*Health Insurance Marketplace Scam Alert*

For most people, the last day to enroll in a health plan for 2016 was January 31, 2016. But for scammers looking for a new twist on health insurance fraud, phishing season has just begun.

Phishing is a form of identity theft in which hackers use fraudulent websites, fake emails, and robocalls to attempt to steal your personal data, especially passwords, credit card information and, increasingly your Social Security number. Clicking on the link may open your computer to malware, like viruses and spyware. Or the link may send you to a spoof site—for example, a copycat version of the Social Security Administration’s site—to trick you into entering your personal information, including your Social Security number.

In what’s being called the Health Insurance Marketplace scam, you get a robocall purporting to be from a local branch of the Health Insurance Marketplace, the umbrella organization that oversees HealthCare.gov. The recorded message says, “You need to buy health insurance or face a fine. To learn more, press 1.” If you press 1, an operator who claims to “work with the law” asks for your personal information, including your name, date of birth, phone number, income, and Social Security number.

The more personal information you share, the more likely you are to be compromised. Crooks running the Health Insurance Marketplace scam start by trying to snag enough basic information—your date of birth and address, for example—to troll the web for more information. The more they amass, the more opportunities for fraud arise: They can open a credit card in your name, steal your tax refund, take out loans in your name, and even clean out your bank account or retirement accounts. 

*What to Watch For*

There are myriad clues that you’ve been targeted for the Health Insurance Marketplace scam:

· *A caller says, “I’m from the government.”* No, he isn't. The government will not call you about your health insurance, and no one from the government will ask you to verify your Social Security number or divulge credit card information.
· *You receive a robocall. *Robocalls are illegal. Unless you gave the caller written permission to call you, a robocall is illegal.
· *A phone recording asks you to press 1.* Don’t press that button—or any button. Pressing a number to connect to an operator—even if you intend to tell them never again to call you—only verifies that you’re a live respondent and puts you at risk for receiving more calls. Scammers will put your number into a queue to target later.
· *The operator asks you for personal information. *If you do speak to an operator who asks you for personal information, hang up. 

*Consumer Reports has no relationship with any advertisers on this website. Copyright © 2006-2016 Consumers Union of U.S.*

*Subscribe now!*
Subscribe to *ConsumerReports.org* for expert Ratings, buying advice and reliability on hundreds of products.
--------------------
Update your feed preferences
   
   
   
   
    Reported by Consumer Reports 8 hours ago.

AP photo by Matt Rourke
*Contrary to Claims by the Washington Post and Fortune, the Vast Majority of the Poor Would Gain*In the heat of battling Sen. Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton's camp (and the camp followers at the Washington Post and Fortune magazine) has made a remarkable discovery: National health insurance (aka Medicare-for-All) hurts poor people.

How is that possible? It's not. But a widely-quoted analysis by Ken Thorpe, a former Clinton administration official, used statistical sleight of hand to zoom in on the tiny slice of the poor who might pay more (while getting better care), and hide the vast majority who would gain.

Here are the real numbers we came up with by analyzing data from the Census Bureau's 2015 Current Population Survey, the standard source for estimates of income and health insurance coverage.

At present 9.2 million people living in poverty -- and 8.8 million just above the poverty line -- are uninsured. They often can't get vital care, and when they do, they face ruinous medical bills. For these 18 million, Medicare-for-All would be a godsend.

Another 10.7 million poor Americans and 21.5 million near-poor have private insurance. For virtually all of them, the new Medicare-for-All taxes would cost less than their current premiums.

Some of this windfall would go directly to families that now pay all or part of their own premiums. The rest would go to employers who now chip in to premiums for the poor and near-poor workers, but most economists believe these gains would be passed on to workers since benefit costs are, in fact, deducted from wages.

About 9.7 million poor and near-poor people have Medicare, without wrap-around private or Medicaid supplements. The vast majority of them would be better off under Medicare-for-All, which would relieve them of Medicare premiums, as well as onerous co-payments and deductibles.

What about the 42 million poor and near-poor Medicaid recipients? This is the group that Thorpe (and recent articles and editorials in the Washington Post and Fortune) claims would be hit hard by the new Medicare-for-All payroll taxes, which their employers would pass on to them by lowering their wages.

Yet, 34.6 million (82 percent) of these 42 million are children, retirees or others who have no earnings. Hence, they wouldn't pay any new payroll tax.

Two million others earn no more than $7.25 an hour, the minimum wage, so employers couldn't lower their wages to make up for the new taxes.

Only 3 percent (1.2 million) of poor and near-poor Medicaid recipients earn more than $15 an hour -- the minimum wage that Sanders has proposed. That's the number of poor households at risk of financial losses. But even that overstates how many might be harmed, since some pay out-of-pocket costs that Medicare-for-All would eliminate.

It's a shame that even this small group might suffer, and we'd recommend that Sen. Sanders tweak his plan to protect them. That shouldn't be hard.

But his plan would relieve the poor, as well as the middle class, from the daunting co-payments and deductibles that obstruct care and threaten finances. And it would abolish the narrow provider networks that restrict patients' choice of doctors and hospitals. Instead, Americans could go anywhere for care, a privilege that every Canadian enjoys, but is rapidly vanishing in our country.

In every nation with national health insurance the poor -- and middle-class families -- fare better than here. They bear less of the health care cost burden, have better access to care, and live longer and healthier lives.

It takes extraordinary mental and rhetorical gymnastics to portray universal health care as bad for the poor. Having mastered that art, perhaps the Clinton team will turn its attention to repealing the law of gravity.

Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H, and David U. Himmelstein, M.D., are professors of health policy and management at the City University of New York School of Public Health and lecturers in medicine at Harvard Medical School. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of those institutions.

-- 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 17 hours ago.

The Harvard Gazette has released a series of articles on inequality in America. They describe Harvard University scholars’ efforts across a range of disciplines to identify and understand this nation-defining and dividing concern and possible solutions. The first piece in the series opens:“It’s a seemingly nondescript chart, buried in a Harvard Business School (HBS) professor’s academic paper. A rectangle, divided into parts, depicts U.S. wealth for each fifth of the population. But it appears to show only three divisions. The bottom two, representing the accumulated wealth of 124 million people, are so small that they almost don’t even show up. Other charts in other journals illustrate different aspects of American inequality. They might depict income, housing quality, rates of imprisonment, or levels of political influence, but they all look very much the same. Perhaps most damning are those that reflect opportunity — whether involving education, health, race, or gender — because the inequity represented there belies our national identity. America, we believe, is a land where everyone gets a fair start and then rises or falls according to his or her own talent and industry. But if you’re poor, if you’re uneducated, if you’re black, if you’re Hispanic, if you’re a woman, there often is no fair start.”The article notes that inequality “has become a national buzzword and a political cause célèbre in this election year,” in part because across so many measures it is on the rise. Harvard-trained historian Dr. Carter G. Woodson was focused on a particular aspect of inequality when he founded Negro History Week — the precursor to Black History Month — ninety years ago. Dr. Woodson was especially concerned about the “mis-education” of Black children from their earliest ages — “The thought of the inferiority of the Negro is drilled into him in almost every class he enters and in almost every book he studies” — and the cumulative effects it could have:“When you control a man’s thinking you do not have to worry about his actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand here or go yonder. He will find his ‘proper place’ and will stay in it. You do not need to send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education makes it necessary.”Dr. Woodson believed teaching children about Black history and Black accomplishments was a crucial corrective step. We now understand the wisdom behind teaching not just Black children but all children Black history just as we make sure all of our American stories are being told as we prepare our next generations for our multicultural nation and world. Although Black History Month is over, every month should be Black and Native American and Latino and Asian American and women’s and non-propertied men’s history month.

