthritis legislation in more than 30 years. The Arthritis Prevention, Control and Cure Act (H.R. 1210/S. 984) was approved today by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and will now go to the House of Representatives to vote on passage.

Bill sponsor U.S. Rep Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) urged the committee leadership to pass the bill in order to address arthritis, a disease that impacts one in five (46 million) Americans and 300,000 children and is the nation's most common cause of disability.

"I'm very proud that my bipartisan legislation has been passed by the Energy and Commerce Committee. The bill will provide states and non-profits the resources they need to tackle this debilitating disorder," Rep. Eshoo said. "It invests in the critical needs of children and adults suffering from arthritis, and in research that will alleviate the costs to future generations of Americans who are diagnosed. I'll continue to fight for this legislation until it's signed into law."

The Arthritis Prevention, Control and Cure Act, when enacted, will better focus federally funded arthritis research, expand and strengthen public health initiatives proven to combat the burden of arthritis, and improve access to pediatric rheumatologists to address the country's severe shortage of these critical health professionals.

"The Arthritis Foundation is comprised of people all across this nation who have worked tirelessly over the past seven years to let Congress know that more needs to be done for people with arthritis," said Dr. John Klippel, president and CEO of the Arthritis Foundation. "Our grassroots advocates deserve to be recognized for reaching and successfully communicating this message to the majority of Congress." To date, 179 Representatives have joined as co-sponsors of the bill.

The Arthritis Foundation urges people to show support for this bill by calling their member of congress and becoming an advocate today.

-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
Twitter: @FayetteFP

Health Reform Needs Enforceable National Workforce Strategy

/PRNewswire/ -- Congressional leaders must ensure that health reform includes a health workforce planning body with sufficient authority to ensure implementation of an integrated, coordinated national health workforce policy, according to Dr. Steven A Wartman, president and CEO of the Association of Academic Health Centers (AAHC). "With each step in the legislative process, the Congress has progressed toward a more effective health workforce planning process," Wartman said. "Still missing from both House and Senate bills is a mechanism -- such as national health workforce commission recommendations that automatically go into effect unless overridden by Congress -- to ensure timely implementation of the recommendations," added Wartman, urging Congress to address this concern before finalizing the legislation.

An updated analysis of the current House and Senate bills released today by the AAHC identifies additional strengths and weaknesses in the bills when measured against the AAHC's own health workforce recommendations:

-- The AAHC recommends that development and implementation of an
integrated, coordinated, strategic national health workforce policy be
the primary objective of any advisory committee or national
commission. The House bill contains a clear statement that the
purpose of its advisory committee is "to develop and implement an
integrated, coordinated, and strategic national health workforce
policy reflective of current and evolving health workforce needs,"
while the Senate bill only lists national health workforce policy as
one of several priorities.
-- The AAHC recommends the list of enumerated issues to be addressed by
the advisory committee or national commission include the
harmonization of conflicting national and state-based regulatory and
private self-regulatory standards (e.g., licensure, scope of practice,
accreditation). The Senate bill expressly directs its national
commission to "identify barriers to improved coordination at the
Federal, State, and local levels," but the House bill does not
expressly address the need for harmonization.
-- The AAHC recommends the creation of a permanent, independent advisory
committee or national commission that serves as a continuously
available policy research and consultative resource. The Senate bill
creates an independent national commission composed of members
appointed by the Comptroller General, while the House bill only
creates an advisory committee appointed by and reporting through the
Secretary.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Consumer Watchdog Asks HHS to Repeal Rule Allowing Health Care Providers to Decide When Notification of Breached Electronic Medical Records is Needed

Consumer Watchdog Asks HHS to Repeal Rule Allowing Health Care Providers to Decide When Notification of Breached Electronic Medical Records is Necessary

/PRNewswire/ -- Consumer Watchdog today called on the Health and Human Services Department to repeal a rule that allows health care providers and insurers to decide whether consumers must be notified when the security of their electronic confidential health information has been breached.

