Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

Sound Off: Are Military Discounts Fair?

0
0
"Do you have a military discount?" If I had a nickel for every time I've heard my husband say this -- at the movie theater, pizza place, tire center, hardware store -- I guess we wouldn't need to ask for discounts.

Every little bit helps, right? But military folks aren't the only ones having to budget these days -- the entire country is feeling the pinch. So why should we get special treatment?

Although the phrase "military-civilian divide" has been around since the Vietnam War, it is seeing a lot more press lately. Journalists, scholars, and commentators are analyzing the widening gap of understanding between the public and our shrinking military population. While the negative effects of such a gap are largely agreed-upon, the causes of this divide are the subject of hot debate.

Who is to blame? What roll do military members play in widening the gap? Do we expect benefits such as military discounts? What message does this send to our civilian neighbors? Do they resent us when we claim a discount while they pay full price?

Recently, I launched these questions into the cyberspace via social media, and the viewpoints that came back were mainly in support of offering military discounts. Although, there were hints that the issue is complex:

"As a military family we are very much into making our dollars stretch as far as possible, so it would be silly for us to leave these discounts unused. We have saved hundreds of dollars (if not thousands) over the years." - Nichole, 33, AF spouse.

"I do not feel any guilt enjoying this small benefit at a very limited number of businesses. I pay for my health insurance, I pay my taxes, I have lived in countries that lack the conveniences Americans enjoy on a daily basis, I have moved 12 times in 18 years and paid thousands of dollars out of pocket over the years to re-stock my pantry without being able to shop 'sales' or use coupons." - Katie, 46, Marine Spouse.

"But when does the notion change from appreciation to expectation? That is where I have concerns." - Jackie, 35, civilian.

"I ask. It's a way that business has decided to express it's appreciation, and I appreciate that business right back! I don't feel entitled, I feel appreciated." - Jill, 48, retired AF spouse.

"I don't ask. To me it feels greedy." Marisa, 29, AF spouse.

"I view that discount as an act of patriotism, a quality, I for one, still value. Funny thing is, I have no idea which companies offer these discounts. I guess these companies have all opted for quiet patriotism. Maybe not so surprising these days." - Chris, 50, real estate agent.

"While I don't wear the uniform, the same oath of office I take as a government civilian is exactly the same oath every officer takes. So why is it that we are perceived as not always a part of the team? ... A great deal of civilians are deploying to austere places. Why discriminate?" - Jacqueline, 35, AF government civilian.

"I was shocked to discover some of the civilians in my community where using their similarly looking military ID for store discounts. Such abuse of an unearned discount in that form made me really upset." -- Ann Marie, 35, Army spouse.

"If students, teachers, AAA, AARP... are all encouraged to ask for discounts then there is no difference in a military family asking." -- Amanda, military spouse.

"There is a movie theater chain that gives a military discount for the active duty member and not dependents ... not nice! If you're going to give a discount, give it to the entire family. We serve too!" -- Suzanne, 43, Navy spouse.

"I think we've gotten spoiled by discounts in general. I have noticed that most military discounts are only given to the active duty member now and not the dependents, which makes sense to me." Angie, 47, retired Army spouse.

"With what our military personnel go through, that discount is well deserved. It is embarrassing what our troops make." -- Danny, 49, civilian.

"As a civilian, I feel the 'pinch' too, but I'm happy to be free thanks to the military. A discount is well worth our freedom." -- Joseph, 44, civilian butcher.

If variety is the spice of life, the topic of military benefits is the five-alarm chili of opinions these days. One way to cool this hot debate is for those of us who benefit from generous discounts to douse any feelings of entitlement with an ample dollop of genuine appreciation.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 days ago.

Premier, Humana partner on Medicare Advantage

0
0
Premier Health and Humana have teamed up on a new Medicare Advantage initiative. The Dayton-based hospital network and health insurance giant say they are partnering with a new value-based agreement. Under this program, Humana's Medicare Advantage members in southwest Ohio will have access to Premier Health's facilities and physicians. It's expected there will be 30,000 Medicare Advantage members in the Miami Valley affected. “Providing individuals with more opportunities to access care is a… Reported by bizjournals 2 days ago.

Wall Street trades mildly higher amid earnings, GDP data

0
0
Wall Street traded mildly higher today as investors digested more earnings and second-quarter GDP, a day after the Federal Reserve left interest rates unchanged. 

The S&P 500 (INDEXSP:.INX) was little changed at 2,109.03 at 3:45 p.m. in New York. The 30-company Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDEXDJX:.DJI) skidded less than 0.1 percent to 17,746.60, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite (INDEXNASDAQ:.IXIC) rose 0.4 percent to 5,133.10.

U.S. economic growth accelerated in the June quarter as solid consumer spending offset a drag from weak business spending on equipment, suggesting steady momentum that could bring the Federal Reserve closer to hiking interest rates this year.

With 64 percent of S&P 500 companies having reported second-quarter results, analysts expect overall earnings to edge up 1 percent and revenue to decline 3.6 percent, according to Thomson Reuters data.

*DATA:*

The U.S. economy expanded at an annualized 2.3 percent rate in the second quarter, while first-quarter growth was increased from negative 0.2 percent to 0.6 percent. Growth was led by consumer spending on big-ticket items such as new cars as well as home construction, the government said today.