Black History Month has helped infuse more multicultural attention in American education, but there is still a big struggle ahead to ensure children are taught the truth in schools in every subject including history, geography and literature. A misleading McGraw-Hill geography textbook called American slaves “workers from Africa” and the evil slave trade just one of many “patterns of immigration.” We must vigilantly monitor and challenge false history, geography and literature that sugarcoats and mischaracterizes the horrors of slavery, lynchings and institutional racism. As scholars watch American inequality’s continual rise, Black children and other children of color remain disproportionately at risk of inferior status, discrimination and racial disparities in measure after measure. We must challenge anyone training any of our children to go around to the back door — yet too often we are still leaving some children outside it. This must stop.

We should remember that for so many Black children and youths each day in America, there is too little to celebrate:
*3 are killed by guns. *

*4 die from accidents.*

*19 die in the first year of life.*

*86 are arrested for violent crimes.*

*90 are arrested for drug crimes.*

*148 are born without health insurance.*

*153 are born to teen mothers.*

*212 are born at low birthweight.*

*318 are corporally punished in public schools.*

*329 are born into extreme poverty.*

*399 are confirmed abused or neglected.*

*603 are born into poverty.*

*763 drop out of high school.*

*1,144 are born to unmarried mothers.*

*1,174 are arrested.*

*4,529 are suspended from public schools.*
Every day in America. We can and must do better and combat systemic, cultural, economic, and educational inequality — hidden and overt. There is no more urgent problem in America than inequality and its many progeny manifested in our education, health, and criminal justice systems and in all aspects of American life. This is the time to face the truth and to do something about our divided nation. We must all change the odds stacked against poor and non-White children so that every child in America has an equal opportunity to achieve and succeed.

-- 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 13 hours ago.

DALLAS (Reuters) - A Texas doctor has been found guilty of bilking $10 million from health insurance companies and the U.S. government through fraud, including being paid for attending surgeries while he was actually on his private jet, U.S. prosecutors said on Friday. Reported by Reuters 12 hours ago.

SF-SafeDump by Enterprise-IT-Security.com to Launch on April 12 with a Free Webinar hosted at IBM Systems Magazine

Zurich, Switzerland (PRWEB) March 05, 2016

Enterprise-IT-Security.com announced today that it will release its unique and patented system dump and log anonymization solution SF-SafeDump for z/OS mainframes in the U.S. on April 12, 2016. SF-SafeDump’s U.S. premiere will coincide with a free webinar hosted at IBM Systems Magazine on April 12, 2016, at 10 a.m. PT / Noon CT / 1 p.m. ET.

Whenever systems or applications run into problems, they create system dumps and logs. Exchanging these dumps and logs with software vendors has been standard practice for decades—but is it safe? "Far from being a harmless collection of technical data, dumps and logs frequently contain sensitive company and client data, sometimes even the entire contents of a computer's main memory," says Stephen Fedtke, CTO of Enterprise-IT-Security.com.

“The world's most important business transactions run on IBM’s System z, and hackers and saboteurs around the world would just love to get their hands on a core system dump coming from a large bank, health insurance or tech company, or even from the IRS or DOD," says Mr. Fedtke. "One dump in the wrong hands is enough to expose your company or even your country to significant IT risks."

To address these risks, Enterprise-IT-Security.com rolled out the Integrity 2.0 Initiative for System z at the beginning of this year. SF-SafeDump, the latest release, allows mainframe users to easily and effectively anonymize their system dumps and logs before sending them out. It currently supports IBM’s z/OS mainframe platform, with support for other leading operating systems to be added in the near future. SF-Sherlock, the company's flagship protection software, is also part of Integrity 2.0.

ABOUT ENTERPRISE-IT-SECURITY.COM:
Enterprise-IT-Security.com is a leading provider of unique security and compliance solutions and services for both mainframe and client-server platforms. The Swiss company with worldwide operations specializes in critical IT infrastructure and partners with the world's largest companies and institutions to successfully achieve and maintain IT environments that fulfill the highest security and compliance requirements. Its Integrity 2.0 Initiative for System z, which launched in 2016, offers new and unique solutions for security and compliance at a level that far surpasses today’s industry standards.

System z, and z/OS are trademarks of IBM Inc.

###

If you would like more information about this topic, please call Dr. Stephen Fedtke at ++41-(0)41-710-4005, or email stfedtke(at)enterprise-it-security(dot)com. Reported by PRWeb 4 hours ago.

The broad definition of 'legally domiciled adult' also would allow others older than 18 to qualify for coverage.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Reported by USATODAY.com 20 hours ago.

The health insurance giant has stayed near all-time highs for the past year. Here's how it could keep climbing. Reported by Motley Fool 19 hours ago.

Health insurance tax deductions, changes to health savings accounts, and drug importation are three of the most attractive ideas to improve healthcare costs in America. Reported by Motley Fool 2 minutes ago.

A great rating translates into cold hard cash for the health-insurance providers behind a plan. Reported by Motley Fool 23 hours ago.

You couldn't find two startup competitors with more starkly different cultures than Zenefits and Gusto — both of which sell similar human resources software to small businesses. 

And right now Gusto cofounder and CEO Josh Reeves is looking especially wise given that Zenefits was embroiled in major drama last month.

He has a warning for his competitor and others: "There are no shortcuts. You can't get somewhere faster by spending money," Reeves told Business Insider.

Zenefits had touted itself as one of the fastest-growing tech startups ever, and, at two years old, raised $582 million investment which valued the young company at $4.5 billion. But it crashed last month amid an insurance-licensing scandal that caused its founder and CEO to suddenly resign, and its new CEO offered some harsh words about its culture.

Gusto (formerly known as Zenpayroll) has also raised a lot of venture investment, a total of $136 million at a $1 billion valuation as of December.

Gusto's flagship product is a payroll system, designed with what Reeves calls a "people-first mentality." It lets bosses write personalized notes with the weekly paycheck, sends new employees a welcome message with a list of their teammates on their first day, and gives each employee a personal dashboard that travels with them from job to job. 

It's geared for companies with 100 or fewer employees and currently counts 30,000 companies as customers. Or as Reeves likes to say, to indicate how big the market is: "One half of 1 percent of all small businesses" now use Gusto.

It used to be a partner with Zenefits, but Gusto recently started competing directly with Zenefit's flagship product, software that manages a company's insurance benefits. And Zenefits just recently launched payroll software that competes with Gusto.

*Zenefits vs. Gusto*

The similarities and contrasts between these two startups go on and on.

Reeves and his cofounders, Tomer London and Edward Kim, founded Gusto in 2011, two years before Zenefits. But they launched their product in 2013, the year Zenefits was founded.

Where Zenefits quickly grew to over 1,500 employees, hiring 1,000 in a matter of months (and just had its first layoff), Gusto has slowly grown to 300 employees. Reeves calls the hiring process slow and "deliberate."

Both companies were founded in San Francisco with Zenefits opening additional offices in Arizona, and Gusto opening more offices in Denver.