In a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius the nonprofit, nonpartisan consumer advocacy group said the HHS regulation violated the intent of Congress when it charged the department with writing the rules requiring notification if electronic medical records are breached. Consumers must be notified whenever there is a breach of medical records, the group said.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) requires notification if there is an "unauthorized acquisition, access, use, or disclosure of protected health information which compromises the security or privacy of such information." The act charged HHS with writing and implementing the rules. But HHS decided to interpret "compromises the security" of data to include a substantial harm standard.

"Under the HHS interpretation, if the breaching entity decides there is no significant risk of financial, reputation or other harm to the individual, the provider or health insurer never has to disclose that the sensitive information was used or disclosed in violation of the federal privacy rule," wrote John M. Simpson, consumer advocate. "In other words, the company responsible for protecting the sensitive data gets to decide if it needs to bother to tell anyone that sensitive health data was breached. This is simply outrageous."

Consumer Watchdog asked what prompted HHS to flout Congressional intent. "Could it be that Congress managed to fend off the pressures of the health care industry in passing ARRA only to have the lobbyists return to exert their influence on the rule making process?"

Read Consumer Watchdog's letter here: https://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/LtrSebelius102209.pdf

Consumer Watchdog noted that Rep. Henry Waxman, Rep. Charles B. Rangel, Rep. John Dingell, Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., Rep. Pete Fortney Stark and Rep. Joe Barton have written Secretary Sebelius protesting that the HHS rule violates Congressional intent. The Congressmen's letter said:

"The primary purpose for mandatory breach notification is to provide incentives for health care entities to protect data, such as through strong encryption or destruction methodologies and to allow individuals to assess the level of unauthorized use of disclosure of their information. Such transparency allows the consumer to judge the quality of a health care entity's privacy protection based on how many breaches occur, enabling them to choose entities with better privacy practices. Furthermore, a black and white standard makes implementation and enforcement simpler."

Read the Congressional letter here: https://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/LtrCongSebelius.pdf

Consumer Watchdog said that the Federal Trade Commission, charged with writing breach regulations for non-HIPPA covered entities such as Personal Health Records vendors like Google Health did not find any justification for introducing a "harm" standard. "The FTC remained true to Congressional intent and to promoting the public interest," the letter said.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

As August Congressional Recess Concludes, Polls Show Seniors, General Public Strongly Opposed to Medicare Cuts in Congressional Health Reform Plan

As August Congressional Recess Concludes, Polls Show Seniors, General Public Strongly Opposed to Medicare Cuts in Congressional Health Reform Plan, Says AHCA

/PRNewswire/ -- As Congress prepares to reconvene next week following an August recess replete with wide-ranging local discussion of how to fund health care reform, new polling finds both seniors and the public at large are strongly opposed to slashing Medicare-funded nursing home care to pay for the plan. Meanwhile, at events in Florida and Pennsylvania - states with large concentrations of Medicare beneficiaries - seniors and caregivers are urging their respective state congressional delegations to help preserve, protect and defend quality nursing home care as the legislative debate resumes Tuesday on Capitol Hill.

According to a new national poll (1000 RVs, 8/21-24, +/- 3%) and analysis from the Mellman Group (D), "78% of voters nationwide predict that if Congress cuts $32 billion in Medicare payments to nursing homes, the quality of care delivered to seniors will decline. Seniors are equally concerned, as 78% of those over 65 believe nursing home care will get worse because of such cuts, and a majority believes care will get 'much worse' (58%). Those approaching retirement age (55-64) express even more concern. 83% believe care will worsen." The Mellman Group data also finds a full 66% of voters are less likely to support their local member of Congress for re-election if he or she votes for cuts to Medicare-financed nursing home care. The poll analysis is available in its entirety at www.ahca.org.