The number of people who applied for U.S. unemployment benefits rose by 12,000 to 267,000 in week ended July 25, the government said today. 

*MOVERS:*

Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) dropped 1.5 percent to $95.50. The world's largest social network reported second-quarter revenue that beat forecasts but its profit fell 9 percent as it sharply increased spending to boost mobile revenue and future growth. 

NCR (NYSE:NCR) slid 9.5 percent to $27.49 after a report said Thoma Bravo ended a $9 billion pursuit. 

ADRs of Nokia (NYSE:NOK) jumped 6.5 percent to $7.02 after the Finnish telecom-equipment company reported better-than-expected second-quarter profit. 

LifeLock (NYSE:LOCK) tumbled 10.4 percent to $7.68 as the identity protection services company lowered its full-year guidance on anticipation of a recent FTC lawsuit weighing on profits. 

Procter & Gamble (NYSE:PG), a consumer-goods company, slipped 4 percent to $77.39 after its fourth-quarter revenue slightly missed expectations. 

Whole Foods Market (NASDAQ:WFM) slumped 12 percent to $35.94 after same-store sales growth cooled. 

Skechers USA (NYSE:SKX) jumped 16.5 percent to $149.69 as the sports shoe maker and retailer reported a better-than-expected rise in quarterly revenue. 

Colgate-Palmolive (NYSE:CL) fell 1.3 percent to $68.01 after the consumer-products company reported lower earnings, dragged by significant currency-related headwinds, though results met expectations. 

Marriott (NASDAQ:MAR) retreated 5.1 percent to $73.08. The hotel operator earned an adjusted $0.82 per share for its latest quarter, $0.01 above estimates, but revenue came in slightly below forecasts. 

Cigna (NYSE:CI) slipped 0.9 percent to $144.16. The health insurance company reported adjusted quarterly profit of $2.55 per share, beating estimates of $2.31, though revenue was slightly below forecasts. 

ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP) skidded 1.9 percent to $51.91 after the oil and gas explorer unveiled plans to further pare its spending for the year, as the company swung to a loss in its second quarter amid tumbling commodity. 

*COMMODITIES:*

August gold settled at $1,088.40 an ounce on Comex, down 0.4 percent. December gold which is now the most-active contract, ended at $1,088.70, down 0.4 percent.

West Texas Intermediate for September delivery slipped 0.6 percent to settle at $48.52 per barrel.

  Reported by Proactive Investors 2 days ago.

Here’s the first check Medicare ever cut: $331.71, for a woman named Mary

0
0
Medicare, the federal health insurance program created 50 years ago Thursday, writes a staggering number of checks. It now covers about 55 million Americans ages 65 and older, as well as people with permanent disabilities. Medicare benefit payments last year totaled $597 billion, or 14 percent of the federal budget. Reported by Washington Post 2 days ago.

California Wants Health Insurance For The Undocumented

0
0
Advocates say excluding undocumented immigrants from healthcare coverage under Obamacare violates the spirit of the law. Reported by IBTimes 2 days ago.

Why Do So Many Working Age Americans Choose Not To Enter The Workforce?

0
0
Why Do So Many Working Age Americans Choose Not To Enter The Workforce? Via ConvergEx's Nick Colas,



*Today we look at a unique dataset – Gallup’s annual poll of job satisfaction – to see what it can tell us about secular trends in employment, consumer confidence and spending.*  This annual survey of +1,000 people active in the U.S. workforce goes back to the late 1980s, so it is a *useful lens with which to consider issues like labor force participation rates that have shifted unexpectedly over the period*.

 

Most surprising news first: *Americans express a broad satisfaction with their jobs, regardless of economic conditions*. The very worst reading since 1989 was in 2011 when “Only” 83% of respondents said they were either “Somewhat” or “completely” satisfied with their jobs.  The peak was in 2007 at 94%, and last year (August 2014) it was 89%.

 

*The key takeaway is that declining labor force participation rates since the year 2000 (67% then, 62.6% now) aren’t because of any systemic disaffection with the American workplace. *

 

The other notable takeaway: *workers are (strangely, we must say) satisfied with what they earn*. Those expressing “Complete” satisfaction with their paystub hit a high last year (31%) not seen since 2010 and 2006…  Wage inflation?  What for?



*You could call it the “Mystery of the Missing Worker” – why do so many people of working age chose not to enter the workforce?*  Here are the numbers, as of the most recent Employment Situation report:

· 250 million: the total number of people of working age in the United States. 
· 149 million: the total number of people in that population that have a job.
· 8 million: the number of people who want a job but do not have one.
· 93 million: the number of people who don’t work, and don’t want work.

*To put some context around that last number, it is 30% of the entire U.S. population.*  This is the same as the current population of the entire West Coast (CA, OR, and WA) AND New York State AND Florida.  Plus another 10 million people.  Economists measure this with the Labor Force Participation rate, and it has been in decline since February 2000, when it peaked at 67.3%.  It is now 62.6% and last month was a new low back to the 1970s. People of working age increasingly do not consider themselves part of the labor force.  Most economists chalk this up to the demographics of an aging workforce even though virtually all the literature on the topic in the early 2000 predicted participation would continue to increase. 