Where Zenefits' founding CEO, Parker Conrad is short and stocky, gregarious and combative, Reeves is tall, thin, contemplative, and soft-spoken.

Where Zenefits had a hard-driving dawn-til-midnight culture, Gusto employees work in shoeless, warm, carpeted quiet offices and are encouraged to stop work and eat their free catered lunch together daily so they can mingle and socialize like family.

Gusto employees also get a round-trip ticket anywhere in the world on their first and fifth anniversaries, a month-long, paid sabbatical on the fifth year, and all kinds of benefits, including infant sleep training, grocery delivery, and house cleaning.

Even their names used to be alike: Gusto was originally called Zenpayroll. While Reeves insists that he didn't change his company's name because it sounded too much like Zenefits, there's that, too.

*The problem with Valley startup culture*

Reeves says he's focused on his own customers and products, and not the missteps of his competitors. He explains, "A bakery owner in Oklahoma City doesn't care about a Valley company's flame-war....That's what we're obsessed with, how do we serve that bakery owner well?"

But he does have a lot of thoughts about the whole Silicon Valley culture that contributed to the problems at Zenefits and other troubled, formerly high-flying billion-dollar startups. 

In fact he's thought so deeply about it, he's given a TED Talk on the topic, called The Startup Journey: A Marathon, Not a Sprint.

He's been elbows-deep in the startup world practically his whole life. He grew up in Marin County, just north of San Francisco across the Golden Gate Bridge.

He earned two degrees in electrical engineering atStanford, and he's collected a who's who of Valley stars as angel investors in Gusto.

Plus, this is his second startup. His first was Unwrap, which made a Facebook creation app called Buzzeo, sold to a company called Context Optional in 2010 for an undisclosed sum. (Enough money for him to "pay for his brother's college tuition," he says.)

So his general take about his competitor Zenefits' troubles is: "I am not surprised one iota about what happened."

He says, "As a student of Silicon Valley, I call it the 'hype ladder.' You can get caught up in these cycles, in things that should not be the focus and it creates a very short-term mind set. There are no shortcuts. You can't get somewhere faster by spending money. It's like pouring water into a leaky bucket." 

He adds, "I really think one of the biggest pitfalls in Silicon Valley is hiring for the sake of hiring. Another is financing for the sake of financing. A third one is getting caught up in comparison. I love to compete, but I am not building ADP or Zenefits." 

*"You can't keep spending $5 to make $1"*

Valley startups in particular, "get focused on top line growth," Reeves says.

"Call me old school, but all that matters is, can we build a sustainable business? You can't keep spending $5 to make $1."

Instead they should be focused on "the metrics that matter" including customer acquisition costs, gross margins, and customer satisfaction. "Otherwise you can get tons of customers and they leave you quickly."

Startups with the growth-at-all-costs mindset then have to "continuously raise money to maintain the optics" of success.

When a company tries to "take shortcuts" to growth and things go south, "the impact is not only on quality of experience, it's also on employee morale, your team dynamic and, potentially compliance," he says.

"That's what really shocked me," he says of Zenefits. "If there's one space where you should not be cutting corners, it's where we're literally helping people get paid or enabling them to have health insurance for their children."

*75 angel investors*

As part of his deliberate style, he says he interviews potential VCs and angel investors by taking them on walks or hikes, sometimes talking to them for years before they become investors.

"I think of fundraising as hiring. It should be the exact same match in motivation, values and skill."

This has resulted in Gusto having over 75 angel investors, he says, as well as a few traditional VCs.

His roster of angels reads like a who's who and includes actor Ashton Kutcher, Max Levchin, (CEO of Affirm and co-founder of PayPal), Aaron Levie (founder CEO of Box, who also invested in Zenefits), famous angel David Sacks (who is an investor and the new CEO of Zenefits), Drew Houston (cofounder and CEO of Dropbox), Elad Gil (another major angel, a former Twitter exec who also invested in Zenefits), and so on.

And even with that roster of investors, he's confident that he and his cofounders can never be forced out. They've structured their stock in classes, following Google as a role model.

"We will forever have control of Gusto from a stock and ownership standpoint," he says.

*A promise to end the women-in-tech problem at Gusto*

Reeves is also tackling the lack of women in tech problem head-on.

He's committed to hiring one female engineer for every male engineer hired and to have a 50/50 gender balance on the executive team.

While that's an admirable goal, such a promise can be tough to execute because many more men graduate with tech degrees these days, and men still make up the majority of the existing engineering employee base.

Since a higher percentage of men will likely be the applicants, a 50/50 goal can hamstring managers — forcing them to consider a person's gender more than they do other qualifications when hiring.

But Reeves says it doesn't have to be that way. The trick is to stuff the  "pipeline" with diverse candidates.

"We get a lot of applicants today," he says, which isn't surprising, with the kind of benefits it offers employees. Gusto has a good reputation as a place to work, according to job-hunting site Glassdoor.

So his recruiters are charged with getting more women and more people from diverse backgrounds into the applicant the funnel, by going to events, conferences and encouraging them to apply.

That way, diversity is solved at the application process, and managers can focus on a person's qualifications. Is this harder than the typical way to recruit?

Yes, he says, but "hiring is hard and hiring should always be hard. It's the most important topic."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Adam Savage reveals why he and 'MythBusters' cohost Jamie Hyneman won't be working together anymore Reported by Business Insider 16 hours ago.

Thousands of high-ranking state workers are expected to continue paying low rates for health insurance, including Gov. Rick Scott. Reported by cbs4.com 13 hours ago.

Photo by: Sarah Pitts

Lawrence, Kan.-Voters in five states and Puerto Rico hit the polls this weekend in a blitz that rivaled Super Tuesday last week.

But clarity about who the eventual nominees will be for the Republican and Democratic parties continued to be murky. Kansas pulled off an Oklahoma, garnering a large voter turnout and awarding delegates to Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders.

A Wichita Eagle article earlier in the week suggested Kansas would become the new Oklahoma, at Saturday's caucuses.

Although Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump led in the polls leading up to the day of the caucus, which was also the case in Oklahoma, Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders emerged as the winners in the sunflower state.

Oklahoma and Kansas relationship goes beyond simply being neighbors, both have similar racial and socioeconomic populations and a similar urban/rural area split.
Millennials in Kansas, like those in the sooner state, seemed to be "feeling the bern."

Zora Janney, 20, student at the University of Kansas said her ideals closely align with Sanders'.

"If I didn't vote for him and didn't come out today I would be sort of like letting myself down," she said.

Fredrick Closs, IV, 34, was one of many who changed his party affiliation on Saturday from Independent to Democrat. Closs was inspired to vote for Sander's after going to one of his rallies.

For 21-year-old Lane Frazier, a history student at KU, Sanders' policies on education and healthcare hit close to home. Frazier had kidney problems and owed more than $1,000, despite having health insurance. He will be graduating in May with more than $30,000 in debt.

"Bernie is the candidate who cares the most about the common person," he said.

Sadie Barbee, 18, a first-time voter, changed her party affiliation to vote for Sanders' and agrees with his policy on education.

"He's wanting to make it work so that our generation can go to college, even those who can't afford it," she said.

Matthew Eagle,18, said he turned out to vote because it's important.

"I want to be a part of politics, and making sure everyone cares about who is running the country, because they represent us," he said.

