Government Programs Access for Seniors

States Should Expect Less Federal Medicaid Matching in 2014

2012-02-08T13:41:00.000-08:00

Alyssa Gerace | February 8, 2012 | Comments (0)

Based on preliminary projections of fiscal year 2014 FMAPs (Federal Medical Assistance Percentage—the share of each state’s Medicaid costs that the federal government covers), a majority of states should expect a decline in how much they will receive from the government, according to a report conducted by the National Association of Medicaid Directors.
About 30 states are projected to experience a decline, and only between four and seven could experience an increase, says the report.
“This reflects personal income shifts among the states as well as an unusual population growth pattern reported by the Census Bureau for 2009-2011,” it says. “Overall, the shifts are estimated to decrease federal Medicaid grants in FY 2014 by $1.1 to $1.9 billion when compared to the FMAPs for the current FY 2012, with decreases of $2 to $3 billion offset by somewhat more than $1 billion of increases for gaining states.”
Additionally, adjusting for Medicaid eligibility expansion under the Affordable Care Act could cause “financial and program disruptions, as the federal government attempts to derive blended FMAPs for the two parts of the program.”
This is bad news for nursing homes, many of which rely heavily on Medicaid reimbursements. A study released in 2011 revealed a $6 billion Medicaid funding shortfall to nursing homes that year.
Click here to view the report, which includes a table of possible changes in 2014 FMAPs and potential financial impacts for all 50 states.
Written by Alyssa Gerace

1 Vote

Email This Post

Howard McGowan · less than 1 minute ago

Your comment must be approved by the site admins before it will appear publicly.

automatic cuts starting in 2013

2011-11-23T16:38:00.000-08:00

Dear Howard,

The past few days have been bittersweet for the health care justice movement. On Monday, the 12-member, bipartisan “super committee” announced a failure to reach agreement on further reduction of the deficit. The Medicaid program was a primary target in negotiations, and cuts would have been devastating to seniors living in nursing homes, people with disabilities who receive home- and community-based services, and children for whom the program is a lifeline.

Thanks in large part to your hard work—district office visits, phone calls, emails, tweets, and sign-on letters—people on Medicaid and Medicare were spared from harmful cuts. In the end, the impasse was a fundamental difference in philosophy over revenues. Republican members were determined to use the process to extend tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans at a time when income inequality is on the rise and families are struggling to make ends meet. Unfortunately, the super committee’s failure to reach a deal means many programs important to low-income people (although not Medicaid) will see automatic cuts starting in 2013, on top of the $900 billion in cuts that Congress agreed to earlier this summer.

We all also received bad news yesterday that the National Association of Insurance Commissioners passed a resolution that would urge Congress and the Administration to exempt insurance agents and brokers from medical loss ratio calculations under the Affordable Care Act. Essentially, this recommendation would transfer more of consumers’ premium dollars away from actual medical care and weaken the protections that are a cornerstone of the law.

The events of this week foreshadow the battles we will see in the coming months. The news media and public dialogue will continue to be dominated by a conversation over our country’s values and our broader vision for the future. Will we, as a country, recommit ourselves to the American people and the essential elements—including access to health and health care—of the American dream? Or will we continue to protect tax breaks for the wealthiest 1 percent and corporate tax loopholes at the expense of the most vulnerable among us?

When I sit down with my family tomorrow at the Thanksgiving table, I will be giving thanks for my loved ones, most especially my 27-month-old grandson, and for you. Your efforts—your dedication, hard work, and sacrifice—have been and will continue to be critical to protecting Medicaid, Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act. There is a tremendous amount at stake in the coming year, and Families USA looks forward to working with you every step of the way.

In gratitude,

Ron Pollack
Executive Director

OLDER AMERICANS ACT

2011-11-22T10:51:00.001-08:00

The stated purpose of the OAA is to ensure equal opportunity to the fair and free enjoyment of: adequate income in retirement; the best possible physical and mental health services without regard to economic status; suitable housing; restorative and long term care; opportunity for employment; retirement in health, honor, and dignity; civic, cultural, educational and recreational participation and contribution; efficient community services; immediate benefit from proven research knowledge; freedom, independence, and the exercise of self determination; and protection against abuse neglect and exploitation.[4]

Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (Deficit "Supercommittee").

2011-11-05T13:38:00.000-07:00

Developments:

Nov. 3 Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, said that he saw no possibility of extending the deadline for a powerful joint committee of Congress to recommend ways of reducing the federal budget deficit. He spoke a day after a leading Democrat suggested that the committee could ask for more time if the current stalemate persists.