*We recently took a long look at a dataset that doesn’t often see the light of day but does provide some useful takes on how workers view their jobs.  *It comes from the Gallup organization and is an annual survey of +1,000 employees since 1989 on their perceptions of job satisfaction in all its forms, from health and safety concerns to compensation to job security.  The complete data set can be found here, and the charts below highight the trends...

But here are the important takeaways.



*#1: Americans are consistently satisfied with their jobs, although the readings vary slightly through a given economic cycle. *The highest ever combined responses of “Completely Satisfied” and “Satisfied” was in 2007 at 94%. The worst since the start of the survey in the late 1980s was 2011, at 82%.  Last year – the results come out every August – the combined reading was 58% “Completely” and 31% “Somewhat” Satisfied, for a total of 89%.

 

*#2: They also feel relatively secure in their positions. * Last year some 88% reported being “Completely” (58%) or “Somewhat” (31%) satisfied by the security offered by their jobs and, implicitly, their employers.  The worst readings were in 2009 at 80% total and in the early 1990s at 79%.

 

*#3: Workers also report high levels of satisfaction with what they receive in terms of compensation.*  Back in 1991 – the worst year in terms of general reported satisfaction for this question – “only” 66% of respondents were completely or somewhat satisfied with their pay stubs.  Even during the Financial Crisis and its aftermath that number troughed at 70% in 2011. Last year a total of 75% of respondents were satisfied with what they received for compensation.

 

*#4: Workers who respond to the Gallup survey last year have the biggest gripes about health insurance benefits (only 61% satisfied), retirement planning (only 63% satisfied) and chances for promotion (68%). *

 

*#5: Conversely, workers reported exceptionally high levels of satisfaction in their relations with co-workers (95% completely or somewhat satisfied), physical safety (93%) and the flexibility of their hours (90%).*



*Frankly, when we started to look at these numbers we expected to see a mirror of the volatility common in consumer confidence surveys.*  A few points here:

· Consumer confidence as measured by the Conference Board peaked in 1966/67 and again in the late 1990s at readings of +140. 
· Troughs occurred in the early 1970s, late 1970s/early 1980s and post September 11 at readings of 50 or so. 
· The Financial Crisis took us down to below 30 in 2008 and readings struggled to get past 70 until 2013. 

*We therefore thought that Americans would feel broadly the same about their work situations as they did the economy as a whole - that things are still pretty bad and the past was much better than the present.  *This turned out not to be the case.  Yes, they express some marginal disaffection when times are hard, but the trough reading during and after the Financial Crisis was 83% satisfied with their jobs.  Hardly a pitchforks and barricades kind of number.  

*In short, we can’t blame lower participation rates on the nature of work – broadly speaking – offered in the American economy. * In Internet parlance, the American workplace gets 4 ½ stars and a lot of recommendations.  Perhaps, in the words of Yogi Berra: “No one goes to that restaurant any more.  It’s too crowded”.

*  *  *

*Of course, when work is punished in the Entitlement State Americans live in...* what else should we expect but 30% of the employable to sit at home? As we previously explained,



*This isthe painful reality in America: for increasingly more it is now more lucrative - in the form of actual disposable income - to sit, do nothing, and collect various welfare entitlements, than to work.*

 

This is graphically, and very painfully confirmed, in the below chart from Gary Alexander, Secretary of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (a state best known for its broke capital Harrisburg). As quantitied, and explained by Alexander, *"the single mom is better off earnings gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.*"

 

 

We realize that this is a painful topic in a country in which the issue of welfare benefits, and cutting (or not) the spending side of the fiscal cliff, have become the two most sensitive social topics. Alas, none of that changes the matrix of incentives for most Americans who find themselves in a comparable situation: either being on the left side of minimum US wage, and relying on benefits, or move to the right side at far greater personal investment of work, and energy, and... have the same disposable income at the end of the day.

Reported by Zero Hedge 2 days ago.

Happy 50th Birthday, Medicare!

0
0
Medicare turns 50 on July 30th!

On this day in 1965, United States President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the landmark legislation into law. Do you know who were the first Medicare beneficiaries? It was President and First Lady Truman. At the bill-signing ceremony, which took place at the Truman Library, former President Harry S. Truman was enrolled as Medicare's first beneficiary and received the first Medicare card. Johnson wanted to recognize Truman, who had become the first president to propose national health insurance, an initiative that was opposed at the time by Congress.

The signing of the Social Security Amendment of 1965 established the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Medicare is the U.S. federal health insurance program for people age 65 or older. Medicaid is a joint federal-state medical assistance program for people with low income and limited assets, and is a separate program that is run by each state under federal guidelines. Nearly all senior citizens are covered by Medicare and/or Medicaid today. Certain people younger than age 65 can qualify for Medicare, too, including those who have disabilities and those who have permanent kidney failure.

Here is a brief history of Medicare in the U.S.,and a Medicare timeline from the The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. You can get your Medicare benefits through Original Medicare, or via a Medicare Advantage Plan (like an HMO or PPO). If you have Original Medicare, the government pays for Medicare benefits when you get them. The majority of beneficiaries are enrolled in Original Medicare that is available anywhere in the U.S.. Based on a fee-for-service model, it allows a covered individual to see any provider that accepts Medicare patients.