Marci Francisco, State Senator for District 2 of Kansas, witnessed a huge turnout in voters to the Democratic precinct in Lawrence, Kansas. "Almost double the number of people. Great to see the crowds," she said.

She plans to ask the Kansas Democratic Party to consider caucusing by house district, so that more precincts are added.

Dagen Reed, 23, a behavioral science student at KU, a first time caucus-goer decided to caucus because he wanted to be part of the change .

"If you want a revolution you gotta participate "

By the end of the weekend on Sunday Cruz had won the GOP caucuses in Kansas and Maine; Trump had won the Kentucky caucuses and the Louisiana primary; and on Sunday Rubio won the Puerto Rico primary. In the Democratic side, Sanders won in Kansas and Nebraska while Clinton won in Louisiana.

-- 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 11 hours ago.

The campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination is supposedly over, with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton clearly ahead of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and on her way to capturing a majority of delegates.

But for two hours on Sunday night, Clinton and Sanders debated as if the outcome was very much in doubt -- sparring over everything from trade and corporate welfare to health care and guns.

The debate, held in Flint, Michigan, was feisty and even cantankerous. Clinton and Sanders had several exchanges where they tried to talk over one another; Sanders, as always, brought his full array of facial expressions.

But the debate was also deeply substantive -- an argument between two seasoned politicians who have obviously given a lot of thought to the problems facing America, and what they would do about them.

The contrast to the Republican debate from last week, with its juvenile insults, could not have been more stark. Instead of discussing penis length, Clinton and Sanders argued over the sizes of their respective infrastructure programs.

In short, both Clinton and Sanders looked ready for prime time.

The debate began, appropriately, with an extended discussion of Flint’s water crisis -- and what the candidates would do, both to help the people of Flint who suffered because of lead in the water and to prevent future tragedies. And it was one of the few discussions of the night when Clinton and Sanders were more or less saying the same thing. Both called for setting up programs for Flint families, both demanded the resignation of Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R), and both called for testing of lead in pipes across the country.  

Sanders said that it is “beyond belief that children in Flint, Michigan in the United States of America in the year 2016 are being poisoned. That is clearly not what this country should be about.”

Clinton said, “This is not the only place where this kind of action is needed. We have a lot of communities right now in our country where the level of toxins in the water, including lead, are way above what anybody should tolerate. … I want to tackle this problem across the board.”

But then an audience member from Flint asked what the candidates would do to keep manufacturing jobs from leaving the country -- and the sparks started flying. Clinton said she wanted to use a mix of “carrots and sticks,” by which she meant new incentives to create factories in the U.S. and a proposal (just announced a few days ago) to “claw back” tax breaks from companies that transfer operations overseas.

Sanders used the occasion to pounce -- attacking Clinton, as he has before, for backing the North American Free Trade Agreement and other trade deals. “I am very glad … that Secretary Clinton discovered religion on this issue, but it's a little bit too late,” Sanders said.

“Secretary Clinton supported virtually every one of the disastrous trade agreements written by corporate America.”A series of contentious exchanges followed. Clinton attacked Sanders for voting against gun control measures, while Sanders attacked Clinton for going soft on Wall Street. They fought over the Export-Import Bank, the controversial government program that is supposed to help American companies that sell their wares overseas. Clinton supports it, saying it provides critical support for American jobs; Sanders opposes it, calling it a form of corporate welfare reform.

Clinton at one point attacked Sanders for opposing President Barack Obama’s rescue of the auto industry, saying that Sanders had voted against it. It’s an argument she hadn’t made before and seemed at least a little unfair to Sanders, by singling out one particular vote when he’d taken other votes to support the rescue and had defended it publicly on a radio show.

But as debates go, this one had relatively few distortions. Instead, the sharp debate offered Democratic Party voters a clear sense of the choice they face in this primary campaign. Stylistically, Clinton measures her words carefully, while Sanders relishes every chance to say something blunt or bold. Clinton talks about programs, while Sanders likes to invoke big themes. Clinton talks about what she can do, while Sanders talks about what he’d like to do.

A classic case was an exchange the two had over infrastructure. Clinton rattled off her plans for more than $200 billion in new infrastructure spending, including the creation of a so-called infrastructure bank. Sanders noted that he wanted to invest more than four times that much -- $1 trillion, over five years -- not just to shore up infrastructure but also to create millions of new jobs. Clinton would say her approach is more realistic; Sanders would say his approach is more appropriate for an economy performing well under capacity.

Of course, there are real and important differences between the two. Sanders thinks that taking donations from Wall Street is singularly corrupting, while Clinton thinks it’s possible to take Wall Street money while still being tough on the financial industry in office. Sanders wants to replace the health care system with a government-run, “single-payer” health insurance scheme, while Clinton has said she wants to build on the Affordable Care Act, further expanding and bolstering insurance coverage step by step.

But on virtually all of these issues -- with the notable exception of trade, on which Donald Trump says things that sound a lot like Sanders -- the philosophical difference between Clinton and Sanders is tiny compared with the difference between Democrats and the Republicans running for president. Near the end of the debate, both Clinton and Sanders noted that they still have a lot in common -- and that voters would be better off with either of them than with a Republican.

“We’re going to invest a lot in mental health,” Sanders quipped. “And if you watch these Republican debates, you know why we need to invest in mental health.”

-- 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 8 hours ago.

ez1095 software is now available for companies with accountants to assist in filing Affordable Care Act Forms 1095 C, 1094 C, 1095 B & 1094 B. Download for compatibility at no cost or obligation at http://www.halfpricesoft.com.

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) March 07, 2016

There are companies that must have accountants on staff because of the quantity of of employees or the type of business. The new ez1095 Affordable Care Act (ACA) software application is now available by Halfpricesoft.com to accommodate business owners that have accountants on staff. Employers that have 50 or more full-time employees or equivalents are now required to file an annual return in 2016 reporting health insurance they offered employees.

“ez1095 2015 software for printing ACA forms 1095 and 1094 has just been released for accountants that are employed by business owners.” said Dr. Ge, the founder of Halfpricesoft.com.

New ez1095 ACA form software is easy-to-use and flexible. ez1095 software’s graphical interface leads customers step-by-step through setting up company, adding employees, add forms and print forms. Customers can also click form level help links to get more details regarding the software.

ez1095 software is compatible Windows 10, 8.1, 8, 7, Vista, XP and other Windows systems. Potential customers can download and try this software at no obligation by visiting http://www.halfpricesoft.com/aca-1095/form-1095-software-free-download.asp

The main features include but are not limited to :· Print ACA Form 1095-C, 1094-C, 1095-B and 1094-B on white paper for recipients and IRS with inkjet or laser printer.
· PDF print 1095-C and 1095-B recipient copies
· Efile version available at additional cost.
· Support unlimited companies.
· Support unlimited number of recipients.
· Print unlimited number of 1095 and 1094 forms.
· Fast data import feature
· Print Form 1095 C: Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage Insurance
· Print Form 1094 C: Transmittal of Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage Information Returns
· Print Form 1095-B: Health Coverage
· Print Form 1094-B: Transmittal of Health Coverage Information Return

Priced at just $195, ($295 for efile version) this ACA forms filing software saves employers time and money. To learn more about ez1095 ACA software, customers can visit http://www.halfpricesoft.com/aca-1095/aca-1095-software.asp

About halfpricesoft.com
Founded in 2003, Halfpricesoft.com has established itself as a leader in meeting the software needs of small businesses around the world with its payroll software, employee attendance tracking software, check printing software, W2 software, 1099 software and barcode generating software. It continues to grow with its philosophy that small business owners need affordable, user friendly, super simple, and totally risk-free software. Reported by PRWeb 3 hours ago.