Background

The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is a bipartisan, 12-member panel created by the deal struck by President Obama and Congressional leaders in late July 2011 to allow the government to raise the federal debt ceiling.

The agreement called for at least $2 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years to offset the $2.4 trillion increase in the amount the Treasury Department is authorized to borrow. The reductions were to come in two steps, with $900 billion being decided upon immediately, based on spending cuts negotiated between Republicans and Democrats in the months of talks that led up to the pact.

The second round of reductions is the business of the Joint Select Committee, which some in Washington have taken to calling the “supercommittee.”

The stated goal of the panel — evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, the House and Senate — is to reduce federal budget deficits by a total of at least $1.2 trillion over 10 years. It was given a deadline of Nov. 23, 2011. Any recommendations it makes are to be voted on immediately by both chambers of Congress, with no filibusters or amendments allowed.

If the committee cannot agree on a plan, or if Congress does not enact its recommendations by Dec. 23, the result would be $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts — called “trigger’' cuts — in January 2013, half of which would come from Pentagon programs. Medicaid and Medicare benefits would be exempt, although provider payments could be reduced.

The committee got underway in September under a cloud of pessimism. In late October, with less than a month till its deadline, a majority of Democrats on the panel offered up a plan that built on President Obama’s “grand bargain’' proposal that had been rejected by Republicans during the debt ceiling talks. It would cut a total of $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion, through cuts in the growth of federal entitlement programs, including Medicare, and more than $1 trillion in new tax revenues.

The proposal, which came after weeks of silence, has virtually no chance of winning approval from Republicans on the committee, who have repeatedly said they would not accept a package that included tax increases.

Democrats had concluded earlier in the fall that they might have — for the first time in many months — some sorts of advantages in the bargaining ahead.

Under the terms of the deal that created the committee, Republicans cannot threaten a default again to get their way, because the deal increased the debt limit enough to cover borrowing through 2012. Also, the automatic cuts in 2013 would hit military programs hard — an outcome Republicans are more eager than Democrats to avoid. And a stalemate could also lead to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts; Mr. Obama has vowed to sign an extension only for households with taxable income under $250,000.

Mr. Obama’s preference remains the “grand bargain” that eluded him with Mr. Boehner — with short-term stimulus measures and long-term deficit reduction greater than mandated for the committee, including higher revenues and savings from entitlement programs.

The slim hopes for a grand bargain rest on the parties’ mutual interest in overhauling the tax code to rein in tax breaks and using the new revenues to lower taxpayers’ rates. But Democrats and many budget groups say some of the new revenues should go to reduce deficits, while many Republicans insist that all must go to cutting tax rates.

Obama’s Deficit Plan

In September, President Obama outlined a plan for reducing the deficit by more than $3 trillion over 10 years.

His proposal called for $1.5 trillion in tax increases, primarily on the wealthy, through a combination of letting the Bush-era tax cuts expire for the most affluent taxpayers, closing loopholes and limiting the amount that high earners can deduct. The proposal also includes $580 billion in adjustments to health and entitlement programs, including $248 billion to Medicare and $72 billion to Medicaid. Administration officials said that the Medicare cuts would not come from an increase in the Medicare eligibility age. Tthe plan also counts a savings of $1.1 trillion from the ending of the American combat mission in Iraq and the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.

At the committee’s first meeting on Sept. 8, several Republicans said that entitlements like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were the main cause of annual deficits and should be the panel’s focus. Democrats have long resisted cuts to those programs, but during the debt ceiling talks President Obama said he was willing to make changes in them in return for increases in tax revenue.

And members of both parties were feeling pressure to address the long-term costs of programs like Medicare before the baby boom generation moves into retirement and starts consuming more benefits.

Going Beyond the Mandate

By mid-September, more pressure was building on the committee to “go big” — beyond its mandate to shave as much as $1.5 trillion from budget shortfalls over 10 years — even as doubts remained about the panel’s ability to find enough bipartisan agreement to meet even the original goal.

A group of at least 57 prominent business executives and former government officials signed a petition in support of a greater deficit reduction. Among them were former treasury secretaries, budget directors and economic advisers to eight presidents from Richard M. Nixon to Mr. Obama; former Congressional leaders; and executives of top companies. The letter reflects a broad sense of urgency in both parties, and among economists and businesses, that the nation must put in place long-range measures to shrink future deficits. At current spending levels, those deficits are expected to balloon over the next decade as the population ages and as health care costs rise.