Medicare Advantage Plans (sometimes called Medicare "Part C") "are offered by private companies approved by Medicare. Medicare pays these companies to cover your Medicare benefits. If you join such a plan, the plan will provide all of your Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) and Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance) coverage. According to Kaiser, Medicare Advantage enrollment has continued to grow, despite concerns that reductions in payments to these plans, enacted by the Affordable Care Act, would reduce enrollment. The payment reductions are aimed to reduce historical overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans, relative to traditional Medicare. As reimbursement rate cuts begin to stabilize, Medicare Advantage Plans are faced with a new challenge of further improving the quality of the care they deliver.

Some people may have supplemental coverage, such as a Medigap Plan, to fill in any health-care coverage gaps, or pay a premium for additional benefits.

Medicare helps with the cost of health care, but it does not cover all medical expenses or the cost of most long-term care. (As baby boomers continue to age over the next two decades, the need for long-term care is expected to dramatically increase, but most people aren't prepared financially to pay for it. Having addressed this issue with two parents having needed elder-care assisted living services, the lack of long-term care and people living longer is a huge issue, one that I will discuss in a future blog).

Medicare and Medicaid cover nearly 1 out of every 3 Americans. On the 50th anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid, regardless of your opinion of these entitlement programs, they have dramatically changed the landscape of health-care in the U.S. Hmm. sounds a bit familiar......Affordable Care Act? It is important to look to the future and how the programs need to be improved, and consider what might need to change/evolve to continue helping future beneficiaries with quality and affordable health-care coverage...............and keep a balanced budget, too!

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 days ago.

Illinois college to drop health coverage over contraception mandate

0
0
CHICAGO (Reuters) - An evangelical Christian college in Illinois will stop providing health insurance to students on Friday because of its objection to the Obamacare mandate to provide contraceptive coverage, a legal group representing the school said on Thursday. Reported by Reuters 2 days ago.

Increased Competition Kept Lid on Health Insurance Inflation, U.S. Says

0
0
The Obama administration said on Thursday that many consumers were benefiting from increased competition among insurers under the Affordable Care Act. Reported by NYTimes.com 2 days ago.

Census Bureau Announces Schedule for Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Statistics and American Community Survey Results

0
0
WASHINGTON, July 30, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The U.S. Census Bureau announced today the schedule for the 2014 income, poverty and health insurance coverage statistics from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey, as well as the 2014 American... Reported by PR Newswire 2 days ago.

The Revolving Door Is Spinning Out of Control. Can It Be Slowed?

0
0
(Photo: Office of Tammy Baldwin)

Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland and Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin announce the introduction of the Financial Services Conflict of Interest Act on July 15.

Five years to the day after the Senate passed the Dodd-Frank Act, Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin and Congressman Elijah Cummings of Maryland gathered for a press conference in the Capitol to announce legislation that would strengthen ethics in the executive branch and work to reduce Wall Street influence in Washington, D.C.

“We can’t afford to have a revolving door working to stack the deck in favor of Wall Street and against hard working Americans who are struggling to get ahead,” Baldwin proclaimed as she introduced the Financial Services Conflict of Interest Act on July 15. “The American people deserve to have trust in the fact that government is working for them and that the system is not being rigged against them.”

Soon after entering office in 2009, President Obama ordered into action an ethics pledge that requires presidential appointees to adhere to protocol aimed at managing the revolving door and minimizing exposure to conflicts of interest. The Baldwin-Cummings legislation would expand and strengthen the existing requirements by including senior officials with significant regulatory authority, increase the mandatory “cooling off” period to two years, and perhaps most strikingly, ban golden parachutes, which is the practice of a firm giving employees a significant bonus when they take a job in government. The golden parachute is an unspoken quid pro quo that has come to epitomize the perception of corruption in Washington. 

Advocates say that the bill would be a significant step in reducing this current (and future) administration’s heavy reliance on Wall Street veterans to staff the important financial regulation positions in the executive branch and limit former officials’ ability to exploit their government experience and contacts after returning to the sectors they once regulated.

The role of lobbyist influence and the revolving door in government has garnered a surprising amount of attention early on in the presidential election. Notably, Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has signed on as a co-sponsor to the bill, used her platform at the progressive Netroots Nation conference to urge presidential candidates to back this legislation. “[The bill] won’t fix everything, but it will throw some heavy sand in the gears of the revolving door—and it’s a bill any presidential candidate should be able to cheer for.”

Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley are expected to support the bill as well. Hillary Clinton’s position, however, remains unclear. Though, as David Dayen reported for The Intercept, Clinton has a rather troubling history of hiring senior State Department officials who she knew had lucrative golden parachute deals from various financial firms.

Republican contender Jeb Bush recently announced his intentions to push for a six-year lobbying ban for former members of Congress—the current ban is one year for House members and two years for Senators.

The bill would expand ethics rules to cover the most senior officials (GS 15 and above) working for the Comptroller of Currency, Federal Reserve, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and other financial overseers. There are already well over 1,000 presidential appointees subject to ethics rules; experts estimate that such an expansion would subject thousands more government officials to more stringent guidelines.

