Republicans debate mini-bailouts for hospitals

Associated Press ^ | Feb 9, 2014 11:34 AM EST | Ray Henry and Christina A. Cassidy

[Olog-hai]

Republican governors scored easy political points by rejecting President Barack Obama’s plan to enroll more poor people in government health insurance.

Now Republican leaders in Georgia and Mississippi may be bailing out hospitals that will lose funding they would have gotten from Obama’s health care law. South Carolina’s leaders increased payments to some hospitals in a push to improve rural health, though the extra money likely placated hospital officials who might otherwise have pressured Republicans to adopt the Democratic plan.

The basic problem is simple: Obama’s overhaul is not being implemented as was planned. Its designers assumed that very few people would lack health insurance, meaning the U.S. government could reduce the payments it makes to hospitals for treating poor and uninsured patients. But after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, 25 states refused to expand their government-funded Medicaid programs or are still debating it, leaving large numbers of the poor without health insurance. Without health insurance, those low-income patients cannot fully pay for treatment. …

[Olog-hai]

So the GOP is wrong for not expanding Medicaid as Obama dictated, is what the AP is saying here.

[arderkrag]

No Obamacare. No bailouts.

[freeandfreezing]

Regardless of whether or not states expand Medicaid, Obamacare will create great stress for hospitals all over the country.

In New Hampshire, around one third of hospitals are not on the provider list for the only policies available on the Obamacare Exchange. And there is no out of network coverage. So any person who goes to those hospitals is "uninsured" as far as their bills at that hospital are concerned. The state does cover expenses at those hospitals for Medicaid patients, but at a low reimbursement rate.

Even for hospitals on the Anthem provider list, the Obamacare policies have such high deductibles that many lower income people will be unable to pay the bills they get from the hospital.

The hospitals are in a far worse position than they used to be in, and they may end up asking the taxpayers to bail them out.

[Zenjitsuman]

No more bailouts. Blame Obamacare, change the Senate, and then change the law. This Obama’s and Justice Roberts fault.

[Rodamala]

No and No.

[Ben Ficklin]

This is a very significant transfer of wealth from the states that rejected the medicare expansion money to the states that did accept.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

What I would do is to come up with substantive tax breaks for any physicians, physician groups, or any caregiver groups, that can show that they have better outcomes, better patient satisfaction, and treat more people, for less money. The assessment would have to involve patient satisfaction (as determined from the patients themselves) and prove that treatment wasn't being withheld. I would make it a national contest. A competition. AND, I would suspend any rules preventing physicians from owning or starting their own hospital/treatment centers. I guarantee there would be a ton of viable options presented, that go way beyond the ability of the current administration-driven plan to provide the best care for the least money.

I would rather work for less, if I am in charge of my patient’s care, and I am not making decisions based on the ill-informed drivel coming from non-clinical bean counters.