Obamacare, was drafted to make health care and health insurance more affordable and more available to more Americans Reported by Mondaq 1 hour ago.

In a March 16 Atlantic Information Services webinar, consultants from Milliman and Wakely Consulting Group will analyze CMS’s 45-day notice and Call Letter, and outline steps health plans can take to reshape 2017 strategies and bids.

Washington, DC (PRWEB) March 07, 2016

Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is pleased to announce its March 16, 2016, webinar, “CMS’s New ‘45-Day Notice’ and Draft Call Letter: Implications for MA and Part D Plan Strategies,” outlining the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ planned changes to Medicare Advantage (MA) and stand-alone Prescription Drug Plans (PDPs) as laid out in CMS’s preliminary 2017 payment notice and Call Letter.

Patrick Dunks, F.S.A., M.A.A.A., a Principal and Consulting Actuary for Milliman, and Tim Courtney, F.S.A., M.A.A.A., Senior Consulting Actuary at Wakely Consulting Group, will analyze the 45-day notice and Call Letter, and outline steps health plans can take to reshape 2017 strategies and bids. In a 60-minute presentation followed by 30 minutes of responses to individual questions, they’ll offer reliable answers to important questions such as:· What do the spending growth rate trends in the 45-day notice mean for MA plan payments — and enrollments — in 2017 and beyond?
· What is the expected impact of the last year of MA payment reform under terms of the Affordable Care Act?
· How much might risk-model changes, normalization factors, coding-pattern adjustments and encounter data affect plan payments for 2017?
· How much financial relief would CMS’s proposals for plans with large Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible populations give those plans? How would they affect other MA plans?
· What changes is CMS proposing to modify MA payments for employer group waiver plans (EGWPs)? What impact are they likely to have?
· What problems could CMS’s “suggestions” for reflecting the one-year health insurer fee moratorium cause MA and Part D plans? What should they do to prepare?
· How is CMS proposing to modify “meaningful differences” requirements for PDPs? What impact would those changes have?
· What new strategies might MA plans and PDPs utilize to cope with the business challenges they are likely to face as a result of the 45-day notice and Call Letter?

Visit https://aishealth.com/marketplace/c6a07_031616 for more details and registration information.

About AIS
Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is a publishing and information company that has been serving the health care industry for nearly 30 years. It develops highly targeted news, data and strategic information for managers in hospitals and health systems, health insurance companies, medical group practices, purchasers of health insurance, pharmaceutical companies and other health care organizations. AIS products include print and electronic newsletters, databases, websites, looseleafs, strategic reports, directories, webinars and virtual conferences.

Contact
Atlantic Information Services, Inc.
Shelly Beaird-Francois
sbeaird-francois(at)aishealth(dot)com
202-775-9008 ext. 3064 Reported by PRWeb 57 minutes ago.

· Trump or Cruz? Republicans face tough choices as primary race churns forward (Reuters)
· The Week the Republican Party Melted Down (BBG)
· Rust Belt Could Be Donald Trump’s Best Route to White House (WSJ)
· China’s Leaders Put the Economy on Bubble Watch (WSJ)
· Top Chinese Official Rebutts Soros Prediction for Hard Landing (BBG)
· China Plans Income-Tax Overhaul to Bolster Consumption (BBG)
· Oil jumps as sentiment boosted; analysts warn of glut (Reuters)
· The Odd Couple: Merkel, Tsipras Fate Tied Over EU Refugees Deal (BBG)
· As covered here last week: The Treasury Market's Big Short Is in 10-Year Notes, Repos Show (BBG)
· China angered by planned U.S. export restrictions on ZTE (Reuters)
· Europe Faces Pension Predicament (WSJ)
· The ETF Files: How the U.S. government inadvertently launched a $3 trillion industry (BBG)
· Draghi Aims ECB's Killer Blow in 11th Round Versus Deflation (BBG)
· European Central Bank Faces Questions Over Which Bonds to Buy (WSJ)
· Russia offers access to its Syria bases to help deliver aid (Reuters)
· In JPMorgan Fintech Bunker, Coders Are Too Focused for Foosball (BBG)
· BASF shares fall after report it is weighing DuPont bid (Reuters)
· Wall Street vets battle BP in fallout over Canada refinery (Reuters)

 

*Overnight Media Digest*

WSJ

- Donald Trump's success in attracting white, working-class voters is raising the prospect that the Republican Party could attempt to take an unexpected path to the White House that would run through the largely white and slow-to-diversify upper Midwest. (http://on.wsj.com/1TCNAfn)

- Nancy Reagan, the former actress who brought grace and style to her role as first lady in the Ronald Reagan White House, has died in her home in Los Angeles due to congestive heart failure at age 94. (http://on.wsj.com/1U5OShm)

- The Democratic presidential contenders clashed sharply over economic policy in a debate Sunday, with front-runner Hillary Clinton attacking rival Bernie Sanders for his opposition to a federal auto bailout and Sanders charging that Clinton-backed trade deals had helped destroy American cities like Detroit. (http://on.wsj.com/21R94d1)

- Record vehicle leasing could pinch new auto margins by creating a glut of good-condition used cars and adding pressure on new-vehicle margins after years of pricing gains. (http://on.wsj.com/1W1dd7b)

- The European Central Bank's expected move to further reduce a key interest rate is likely to drive down government-bond yields, further reducing borrowing costs that are already near record lows in many nations, according to analysts and investors. (http://on.wsj.com/1npS7U1)

- China's leaders made clear they are emphasizing growth over restructuring this year, but suggested they are trying to avoid inflating debt or asset bubbles as they send massive amounts of money coursing through the economy. (http://on.wsj.com/1QA51uf)

- United Continental Holdings Inc said President and Chief Executive Oscar Munoz plans to return to the carrier on a full-time basis on March 14. (http://on.wsj.com/1QEBtZ1)

 

FT

French utility EDF's chief financial officer, Thomas Piquemal, has resigned over the company's plan to build nuclear reactors in Britain.

The Pension Protection Fund is in talks with Philip Green and British Home Stores that could see the agency take on responsibility for 20,000 pensioners of the lossmaking department store chain.

The British Chambers of Commerce said on Sunday its director general, John Longworth, had resigned after calling for Britain to leave the European Union despite the business lobby group taking a neutral stance on an upcoming referendum.

The Bank of England is going to lay its focus on reviewing operations of the market risk managers as average daily trading payments held at the utilities topped 8 billion pounds ($11.37 billion) last year.