-*Good, But Could Be Better*-

Good government advocates applauded Obama when he introduced his administration’s ethics pledge for appointees within his first month in office. Nearly seven years in, the pledge appears to have had an impact on slowing the revolving door in his administration. According to a Public Citizen report, Obama has appointed 56 reverse revolvers—those who come directly from the industry that they will oversee—during his presidency. Bill Clinton appointed 64 reverse revolvers and George W. Bush appointed 91. To comply with Obama’s code, officials with clear conflicts of interest are required to recuse themselves. No other administration had such restrictions.

But as his term has worn on, he has been criticized for a continued—and some say troubling—reliance on Wall Streeters to staff the West Wing, as well as the SEC, the Treasury Department, and other important regulatory agencies. These are the senior officials who are charged with regulating the vast financial sector, many of whom currently do not labor under conflict of interest rules as strong as other appointees do.

Another important aspect of ethics is merely cutting down on the appearance of conflicts of interest. That’s been a big problem for the Obama administration as senior officials begin leaving en masse as his tenure winds down. As Glenn Greenwald wrote for The Intercept, “So many Obama officials have ‘spun through the revolving door’ that it’s almost impossible to count them all.”
Most recently, former Attorney General Eric Holder returned to the Wall Street law firm, Covington & Burling (a firm where several former Obama officials have already landed), where he worked before heading up the Justice Department. Marilyn Tavenner, who led the administration’s rollout of Healthcare.gov, left her position in February and recently took a job as the top lobbyist for the powerful health insurance trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans. A slew of other prominent Obama officials have taken lucrative positions at corporate powerhouses like McDonald’s, Amazon, and Uber.

“Whether they are going to roles where they will be directly lobbying government or go into positions where they are directing lobbying, you have these extremely well-connected people who know the people in government to call to sort out problems for the company,” Bill Allison, a former senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, told The Guardian in March. “Seven years into the Obama administration, this is the time when people are leaving and cashing in by joining companies.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, 82 percent of lobbyists who went through the revolving door said that they’ve lobbied their former agency or government office after their one-year cooling off period. This new bill is not intended to stop the revolving door, but merely to mitigate its influence over government regulation. So how is that done?

-*Getting Stricter*-

“There isn’t a magic [cooling-off] period; we just know that one year is too short. One year has been the cooling-off period for both the Congress and executive branch for decades, and it hasn’t worked,” said Craig Holman, the government affairs lobbyist for the good government organization Public Citizen. “We know with a certain period of time, those networks, that rolodex that people cash in on, becomes considerably weakened.”

The bill would also kill the practice of companies like Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase providing highly lucrative bonuses—so-called “golden parachutes”—to employees if they agree to take a high-level government position, typically with a wink and a nod that they’ll come back to the company when they’ve finished their public service. Under current ethics rules, government officials who have taken such payments are required to observe a certain recusal period for regulatory matters specifically involving their former employers, but not in general industry regulation matters.

These quid pro quo payments were thrust into the public eye earlier this year when it was discovered that Antonio Weiss, who is serving as counselor to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, was to be paid $21 million in unvested income and deferred compensation from his investment bank employer Lazard Freres in return for Weiss taking a government post. Financial reform advocates furiously argued that this should keep Weiss from becoming undersecretary for domestic finance, a position he was being closely considered for. The public pressure led to his dropping out of consideration, though he subsequently took the counselor’s job, which, unlike the undersecretary’s, did not require senatorial confirmation. Lew himself was grilled during his confirmation hearing as well for taking a golden parachute bonus for heading to the government. There are endless other examples throughout the myriad levels of the federal bureaucracy.

One of the more controversial aspects of the bill is that it expands the definition of lobbying to include former officials who engage in behind-the-scenes strategizing with companies that are in the sector the official was previously regulating. Critics say that this is an overreach because it would severely hamper former government officials’ ability to find employment in the field of their expertise.

“That’s a difficult balance,” says Richard Painter, who was the former ethics czar for the George W. Bush administration. Take, for instance, an energy company that wants to get an offshore drill passed in Congress. A former energy department regulator who now works for that company could advise them that such a bill would need to require certain environmental protection language. “I think that’s a legitimate role for a former government official,” Painter contends. “Using your knowledge in the private sector to advise people.” But not within a two-year period after leaving government, he adds.

The bill’s supporters say the current strict definition of lobbying leaves too many loopholes. “If you don’t include the sort of strategic services or look at exempting folks who do just a limited amount of lobbying, the conflict is still allowed to exist,” Baldwin told The American Prospect on the day the bill was introduced. “Sometimes the difference between strategy and lobbying is very small. That’s what people are so troubled by.”

-*What Do the Ethics Czars Think? *-

Presidential administrations are overseen by an Office of Government Ethics, but also have a team of ethics specialists in the counsel’s office. The head of the ethics programs have been informally dubbed the “ethics czar.”

While the Clinton administration imposed some regulations covering what government officials could do right after leaving their posts, the George W. Bush administration’s ethics guidelines basically just required abiding by existing law and avoiding any appearance of impropriety.

Painter was an associate counsel to George W. Bush and his ethics czar. He was responsible for enforcing rules that required Hank Paulson to liquidate his $600 million in Goldman Sachs stock before taking on his post as Treasury Secretary in order to avoid financial conflicts of interest.