Additionally, A new CNN poll (1010 Adults, 8/28-31, +/- 3%) released 9/2) finds that by a 43% to 26% margin, Americans believe senior citizens will be "worse off," not "better off," from the health care reform proposals now being advanced. 30% said "about the same"; 1% expressed no opinion.

The 9/2 Florida Times Union, in a story entitled, "Proposed Medicare Cuts Have Nursing Homes Worried," reports on a Jacksonville-area event in which seniors' advocates and nursing home staff warned Florida's Medicare funded nursing home care benefits will be cut $3.5 billion over ten years to finance health care reform. Lisa Cantrell, President of the National Association of Health Care Assistants, spoke at the Southlake Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Mandarin, FL. "To Cantrell's side, propped against a wall, was a large, scroll-like petition urging Florida's congressional delegation to rethink the cuts. . . Patricia Johnson, 68, signed the petition with her left hand, as her dominant right hand remains paralyzed from a recent stroke. 'If they have to cut staff here,' her husband, Artie, said, 'it would be down to what I would call the bare minimum.' He added his name, too."

The 9/4 Wilkes-Barre Times-Leader, in a story entitled, "Residents Petition Against Any Medicare Cuts," reports that "Caregivers, residents and family members gathered at the Riverstreet Manor Nursing Home Thursday to sign a petition to members of Pennsylvania's congressional delegation asking that any health care reform bill does not include crippling cuts in Medicare funding." The story notes "Representatives of The Coalition to Protect Senior Care are touring the country's nursing homes asking them to urge their respective members of Congress not to support the currently proposed health care reform measure as long as it includes Medicare funding cuts for seniors in nursing homes by more than $32 billion over 10 years. In Pennsylvania, which would be the seventh hardest hit state, the cuts would total $2.1 billion. In the 11th Congressional District alone, where Riverstreet Manor is, the loss over the next decade would be about $142 million."

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Congress Must Recognize Homecare as Cost-Effective Part of Health Care Reform

/PRNewswire/ -- In their effort to find savings in the healthcare system, the Obama administration and Members of Congress have been eyeing Medicare's home medical equipment (HME) sector for cuts. This sector provides medical oxygen, respiratory therapy, hospital beds, wheelchairs, walkers and other equipment and services that allow people to get the care they need at home instead of in a hospital or nursing home.

Already in 2009, Medicare payments for the most commonly prescribed home medical equipment categories have been cut by 9.5 percent. Medical oxygen reimbursement has been cut by 27 percent so far this year. Another measure aimed at cutting HME costs further is so-called "competitive" bidding.

"The American Association for Homecare urges Congress to recognize that home care is a cost-effective alternative to more expensive forms of care, and should therefore be a critical component -- not a casualty -- of American health care reform. Current and proposed cuts to Medicare's home medical equipment sector are not an effective way to reduce overall Medicare spending. These cuts are likely to increase Medicare costs over time by forcing more seniors into nursing homes and hospitals, blocking preventative care, and causing more frequent visits to emergency rooms.

"Quality home medical equipment and services facilitate hospital discharges, reduce hospital readmissions and emergency room visits, and help to keep seniors and people with disabilities out of more expensive institutional settings. As Congress debates health care reforms, it is important that it keeps these facts in mind and recognizes home care as a partner in improving the quality of American health care and reducing overall health care costs.

"Most home medical equipment costs just dollars a day. The cost of providing the equipment and service for home oxygen, for example, is less than $7 per day under Medicare. Compare that to the average daily cost of about $200 for a nursing facility and more than $5,000 per day for a hospital stay under Medicare.

"According to a recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine, up to one-fifth of all Medicare patients are readmitted to hospitals within one month of being discharged. These unplanned visits cost Medicare an estimated $17 billion in 2004. One reason for the high readmission rates is the lack of continued interaction and guidance once patients are dismissed. Home medical equipment providers help to fill this gap by smoothing the transition from hospital to home with the equipment and services patients need.