 

NYT

- The Obama administration, responding to consumer complaints, says it will begin rating health insurance plans based on how many doctors and hospitals they include in their networks. (nyti.ms/1TkOkW1)

- The Philippines will become the first country to enforce tough new United Nations sanctions on North Korea when it begins formal procedures on Monday to impound a cargo vessel linked to the reclusive nation, a government spokesman said on Sunday. (nyti.ms/1TkP8KA)

- For the first time, a law school will stand trial on charges that it inflated the employment data for its graduates to lure prospective students. On Monday, Anna Alaburda will tell a story that has become all too familiar among law students in the United States: Since graduating from the Thomas Jefferson School of Law in 2008, she has yet to find a full-time salaried job as a lawyer. (nyti.ms/1TkQ55B)

- As some tech sectors show signs of slowing, cloud services have created remarkable demand for highly educated engineers and mathematicians. And they are being compensated very well. (nyti.ms/1TkROrM)

- In an interview, Margrethe Vestager, the European Union's competition commissioner, discusses the issues underpinning her current investigations and whether she unfairly targets U.S. companies. (nyti.ms/1TkSfCi)

 

Canada

THE GLOBE AND MAIL

** Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's official visit to the White House this week should result in a new border pact that will remove a series of barriers hindering the flow of travellers and trade while improving security, says Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale.(bit.ly/1X6kWkp)

** In a new paper called Augur: Mining Human Behaviors from Fiction to Power Interactive Systems, a group of Stanford University computer science researchers revealed that they used the Wattpad "corpus" - a collection of almost two billion words (or 600,000 chapters) written by regular people - to help a computer understand the world around it. The team intends to make the program they built, Augur, into an open-source tool that other researchers can build on.(bit.ly/1ROFfla)

NATIONAL POST

** Nancy Reagan, the helpmate, backstage adviser and fierce protector of Ronald Reagan in his journey from actor to president - and finally during his 10-year battle with Alzheimer's disease - has died. She was 94. (bit.ly/1QFn5zM)

** The son of a former Ottawa cleric who encouraged Libyans to "take part in jihad" was reportedly killed in an armed clash with government forces in Benghazi over the weekend. The death of Owais Egwilla, described as a former Ottawa university student, was announced on social media accounts affiliated with Libyan fighters.(bit.ly/1W2HlPn)

 

Britain

The Times

* Npower's German owner to cut 2,500 UK workers

(http://thetim.es/1Qw0pE9)

The owner of npower, RWE AG plans to cut more than a fifth of its British workers as it braces itself for a fresh attack by the consumer watchdog.

* Business leader quits in Brexit row

(http://thetim.es/1U5whC7)

John Longworth was suspended on Friday after making a speech in favour of leaving the EU despite the British Chambers of Commerce's decision to remain neutral in the referendum campaign.

The Guardian

* EU referendum: British exit would be 'poison', says German finance minister (http://bit.ly/1Yi2xCE)

A British decision to leave the European Union would be "poison" for the UK, European and global economies that would last for years, the German finance minister has said.

* Grexit back on the agenda again as Greek economy unravels

(http://bit.ly/21fRvxA)

European finance ministers will once again deliberate over how to treat Greece's ongoing debt crisis this week despite the country desperately grappling with refugees pouring across its borders.

The Telegraph

* England's water market poised for M&A wave

(http://bit.ly/1X5sUKE)

Water utilities in England are braced for a market shake- up, with analysts expecting a wave of mergers, acquisitions and new entrants within the next three months to tap the increasingly competitive business supply market.

* UK manufacturing has hit bottom, says EEF

(http://bit.ly/1Qw1nAg)

Industry trade group EEF said that "rays of light" have begun to cut through the gloom which in 2015 caused the UK's manufactured output and orders to hit their lowest point in six years.

Sky News

* FTSE-100 giant Old Mutual plots 9 billion pounds break-up

(http://bit.ly/1ULqPVE)

The FTSE-100 financial services group Old Mutual Plc is plotting an audacious nine billion pounds ($12.79 billion) break-up which could spark a takeover battle for some of the City's most prominent wealth management operations.

The Independent

* Local employers take fight to Gatwick over second runway plan (http://ind.pn/1OX2kgY)

Gatwick airport's claims that a 7.8 billion pounds second runway would boost business and create 120,000 jobs have been challenged by owners of local companies who fear expansion could damage them badly.

* Female retail bosses fall out of fashion

(http://ind.pn/1X5u3BW)

The number of female chief executives appointed at UK retailers fell by 40 percent last year despite pressure to improve the number of women in senior positions, according to a new report. Reported by Zero Hedge 23 hours ago.

For the third time in eight years, the presidential campaign is doubling as a referendum on the U.S. healthcare system. And once again, the debate will revolve around the rising cost of health insurance and the number of people struggling to obtain or maintain coverage. The obvious difference this... Reported by L.A. Times 23 hours ago.

U.S. presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has reopened the health care debate by urging America to adopt a system more like that of other wealthy countries. In Sunday night's Democratic presidential debate in Flint, Michigan, he said, "When we talk about Europe and their pluses and minuses, one thing they have done well that we should emulate ... is guaranteed health care for all people."

He pointed out that even though the U.S. is the only major country on Earth that doesn't guarantee health care to all people as a right, we spend far more per capita than the UK, France and other advanced countries. Yet, even though he's right to think that we need a health care system more like those in Europe, his platform is under attack, not just from the right, but also from the left. Here is why I think his critics are wrong.
What to call it?

Sanders says he wants a health care system like those of other wealthy countries -- one that provides better results at a lower cost than the one we have. Unfortunately, there is no generally accepted term that covers all such systems as a class.

Sanders calls his plan "Medicare for All," but that is misleading. As we will see, his proposal -- at least the brief version posted on his campaign Web site -- differs from Medicare in some important ways. It also differs from many of the systems in other countries that he admires most.

Liberals tend to call Sanders' plan a "single-payer" system. That is correct, in that Medicare for All would in fact be a system under which a single agency would directly pay health care providers with funds from the government budget. However, many of the best health care systems of other wealthy countries are not single-payer systems in that sense.
The U.S. ranks last in the fund's overall evaluation of health care, despite having by far the largest per capita expenditures.
Their plans are surprisingly diverse. Some, like those of Germany and France, funnel payments through multiple independent insurance funds. Others, including those of the UK and Canada, are more decentralized than the "single payer" label suggests. None of them covers 100 percent of national health care expenditure.

Conservatives describe the health care systems of Scandinavia, Germany, France and other wealthy countries as "socialized medicine," but that term doesn't uniformly fit, either. Socialized medicine suggests something like the U.S. Veterans Administration health care in the U.S. -- a system that not only features a single payer, but one in which doctors are salaried government employees and hospitals are government-owned. That description, too, fails to capture the diversity of foreign health care systems, where we find a kaleidoscopic mix of salaried and fee-for-service doctors; for-profit, private not-for-profit, and state-owned clinics and hospitals; and both unified and decentralized payment mechanisms.

We could stick with "high-performing health care systems of other wealthy countries," but that is too long winded. For this post, I will shorten that to Euro-style health care, despite the obvious problem that Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan also fit the pattern in many respects.

Enough with terminology. Let's turn to Sanders' critics, starting with those on the right and then moving to critics on the left.
Conservative Myth #1: The U.S. already has the world's best health care system.

Many conservatives think, or at least pretend to think, that the U.S. already has the best health care system in the world, or at least that it did before the advent of Obamacare. Senate leader Mitch McConnell and former House Speaker John Boehner are both on record as having said so. A survey from Harvard University, taken not long before the passage of the Affordable Care Act, found that 68 percent of Republicans (but only 32 percent of Democrats) thought the U.S. health care system was the world's best. To support that belief, conservatives often note that world leaders like former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, Jordan's late King Hussein and the Shah of Iran have all sought health care in the U.S.