Since leaving the administration Painter has been a vocal advocate for regulating the revolving door and cutting down on conflicts of interest within regulatory bodies. He enthusiastically supports forbidding the golden parachute scheme, saying that it’s one of the clearest and easiest ways to cut down on regulatory capture, and the perception of regulatory capture. He also favors expanding the period in which a government official cannot actively lobby from one to two years. But as noted above, he thinks that expanding lobbying to include strategy and broadening instances that call for recusal are too restrictive.

“It seems to me that you really aren’t going to be able to hire from private sector,” he says. “The finance lawyer would have to go to [the Department of Energy], the energy lawyer would go to the SEC. That strips what the good parts of the revolving door are.”

Painter also thinks that the ethics rules shouldn’t be limited to just the financial services agencies, pointing out that the revolving door spins with fury in health care, telecommunications, and energy as well. “It should be across the board. I would avoid these piecemeal actions,” he says, as the Baldwin-Cummings bill proposes.

Norm Eisen, who was the ethics czar in the beginning of the Obama administration, agrees that the law should cover all agencies, but sees financial services as a logical jumping off point. A report from the Project on Government Oversight shows how much the door revolves injust the SEC: From 2001 to 2010 more than 400 former SEC officials filed lobbying disclosure forms saying that they were planning on representing a client or employer before the financial regulator.

Eisen was in charge of overseeing and enforcing the first-of-its-kind ethics pledge, becoming known within the White House as “Dr. No” and “The Fun Sponge” due to his insistence on a rigorous adherence to the new ethics rules. He later served as ambassador to the Czech Republic and is now a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution. The former czar is highly supportive of the Financial Services Conflict of Interest Act and says the current pledge is good starting point for future regulations.

“I think the existing pledge has been successful in making the White House and the administration score well by historic standards on being free from conflicts of interest,” Eisen told the Prospect. It’s both doable and necessary, he adds, to expand cooling-off periods and expand ethics coverage to more officials. “Because they are in senior positions it makes sense to for them to enjoy a similar cooling off period as part of the rebalancing in the public interest,” he says.

Eisen also believes that bolstering ethics rules will not only cut down on the public perception of corruption in government, but will do real work in ending actual conflicts as well. “I want to make clear that you are able to get top-notch people from every field [while still] setting up safeguards that protect the public interest and public perception of their interest...I think this bill does that.”

-*What’s Next?*-

“A lot of people spend time trying to figure out how to punish people after the fact. Well, we’re trying to do some things before they even happen,” Congressman and legislative co-sponsor Elijah Cummings said at the press conference. “[The American people] want to know that there is a divide between the hen and the fox. It would be legislative malpractice if we did not try, and that’s what it’s all about.”

That sums up the essence of this legislation. The question is whether it can gain any political traction. It would seem that Republicans would be eager to support strengthening regulations of White House power, but so far bipartisan support has proven elusive.

Craig Holman with Public Citizen has been working furiously to find a Republican to bring the bill before committee, so far with no luck. He’s also been actively lobbying the White House to come out in support of the bill, which again would seem logical as it is building on the administration’s own policy. Still, the White House has remained quiet.

But with public support from Sanders, Warren, and a coalition of government watchdog groups, the revolving door issue is seeping into the political conversation as the presidential primaries ramp up.

“There’s always a chance, and we’re gonna try to maximize this,” Baldwin says. “We just want to get the ball rolling and seize the opportunity of this moment.”  Reported by The American Prospect 1 day ago.

IBM Watson deal could pick up slack for New York health insurance

0
0
The day after a report was released showing New York State's enrollment in its health insurance plans, IBM announced a deal with CVS Health that will use its artificial intelligence software to develop care management solutions. Under the partnership, patients with chronic diseases will be able to use natural language to interact with Watson's artificial intelligence, which can read and understand vast amounts of information, and learn about the patient over time. The offering could enable health… Reported by bizjournals 2 days ago.

Obamacare: 70 percent of previously uninsured Californians now have health plans

0
0
Nearly 70 percent of California's previously uninsured adults have gained health insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act -- and most of them say their health care needs are being met, according to the latest survey of the Kaiser Family Foundation. But the survey also found that plenty of challenges for the newly insured remain when it comes to paying for and accessing care. Reported by San Jose Mercury News 2 days ago.

College to Stop Students Health Coverage Over Contraception Flap

0
0
An evangelical Christian college in suburban Chicago is refusing to buckle under Obamacare's controversial contraception mandate, and Friday stops providing students health insurance. Reported by Newsmax 2 days ago.

Wheaton College Drops Student Health Insurance To 'Protect' Lawsuit Against Obamacare

0
0
Wheaton College Drops Student Health Insurance To 'Protect' Lawsuit Against Obamacare Reported by Opposing Views 2 days ago.

India Network Visitor Health Insurance Announces Completion of Food Grains Distribution to Godavari Pushkaram Visitors, Andhra Pradesh, India

0
0
India Network Foundation organized annadhanam in memory of departed members of India Network Visitors health insurance plan participants in 2015. Mahapushkaralu in Andhra Pradesh, India comes once in 144 years and millions of people participated in the festivities.