"This year, Medicare payments for the most commonly prescribed home medical equipment categories have been cut by 9.5 percent, including complex rehabilitative power wheelchairs. Medical oxygen reimbursement has also been cut by 27 percent so far this year. Home oxygen is a critical, life-sustaining medical treatment prescribed to nearly 1.5 million Medicare patients each year who suffer from respiratory illnesses such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

"Another measure aimed at cutting HME costs further has been labeled 'competitive' acquisition. A regulation enacted in the final hours of the Bush administration would selectively contract with a small number of home care providers based on a race to bid the lowest payment. Even among those who agree to new bid-determined payment rates, Medicare only allows a select few to provide the items, which will have the long-term result of reducing the number of companies competing to offer home care products.

"These cuts in reimbursement are having a negative impact on the quality of equipment and the level of services that providers are able to furnish to consumers who have severe disabilities and who are in greatest need of mobility products and services.

"Home medical equipment and service is already the most cost-effective slowest-growing portion of Medicare spending, increasing only 0.75 percent per year, according to the latest National Health Expenditures data from Medicare. That compares to more than 6 percent annual growth for Medicare spending overall. Moreover, home medical equipment represents only 1.6 percent of the Medicare budget.

"As Congress deliberates cuts to Medicare, they would do well to recognize that cuts to home medical equipment will increase long-term Medicare costs. The home medical equipment sector should be seen as a key element in reducing overall Medicare costs."

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Sen. Judson Hill (GA): All Health Care Reform is Not Created Equal

With Democratic control of both the White House and Congress, national health care reform has a better chance of passing now than any time in recent history. Americans agree that change in our health care system is necessary. Escalating health care and insurance premiums are unsustainable for most families, businesses and all levels of government. Every day it becomes more and more evident that all health care reform is not created equal.

Conservatives have worked for years to change the fundamentals of health care and health care financing to achieve a patient centered, prevention focused, free market system. Many moderates and liberals want government-based health care reform in which the government provides for everyone and health care is “free.” National leaders are advancing numerous reform proposals. Yes, America needs health care reform, but be careful which version you ask for because as the saying goes, “choose your rut in the road carefully since you’ll be in it for the next 100 miles”.

Political experts today will tell you that some sort of health care reform will pass. Any national health care reform measures that survive the political hurdles necessary to become law will be very difficult to change in the future. You and I have a vested interest in which reform proposal actually becomes law.

Early free market successes have begun in several states. These conservative initiatives offer healthier outcomes, stabilized costs, and tax savings and incentives for individual responsibility. For example, Georgia law now incentivizes people to choose healthy behaviors by actually allowing health insurance companies to partially refund premiums to people who stay healthy. But to date, no insurance company has refunded premiums. It’s time we ask them why not?

Three simple conservative steps would improve health care, lower costs and reduce the number of people without health insurance. First, all insurance should be owned by the individual so your financial security and health care coverage is not at risk just because you left your job and lost your company’s insurance. Second, everyone should be able to pay for health care and health insurance with before tax dollars. And third, we should reward personal responsibility and healthy choices with lower insurance premiums.

Governments can and should transform their health care programs. Taxpayers cannot afford to expand and sustain Medicare and Medicaid programs. Instead millions of dollars can be saved by allowing qualified, lower income earners to use their government health care assistance subsidy as a scholarship to buy private health insurance through their employer. In most cases this is a much less expensive option that provides better and more accessible health care. Under such a plan, physician reimbursements for government programs are higher and state taxpayers would save millions of dollars.

If America chooses a national more socialized plan similar to government plans in Western Europe, there will be a huge price to pay. The consequences of this choice are monumental and long-term. European and Canadian health care is characterized by delayed treatments, rationing of care, exorbitant taxpayer costs and sometimes the loss of life. In these countries people with higher incomes purchase private insurance to get to the” head of the line” for better treatment for themselves and their families. Those who chose to buy private insurance continue to pay much higher taxes for national care to cover everyone else. Europeans and Canadians even come to the U.S. to find better health care with easier access for treatment, and yet our government wants to put forth a similar government plan.