The letter did not call for short-term job-creation measures like the tax cuts and infrastructure spending Mr. Obama proposed on Sept. 8, which would add to deficits initially. Even so, many of the signers, liberals and conservatives, called for such steps.

Who’s Who on the Panel

The committee’s members were appointed by the Senate majority and minority leaders, the speaker of the House and the House minority leader.

Senate majority leader Harry Reid named Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, co-chairwoman of the new committee and appointed two other Democratic senators, Max Baucus of Montana and John Kerry of Massachusetts, to the panel. Ms. Murray is chairwoman of the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Speaker John A. Boehner chose three senior Republican House memebrs: Jeb Hensarling of Texas, and Dave Camp and Fred Upton, both from Michigan. Mr. Hensarling, who is chairman of the House Republican Conference, will be co-chairman of the new panel. The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, chose Senators Jon Kyl of Arizona, Rob Portman of Ohio and Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania.

Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House minority leader, named three members of her caucus’s leadership: Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 House Democrat; Representative Xavier Becerra of California, vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus; and Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee.

The deal that created the committee was criticized by some liberals in Congress as a “heads they win, tails we lose’' proposition, guaranteeing that a Republican refusal to consider tax increases would result in the spending cuts that Republicans consider the best approach to deficit reduction.

It was criticized by some conservatives — and by all but one of the 2012 Republican presidential candidates — for allowing the possibility of tax increases, and for not cutting into entitlements. Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare benefits were all exempted from the automatic cuts.

Some members of both parties complained that the panel would usurp their authority to write legislation.

Within days of the deal being struck, both sides began to maneuver for advantage. A fight broke out specifically over whether the amount of deficit reduction should be calculated by comparison to current law, under which all of the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2012, or in comparison to proposals to extend most of the tax cuts, as Democrats want, or all of them, as Republicans propose. If current law is used, more cuts elsewhere would be needed to offset the loss of the revenues that would follow the expiration of the tax cuts.

Commissions in the Past

The options on the table have been studied by numerous expert panels, including several in the past year. The problem is not so much determining how to align the government’s revenues and spending; it is in reaching a compromise on the specific elements of a plan and then finding the political will to enact the necessary spending cuts, tax increases or both.

In the last six decades, Washington has turned to more than a dozen blue-ribbon panels to grapple with fiscal problems. These include the 1947-49 Hoover Commission, the 1982-84 Grace Commission and most recently, the Simpson-Bowles Commission, a bipartisan panel President Obama created by executive order in 2010 that included 12 sitting members of Congress.

The panels were often devised as a way to give political cover to policy makers so they could make unpopular changes to things like entitlements and tax rates. In most cases, though, Congress ignored the proposals or deferred action.

Even the panel usually held up as the exception that proved the rule, the 1981-83 Greenspan Commission set up to revamp Social Security, was largely a failure.

According to an unpublished memoir written by one of the now-deceased members of the commission, the panel deadlocked and then splintered. President Reagan and the House leadership were able to eke out a deal to save Social Security only by engaging in separate negotiations just as the entitlement program was about to go bankrupt.

Debt Ceiling Compromise and Super Committee

2011-09-20T11:17:00.000-07:00

Legislative Update

At the beginning of August, President Obama and Congressional leaders passed a bipartisan debt ceiling compromise. This package gives the President the authority to raise the debt ceiling by $2.1 trillion and eliminates the need for another increase until 2013. This was an important political move for those who wanted to avoid another vote until after 2012 election.

The measure cuts $1 trillion in domestic and defense spending over 10 years. While this legislation does not include any upfront cuts to Medicaid, there are still serious lingering threats. The proposal creates a bipartisan committee of 12 members of Congress, tasked with identifying an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts through entitlements (including Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security) and tax reforms. This “super committee” will need a majority vote to pass a recommendation along to Congress before Thanksgiving of this year. Congress will be required to vote on the committee’s recommendations before Christmas. If the committee comes to a gridlock, an enforcement mechanism will trigger automatic across-the-board cuts, split evenly between domestic and defense spending. However, the enforcement protects low-income programs, such as Medicaid, as well as Social Security and Medicare from cuts. For more information, click here.The super committee held its first logistical meeting on September 8, and its first public hearing on September 13.

The 12 members are Senators Max Baucus (D-MT), John Kerry (D-MA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Rob Portman (R-OH) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), as well as Representatives Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Jim Clyburn (D-SC), Xavier Becerra (D-CA), Fred Upton (R-MI), Dave Camp (R-MI), and Jeb Hensarling (R-TX). If one of the members is from your district or state, you can reach them by setting up visits in his or her local district offices, making phone calls, and/or writing a letter

CLASS ACT

2011-06-19T13:47:00.000-07:00

When will the CLASS Act begin?