Orlando, FL (PRWEB) July 31, 2015

India Network Foundation sponsors visitor health insurance program for all non-US citizens visiting the United States for temporary work, study or family visit for the past 25 years. As India Network offers coverage for all age groups, many elderly parents in their 80s and 90s are able to travel and spend time with their children and grand children. India Network specializes in covering pre-existing conditions when purchased before arrival in the United States or after arrival subject to approval case by case.

India Network Foundation lost a few policy holders in the last three months that have passed away for variety of reasons while visiting their children and grand children. India Network Visitor Health Insurance Program insures visitors up to age 99 years old covering both pre-existing conditions and new problems. It is highly recommended that members contact the India Network Health Insurance Assistance Services when an insured policy holder is involved in an accident or dies due to an illness to help them with a variety of services. In honor of those members, Dr. KV Rao donated funds and organized annadhanam during recently concluded Godvari Mahapushkaralu held on the river banks of Godavari in Rajahmundry and several other locations. Many NGOs actively participated and offered high quality prasadams to devotees visiting the ghats of Godavari River.

Dr. KV Rao, President of India Network Foundation said that it gives him immense satisfaction that the funds provided to the food grains distribution project were well spent. The project touched thousands of pilgrims who came to Godavari river basin to take holy dip from around the country. India Network visitor health insurance helping thousands of families every year with parents visits but unfortunately due to old age, some visitors could not recover in spite of best medical facilities in the United States. India Network Foundation dedicates this Annadhanam project as a tribute to all those members who bravely traveled to the United States with all their medical problems and age.

About India Network Foundation
India Network Foundation, established as a US non-profit organization, has been helping the Asian Indian community in North America with programs and grants to academics from India for more than two decades. India Network Foundation sponsors visitor health insurance to tourists, students, temporary workers (H1 visa holders) and their families. All insurance products are administered by India Network Services.

About India Network Health Insurance

India Network Services is a US based company that administers visitor health insurance to visiting parents, transient residents, tourists, students, temporary workers and their families. Cashless Visitor health insurance plans are offered for all age groups with network based comprehensive coverage and with pre-existing condition coverage
.
For more information, visit http://www.kvrao.org. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.

PROS Completes SOC2, HIPAA, U.S.-European Union Safe Harbor Certifications for Internal Security Controls, Compliance

0
0
PROS Completes SOC2, HIPAA, U.S.-European Union Safe Harbor Certifications for Internal Security Controls, Compliance HOUSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--PROS® (NYSE: PRO), a big data software company, today announced it has again successfully completed the Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAE) No. 16 SOC2 Type II independent annual audit. PROS has also certified compliance with both the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and U.S.-European Union (EU) Safe Harbor program. These recognized standards underscore the company’s commitment to security and privacy, and to helpi Reported by Business Wire 1 day ago.

Hillary Clinton Burns Jeb Bush Over 'Right To Rise' Hypocrisy

0
0
WASHINGTON -- Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton suggested at a gathering of civil rights activists on Friday that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) can't credibly claim to support the advancement of minorities and the poor given his positions on Medicare, the minimum wage, education and voting rights.

Clinton made her comments at a National Urban League conference held in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, shortly before Bush, who is running for the Republican nomination, took the same stage. She didn't utter Bush's name, but made repeated reference to the phrase "Right to Rise," which is the name of the super PAC backing Bush's candidacy. Bush is closely linked to the PAC, and was fundraising for it until he officially announced that he would seek the Republican presidential nomination.

"I don't think you can credibly say that everyone has a 'right to rise' and then say you are for phasing out Medicare and repealing Obamacare," Clinton said, referring to Bush's comment last week that the U.S. should "phase out" the federal program that provides health insurance to Americans once they turn 65 and replace it with a different system. "People can't rise if they can't afford health care." 

Clinton referred to Bush's opposition to raising the minimum wage, Florida's ban on affirmative action in university admissions and state contracts during his time as governor and the controversial voter purge he oversaw ahead of the 2000 presidential election.

"They can't rise if the minimum wage is too low to live on," Clinton said. "They can't rise if their governor makes it harder for them to get a college education. And you cannot seriously talk about the right to rise and support laws that deny the right to vote."The former secretary of state added that "the real test" of a candidate's authenticity is whether their positions match their rhetoric. 

“Too often we see a mismatch between what some candidates say in venues like this and what they actually do when they’re elected," she said. 

Tim Miller, Bush's communications director, tweeted that Clinton's comments were a "false cheap shot." 


Clintonesque move to pass over chance to unite in favor of a false cheap shot. When you have no record of accomplishment to point to....

— Tim Miller (@Timodc) July 31, 2015

In his own speech at the event later on Friday morning, Bush defended his record, saying his administration had given people "the tools to move up in the world" by creating jobs and expanding educational opportunities. 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 day ago.

In Some Ways, AIDS In America Has Gotten Worse

0
0
NEW YORK (AP) -- U.S. health officials have updated their strategic plan for fighting AIDS, setting new goals for reducing infections and deaths.

The new document "seizes on the rapid shifts in science as we've learned more about this disease," said President Barack Obama, in a statement.

The plan unveiled Thursday updates one issued five years ago. Developments since then include new diagnostic tests, a daily pill for infection prevention and the implementation of the Affordable Care Act - increasing the number of people with health insurance.