Earlier this year the Obama Administration and the Democrat controlled Congress quickly rushed through billions of government spending in the federal “stimulus” bill. Health care reforms cannot be rushed. Health care delivery and financing is too complex. Although Democrats in Congress may have the votes, now is not the time to “just pass” health care reform legislation and then fill in the blanks later. This is not the time to experiment. The details matter too much because lives are at risk.

As we work toward health care reform, everyone should answer three questions and then call their representatives. “What type of reform do you want - patient centered or government centered?” “Should our government be in the health care business or should we incentivize physician-patient relationships?” And finally, “Which health care reform measure encourages and incentives personal responsibility for your health?” Your answers to these questions are vital because if you think health care is expensive now, just wait until you see the costs when it is “free.”
---
Community News You Can Use
Follow us on Twitter: @gafrontpage
http://www.fayettefrontpage.com/
http://www.georgiafrontpage.com/
http://www.politicalpotluck.com/
http://www.artsacrossgeorgia.com/
---

New CDC Study Shows Tobacco Marketing Influences Kids to Smoke, Underscores Need for FDA Regulation of Tobacco Products

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Matthew L. Myers, President, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids:

Several scientific studies released today provide powerful new evidence that tobacco marketing causes kids to smoke, while anti-tobacco advertising campaigns prevent smoking. These studies send a loud and clear message to the nation's policy makers: We need less tobacco marketing and more tobacco prevention.

It is critical that Congress this year pass legislation granting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to regulate tobacco products and marketing, which among other things would crack down on tobacco marketing that appeals to kids. It is also imperative that Congress and the states increase funding for programs proven to prevent kids from smoking and help smokers quit.

CDC Study: Youth Smokers Overwhelmingly Prefer Three Most Heavily Advertised Brands

A study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) finds that the three most heavily advertised cigarette brands - Philip Morris' Marlboro, Lorillard's Newport and R.J. Reynolds' Camel - continue to be the preferred brands of youth smokers. These brands were preferred by 78.2 percent of middle school smokers and 86.5 percent of high school smokers. Marlboro is preferred by more high school smokers, 52.3 percent, than all other brands combined.

This study indicates that, despite limited restrictions placed on tobacco marketing by the 1998 state tobacco settlement, tobacco marketing continues to have a large and disproportionate impact on the nation's youth. While tobacco companies claim they do not market to kids, they're sure doing a good job of getting kids to use their products. This study was published in the February 13, 2009, issue of the CDC journal Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (www.cdc.gov/mmwr).

Congress can protect our nation's children by granting the FDA authority to regulate the manufacturing, marketing and sale of tobacco products. This bill would impose specific restrictions on tobacco marketing that appeals to children. It would limit tobacco advertising in stores and in magazines with significant teen readership to black-and-white text only, eliminating the colorful images that depict smoking as cool and glamorous. It would ban outdoor tobacco advertising near schools and playgrounds, end tobacco sponsorships of sports and entertainment events, and require stores to place tobacco products behind the counter. The bill would also grant the FDA and the states authority to further limit tobacco marketing.

In addition to these marketing restrictions, the legislation would require larger and more effective health warnings, ban misleading terms such as "light" and "low-tar," strictly regulate all health claims about tobacco products, require disclosure of the contents of and changes to tobacco products, and empower the FDA to mandate changes in tobacco products, such as the reduction or removal of harmful ingredients.

Three Studies Finds truth(R) Prevention Campaign Reduces Smoking and Saves Money

In addition to the new CDC studies, three new research papers find that truth(R), the national youth smoking prevention campaign conducted by the American Legacy Foundation, has been both highly effective and cost-effective in preventing America's youth from starting to smoke. One study found that truth(R) was directly responsible for keeping 450,000 teens from starting to smoke during its first four years, while a second study found that the campaign not only paid for itself in its first two years, but also saved between $1.9 billion and $5.4 billion in health care costs. These two studies were published online today by the American Journal of Prevention Medicine (www.ajpm-online.net). A third study in the February issue of Ethnicity and Health found that youth exposed to the truth(R) campaign were more likely to have anti-tobacco beliefs and attitudes.