Unfortunately, hard data do not support that optimistic view. One of the most detailed recent comparative studies of health care systems in wealthy countries comes from the Commonwealth Fund. The following figure shows its ranking of eleven health care systems along with data on expenditures per capita (evaluated at purchasing power parity to avoid exchange rate distortions):

The U.S. ranks last in the fund's overall evaluation of health care, despite having by far the largest per capita expenditures. The Commonwealth study is not the only one to have reached that conclusion. This earlier post discussed other rankings that agree.
Conservative Myth #2: European health care saves costs only by severely rationing care.

The second conservative myth is that Euro-style health care achieves lower costs only by employing a degree of rationing that would be unacceptable to Americans. Here, for example, is David Brooks, writing the The New York Times:
Sanders would create a centralized and streamlined system. His approach would also, as in Europe, reduce the rate of medical progress, increase the rationing of care, increase the wait times for patients, induce many doctors to retire, and centralize decision-making.
In a recent televised debate, Presidential candidate Ted Cruz put it even more bluntly:
Socialized medicine is a disaster. It does not work. If you look at the countries that have imposed socialized medicine, that have put the government in charge of providing medicine, what inevitably happens is rationing.
Canada is Exhibit A for many who make the rationing argument. Consider, for example, this "explainer video" from Vox, titled "What is Single-Payer Health care?" After noting that such a system could save administrative costs, the narrator says, "But there's a catch." The catch is said to be longer waiting times and other limits on services, illustrated by a graphic showing that waiting times for health services are longer in Canada than in the U.S.
Most wealthy European countries do better than either of their North American peers when it comes to rationing by waiting and still manage to spend less.
Detailed data from the Commonwealth Fund report show how unfair the charge of rationing is, especially when based on a comparison with Canada. Of the eleven countries covered in the survey, the U.S. ranks last overall, and Canada is next to last. One of the main reasons for Canada's poor performance is its poor record on measures of rationing, where it has the lowest ratings of the countries surveyed.
· 48 percent of Canadians reported an emergency room waiting time of over two hours (11th place) compared with 28 percent in the U.S. (7th place) and 14 percent in New Zealand (1st place).· 38 percent of Canadian doctors reported that patients had difficulty getting specialized tests like MRIs (10th place) compared to 23 percent in the U.S. (7th place) and 3 percent in Switzerland (1st place).· 18 percent of Canadian doctors reported a wait of four months of more for elective surgery (9th place) compared to 7 percent in the U.S. (6th place) and 1 percent in the Netherlands (1st place).
To compare the U.S. with Canada in terms of rationing by waiting, then, is to make a sub-par system look better by comparing it with one that is truly terrible. Most wealthy European countries do better than either of their North American peers when it comes to rationing by waiting and still manage to spend less.

Instead of rationing by waiting, the American system practices rationing by cost. Relatively few private plans, whether employer-provided or individual, give free access to a full range of providers, drugs and services. Most middle-class insurance plans steer their members toward hospitals and doctors who are in a preferred provider network and drugs that are on the company's preferred list. The uninsured often find themselves rationed out of anything but emergency services by high prices.

The burden of rationing by cost shows up clearly in the Commonwealth study:
· 37 percent of Americans reported that they did not fill a prescription, skipped a test or treatment, or failed to visit a doctor when ill--the worst of all countries. In Canada, the figure was 13 percent, a respectable 4th· 28 percent of Americans reported that their insurance company denied payment or paid less than expected for treatments they received, the worst of all countries. In the top ranked countries, Norway and Sweden, the figure was 3 percent.
What is more, the pressure toward rationing by cost is intensifying. A recent New York Times article describes the situation in these terms:
Once emblematic of everything wrong with health insurance, the health maintenance organization is making a grudging, if somewhat successful, comeback. But its reputation for skimping on care has so tainted the plans that the insurers and companies resurrecting them have gone through innumerable steps to try to avoid using the term H.M.O. ... Despite the stigma and many failed efforts, insurers say they are eager to push a revamped version that revives many of the same features that restrict choices as a way of lowering costs.
In short, far from achieving their cost savings through rationing, European systems provide more timely care with fewer people skipping needed services for economic reasons.
Liberal critics focus on cost

Unlike conservatives, liberal critics, by and large, approve of Sanders' Medicare for All plan in principle. They instead focus their criticisms on its cost.

The most widely publicized critique comes from Kenneth Thorpe of Emory University. As this discussion explains, Thorpe estimates that Sanders' plan would be almost twice as expensive as the candidate claims. Instead of leaving most middle class households better off, Thorpe claims the Sanders plan would make 71 percent of households worse off, when the taxes needed to fund it fully are set against savings in health care costs.

I find Thorpe's analysis disingenuous. The problem is that he construes Sanders' plan in a naively literal way that makes it very different from the health care systems of Europe as they actually operate.
European systems provide more timely care with fewer people skipping needed services for economic reasons.
The first difference concerns just who pays for what under high quality, low-cost Euro-style systems. When many Americans think of European health care, they assume that the government pays for everything, providing a broad range of services at no charge to the consumer. That is not strictly true.

The following chart, reproduced from a 2015 report from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, shows that in other wealthy democratic countries, governments do pay a larger share of health care costs than in the U.S., but they do not by any means pay for everything. The government share of total health care expenditures ranges from nearly 90 percent in Sweden and the UK to around 75 percent in Switzerland, compared with a little under 50 percent in the U.S.

The reasons for the substantial private health care expenditures vary from one country to another. Most countries expect copayments for some, if not all, services and medications. In many, people purchase private insurance to cover services not provided in the government's basic package, for example, private hospital rooms. Some countries do not fully cover dental and vision services. (However, most Euro-style systems have special mechanisms in place to shield low-income families from some of these cost-saving measures.)

One of the reasons that critics like Thorpe come up with such high cost estimates is that they take at face value the version of the Sanders plan that is found on his campaign Web site. That version promises to "cover the entire continuum of health care, from inpatient to outpatient care; preventive to emergency care; primary care to specialty care, including long-term and palliative care; vision, hearing and oral health care; mental health and substance abuse services; as well as prescription medications, medical equipment, supplies, diagnostics and treatments."

I do not think we have to take that language literally in estimating the cost of translating Sanders' political aspirations into a specific program for implementation in the real world. The very fact that Sanders describes his plan as "Medicare for All" suggests that a final version is likely to include deductibles and co-payments similar to those in Medicare as it now exists for seniors. Nor would we need all of the features of the Web site version of the plan in order to meet Sanders' often-repeated goal of equaling the quality and cost performance of other countries.
The hard part lies ahead

It is easy to criticize a campaign slogan and to inflate the cost of ambitious aspirations. Liberal critics, who ostensibly share Sanders' aspirations, ought to put their energies into the hard part -- filling in the details that would allow the U.S. to equal the cost performance of the best Euro-style health care systems without loss of quality.

Including Medicare-style deductibles and co-payments would go a long way toward closing the gap between Thorpe's estimates of the costs of Sanders' health care plan and the candidate's own estimates, but it would not entirely close it. There are many other problems to deal with.