However, new infections with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, have stayed about the same, at around 50,000 a year. Diagnosed infections have dropped in women and heterosexuals, but climbed in gay and bisexual men.

The updated document adds some new goals for 2020, like reducing the death rate among HIV-diagnosed people by at least one-third, and increasing the percentage who control their infection though medication.

It also reports on progress toward the goals that had been set for 2015. Health statistics for this year are not compiled yet. But a look at 2012 and 2013 data suggests slight progress in some categories, like the proportion of people with HIV who were linked to specialized medical care within one month of diagnosis - from 70 percent to nearly 73 percent.

But by some measures, the situation got worse. The proportion of people with diagnosed HIV who are homeless rose slightly from 2000 to 2012, to more than 8 percent.

Since AIDS was first identified more than 30 years ago, medicines have changed it from a death sentence to a chronic threat. About 1.2 million Americans were living with HIV in 2012, the most recent year for which that statistic is available.

© 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy andTerms of Use.

*Also on HuffPost: *

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 day ago.

Dual Eligibles: Best Practices for Managing Your State's Beneficiaries

0
0
According to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, there are roughly 9 million people in the U.S. eligible for both Medicaid and Medicare. These individuals, known as dual eligible beneficiaries or dual eligibles, include people with disabilities of all ages, as well as low-income seniors, whom often have costly and complex health care needs. In a recent webinar, Barbara Selter, a MAXIMUS long-term care expert who has worked with many states on their dual eligible initiatives, spoke about the important lessons she has learned through her experiences.

"We have found that this is a more difficult audience to support," stated Selter. "They have more varied questions and concerns. [And] as the number of elderly and persons with disability grows, and as the cost of care for dual eligibles continues to escalate, states will need a viable strategy for integrating care for the vulnerable and expensive Medicare-Medicaid eligible populations."

As a result of their often costly care, dual eligibles have been a major focus for states and the federal government, with a number of initiatives and proposed projects working to improve quality while reducing costs. One such strategy has been the creation of the Financial Alignment Initiative from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which is designed to better integrate services and align the payment models of Medicare and Medicaid and provide Medicare-Medicaid enrollees with a better overall care experience. As a part of CMS' initiative, states have the ability to propose their own Financial Alignment Demonstrations, which run for three years and propose changes in the care delivery systems through which beneficiaries receive medical and long-term care services. These demonstrations also alter the financing arrangements among the states, CMS and providers.

California was among the handful of states that implemented a dual eligibles demonstration in 2013. As a result of their pioneered demonstration they enrolled more than 120,000 beneficiaries. With its success, California is a great case study for other states that may be looking to implement a similar initiative for their dual eligible population.

Based on our work with nine different state demonstrations, including California, we have complied a list of four steps your state needs to take in order to have the most effective dual eligibles demonstration:

*1. Incorporate feedback from all parties as soon as possible*
We know that health care language and benefits can be confusing. Make sure that you are clearly defining benefits to both the beneficiaries and providers participating in these programs. Without clear language and broad comprehension, each of these groups will be unable to make the best use of resources. Gaining feedback from stakeholders and the advocacy community is also critical. Make sure the groups communicating to the beneficiary population have collaborated on draft materials and scripts being used to ensure that they are received and understood as desired. It's also important to obtain provider buy-in before beginning communications with beneficiaries to align messages and avoid confusion.

*2. Enhance your community outreach*
Once you have your messages to the provider and beneficiary community solidified, begin engaging both populations. To effectively reach the beneficiary population, look to conduct local, grassroots events like Town Halls and health fairs where people can learn more and ask questions. For individuals who may not be able to attend in-person events, webinars and outbound call campaigns can be an extremely effective way to get the message out. Also be sure to communicate with providers so they are aware of the benefits of your particular program in your state. Look to conduct telephone interviews and consider providing potential outcome-based incentives for improved care delivery.

*3. Improve your overall communications*
Health care and health insurance information can be complicated for many beneficiaries attempting to sift though and understand appropriate next steps. When looking to get dual eligibles enrolled in your program be sure that you have well-trained staffed armed with comprehensive telephone scripts and be sure they emphasize the benefits of participating in your program. Notices and fact sheets are two more great ways to communicate with the beneficiary population. When creating those, be sure they are easy to understand, use plain language, and are linguistically and culturally competent. The more synchronized and proactive your communications efforts are, the better the results!

*4. Manage your data appropriately*
Data needs to be shared across state, federal and vendor channels to ensure aligned care coordination and outreach to beneficiaries. A great first step to take is to work closely with your federal partners to ensure data integrity across state, vendor and federal systems, as well as establish protocols for sharing data with 1-800-MEDICARE. Once established, implementing a comprehensive data reconciliation process is advised to reduce data inconsistencies and avoid beneficiary and provider confusion. Appropriate access to data can also help you measure the health outcomes and efficiencies you achieve through your program.

Dual eligible citizens are an extremely vulnerable population, and meeting their unique needs requires careful design and oversight of new, integrated health care delivery models. These four steps will help streamline efficiency while improving overall care. For more information on California's demonstration, and for additional real-life examples from demonstration projects in other states, click here. To learn more about dual eligible demonstrations across the U.S. and the overall population, visit the Kaiser Family Foundation's website here.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 22 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images