These studies show that tobacco prevention campaigns are a vital element of the overall effort to reduce tobacco use and its devastating consequences. Unfortunately, both nationally and in the states, these programs are badly underfunded and fall woefully short of the $13.4 billion a year the tobacco companies spend to market their deadly and addictive products. This year, the states will collect $24.6 billion in revenue from the tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes, but will spend less than three percent of it on tobacco prevention and cessation programs. No state currently meets the CDC's recommendation for funding such programs and many states are considering cuts to their programs.

It is critical that both the federal government and the states increase funding for programs to prevent kids from smoking and help smokers quit. As underscored by the new studies, the evidence is abundantly clear that these programs not only reduce smoking and save lives, they save money by reducing tobacco-related health care costs. It is penny-wise and pound-foolish to skimp on funding for these programs.

Today's new studies follow a landmark August 2008 report by the National Cancer Institute that reached the federal government's strongest conclusions to date that 1) tobacco advertising and promotion cause kids to smoke and 2) mass media campaigns are effective at reducing smoking, especially when combined with other tobacco control strategies.

Tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable death in the United States, killing more than 400,000 people and costing the nation nearly $100 billion in health care bills year. The Institute of Medicine, the President's Cancer Plan and other public health authorities have recommended a clear plan for winning the fight against tobacco use. It includes FDA regulation of tobacco products, well-funded tobacco prevention and cessation programs, and other proven measures such as higher tobacco taxes and smoke-free workplace laws. It is critical that Congress and other elected leaders take urgent action to protect our children and the nation's health.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

SCHIP Provides Health Coverage to 7.4 Million Children in 2008

Some 7.4 million children were enrolled in the State Children's Health
Insurance Program (SCHIP) in 2008 -- a four percent increase over the
previous year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
announced today. The announcement comes as Congress is debating
reauthorization of SCHIP, which is projected to expand coverage to an
additional four million children.

"With unemployment numbers rising and the economy struggling to regain
momentum, more and more American families are relying on SCHIP to insure
their children get the health coverage they need," said Acting HHS
Secretary Charles Johnson. "It is no surprise that SCHIP enrollment
went up in 2008 and we expect this trend to continue well into 2009 if
the program is reauthorized."

Created in 1997, SCHIP is a state and federal partnership designed to
help uninsured children. SCHIP received $40 billion in federal funds
over 10 years through 2007. The Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension
Act of 2007 extended the program until March 31, 2009, with an
appropriation of $5 billion for each of fiscal years 2008 and 2009, with
fiscal year 2009 funding available only through March 31, 2009. The
legislation also provided $1.6 billion in funding for states with SCHIP
budget shortfalls for fiscal year 2008 and $275 million for state
shortfalls through the first two quarters of fiscal year 2009.

Enrollment data, compiled by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS), and based on state reports, show that 7.4 million
children were enrolled in SCHIP at some point during federal fiscal year
(FFY) 2008, compared to 7.1 million for fiscal 2007. During FFY 2008,
334,616 adults were covered with SCHIP funds.

"While more children are relying on the program, we know millions more
children need health care coverage and that is why we need a strong
SCHIP to meet the nation's growing need," said Acting Secretary Johnson.
"President Obama believes that healthy children are the key to a healthy
economy and a healthy future for our country. We look forward to
working closely with Congress to reauthorize SCHIP and to working with
the States to do every thing we can to enroll every eligible child in
the program."

The SCHIP targets uninsured children who live in families with incomes
generally around 200 percent of the federal poverty level ($42,000 for a
family of four in 2008), which is too high in most states to qualify for
Medicaid, but in many cases, too low to afford private coverage.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page