To date, Sanders has focused on two sources of potential cost savings. Administrative costs are one. Sanders' campaign website does not give an exact estimate of savings, but Sanders' policy director Warren Gunnels reportedly estimates that administrative savings from his plan would reduce total health care spending by 13 percent. Thorpe says it would save 4.7 percent. If we split the difference, the savings would be a little under 9 percent.

But reducing per capita health care spending to the level of the Netherlands (the most expensive after the U.S. among the eleven covered in the Commonwealth study) would require U.S. spending to fall by 33 percent. To get to the level of the UK (the least expensive of the eleven) would require a 60 percent cut. So, even viewed optimistically, administrative savings are just a start.
A single government payer would have more bargaining power.
The second major saving claimed by the Sanders team comes from lowering the price of prescription drugs. Total prescription drug expenditures in 2014 came to an estimated $297 billion, a fraction less than 10 percent of total health care costs, on prescription drugs. Cutting that in half -- a truly heroic accomplishment -- would still save only another 5 percent of total health care costs.

So, beyond prescription drugs and administrative costs, where would the additional 20 to 40 percent saving come from that would be needed to bring U.S. health care costs down to the level of the best performing Euro-style systems? There are only two possible sources: cuts in quantity of services or cuts in prices.

Cutting quantities is not as easy as it sounds. To be sure, there are some areas where the U.S. does seem to provide excessive services or procedures. For example, the U.S. rate for Caesarian sections is reportedly about 30 percent, more than double that of the Netherlands (13 percent) and nearly double that of Finland, Sweden and Norway (all close to 17 percent).

On the whole, however, as health care economists like Princeton's Uwe Reinhart note, the quantity of health care services provided in the U.S. is actually lower than in other advanced countries. It does not seem realistically possible to cut service quantities further while extending health care coverage to the 13 percent of Americans who remain uninsured, even under the Affordable Care Act, and to do so without any loss in quality of care.

Prices are the "elephant in the room," says Reinhart. Medical prices in the U.S. are reportedly 60 percent higher than in an average of 12 other high-income countries. For individual procedures, the differences are often greater. For example, an appendectomy that cost $7,962 in the US cost $2,943 in Germany and $3,739 in Finland. What is more, the prices of services like an MRI or colonoscopy, can vary by a factor of two, three or more even with in a city.

Worst of all, says Reinhart, "Fees in the private health care sector have been jealously guarded trade secrets among insurers and providers of health care." That makes it impossible for consumers to shop around for the best price, as Forbes writer Kate Ashford found from personal experience when she tried to find the best deal on an MRI. In practice, it can be difficult or impossible for consumers to shop for medical care the way they would for a set of snow tires.
The present trend toward mergers and consolidations demonstrably pushes up prices.
Liberal critics don't even pretend to address the problem of health care prices. The widely cited Thorpe study simply assumes that prices under the Sanders' plan would be an average of the prices now paid by private insurers and the modestly lower prices now paid by Medicare.

The day after a Sanders inauguration, his health care team would have to set to work on tackling the elephant in the room. Unfortunately, there is no single solution to the problem of high U.S. health care prices. Instead, the problem would have to be approached one piece at a time. Coordinated bargaining for lower prescription drug prices is just a start.

Lowering the prices charged by the most expensive hospitals to those charged by the most effective ones would help -- and no, they are not necessarily the same hospitals. A single government payer would have more bargaining power. Greater transparency in pricing would help, too. So would greater competition among hospitals. The present trend toward mergers and consolidations demonstrably pushes up prices.

Another reason for the higher cost of U.S. health care services are higher earnings of physicians. U.S. doctors earn considerably more than their European counterparts do, even when we adjust fees for differences in expenses and cost of living. But changing compensation practices for American doctors would not be easy without other, more far-reaching reforms. For example, making higher education tuition-free, as Sanders has proposed, following the policies of many European countries, would reduce the burden of student debt with which American doctors begin their careers. And less adversarial systems to deal with malpractice claims free European doctors from a major cost item while giving them less incentive to practice unproductive defensive medicine.
The bottom line

It is hard not to conclude that Sanders is right to think that America needs a health care system more like those in Europe. True, his Medicare for All plan is still more aspirational than operational, but what do other candidates offer? Hillary Clinton proposes building on Obamacare, but there is nothing in the byzantine complexity of the Affordable Care Act that makes it easier to solve any of the cost and price problems we have discussed, and many things that make it harder. Republican candidates have a field day enumerating the problems of the ACA, but offer only the vaguest suggestions of what they would offer in its place.

So I say, better to go with someone who has the right aspirations and hope his team can work out the details as they go along. Otherwise, we are stuck with the health care mess we have, or with a worse one.

*Follow Dolan's blog at www.economonitor.com.*
-- 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 20 hours ago.

The future health and health care of Latinos and other Americans will be in good hands. Listening to comments and questions from young Latinos attending a recent panel discussion on "The State of Hispanic Health in America," I was encouraged and inspired. These mostly college-aged students represent our nation's future leaders, and what I saw and heard and experienced gave me tremendous hope.

They were engaged, interested in learning, and interested in leading. The panel was part of the four-day United States Hispanic Leadership Institute conference held annually in Chicago. The conference attracts participants who will help govern our cities, schools, states and nation and who will be health and health care decision makers.

On the panel, I talked about healthy behaviors to achieve ideal cardiovascular health. I also told the participants something they probably knew but that I wanted to make sure they heard, that education is the key to many of the things we consider important - a good job, good health, a good life. The evidence is clear. Education is key for a population to realize its best health. Graduating from high school may be the single most important health factor for individuals and populations.

Having a regular doctor or other primary care provider is another very important factor for optimal health. So, we must do a better job of reaching Latinos, many of whom are busy living their lives, making ends meet, and not receiving messages that, frankly, could be better targeted at Latinos in the first place.

That is why the American Heart Association's Go Red For Women campaign is so crucial. This year we are encouraging Latinas to schedule a well-woman visit with their health care provider to take control of their health, particularly their heart health.

Cristy Marrero, editorial vice president for Hola USA, a print and online publication, is co-hosting the Go Red For Women media luncheon in Miami on March 9. At the event, members of the Hispanic media will discuss the No. 1 combined killers of Latinas - heart disease and stroke.

"Bad eating habits, childhood diabetes, obesity and everything that triggers heart disease amongst us keeps me up at night," Marrero said. "It is my responsibility to serve as a microphone for the amazing message AHA's Go Red For Women is committed to deliver."

The audience of young adult Latinos and Latinas in Chicago was interested in careers in the health and health-related professions. They heard that the Latino community carries a significant burden of risk factors for premature cardiovascular disease and diabetes, a disease that, in addition to its own challenges and complications, also increases the risk of heart disease and stroke. They heard that Latinos are less likely to have health insurance access to evidence-based, health promoting and lifesaving primary care. They heard that Latinos are less likely to have fully benefited from the value of clinical preventive services. And they heard that America needs more Latino clinicians and researchers.

I spoke to the participants as a Latino physician who has cared for patients and is a senior level leader in a national organization and as a Latino who they might see themselves in. I spoke to the participants as a Latino who went from high school in the United States to college to medical school and beyond.

The two other panelists were also Latino physicians. By the end of the workshop, it was clear they saw the three of us as role models and possibly as mentors.

And that has tremendous value for their future, their health, and the health of all they touch. The future looks bright.

Dr. Eduardo Sanchez is chief medical officer for prevention at the American Heart Association.

-- 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 19 hours ago.