While provisions of the CLASS Act become effective in 2011, there are so many details to be worked out that most experts don't expect the plan will actually become available until 2013. (The law says details are not due until the final months of 2012.

Costs have to be determined. Employers must be given sufficient time to educate employees and prepare to start withholding premiums from employee paychecks. Systems have to be in place to accept and keep track of monies withheld from participants.

Following implementation and withholding of the first payments from employees' paychecks, there is a five-year waiting period during which premiums must be paid before the participant becomes eligible to receive benefits. As a result, the earliest anyone could be receiving CLASS benefits may be as late as 2018.

back to top

Who will pay - will it cost me money?

CLASS is intended to be a voluntary plan primarily offered by employers and paid for by employees. Or simply stated, money will be withheld from individual paychecks -- similar to the way Social Security (FICA) tax payments are withheld from paychecks.

There are provisions to make the CLASS offering available to others who may be self-employed or who may not have access to the plan through an employer. These also will have to be defined and systems established.

Congress made CLASS an "opt out" plan. This is an important point that people need to be aware of. Unlike Social Security or Medicare that are mandatory, CLASS is a "voluntary, opt-out" plan. If that sounds confusing, it is. Read the question below regarding "opt out".
back to top

new federal support for states to develop and upgrade Medicaid IT systems and systems for enrollment in state exchanges

2011-06-16T12:42:00.001-07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Contact: HHS Press Office
(202) 690-6343

HHS announces new federal support for states to develop and upgrade Medicaid IT systems and systems for enrollment in state exchanges

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today announced two steps to help states assure a simple and seamless enrollment experience for consumers who qualify for Medicaid or who are shopping for health insurance in the exchanges under the Affordable Care Act.

First, HHS proposed new federal funding that will be available to all states to streamline and upgrade their Medicaid eligibility systems in preparation for the changes resulting from the Affordable Care Act in 2014. Second, HHS announced guidance to help states design and implement the information technology (IT) needed to establish exchanges. These systems will help enroll people who qualify for Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), tax credits or cost-sharing reductions available through the Affordable Care Act.

These prudent, efficient technology investments will support a simple, coordinated, consumer-oriented system for individuals, families and businesses to sign up for the health insurance plan that they choose. They complement the competitive funding announcement released on October 29, to create cooperative agreements with up to five states to create models for IT infrastructure that all states can use.

As states prepare for 2014, they have requested early guidance and funding assistance for their technology projects, particularly with respect to eligibility and enrollment systems.

“The resources and guidance announced today are an important next step in developing seamless systems of coverage and ensuring effective and efficient implementation of health insurance exchanges and a modernized Medicaid program,” said Cindy Mann, CMS deputy administrator and director for the Center for Medicaid, CHIP and Survey and Certification. “Building a smooth customer experience requires a foundation of integrated eligibility systems for health insurance assistance at both the state and federal levels and the resources and guidance announced today supports this foundation.”

“Individuals will seek health care coverage without necessarily knowing whether they are looking for an exchange plan, a Medicaid or a CHIP plan,” said Joel Ario, director of the Office of Health Insurance Exchanges. “Effective and efficient data exchange between state and federal health programs is critical to achieving this one stop shopping experience and today’s guidance establishes the framework and approach that will make this seamless coordination possible.”

This announcement includes:
•Federal Funding for Medicaid Eligibility Determination and Enrollment Activities: A notice of proposed rulemaking has been published in the Federal Register that proposes that Medicaid eligibility systems will potentially be eligible for an enhanced federal matching rate of 90 percent for design and development of new systems and a 75 percent federal matching rate for maintenance and operations. This represents a significant increase above the 50 percent match rate currently available for these systems. States must meet a set of performance standards and conditions, including seamless coordination with the exchanges, in order for their Medicaid technology investments to qualify for the enhanced match. Under the proposed rule, the 90 percent matching rate will be available for eligibility systems until December 31, 2015, and the 75 percent match for such systems will be available beyond that date, assuming the conditions continue to be met. The state exchange grants will provide 100 percent support for exchange IT infrastructure and now this 90 percent matching rate will be available for the exchange-related Medicaid eligibility system changes as well as for those Medicaid system changes not directly related to the exchanges. The proposed regulation can be accessed at http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/11/08/2010-27971/medicaid-federal-funding-for-medicaid-eligibility-determination-and-enrollment-activities.

•New IT Guidance: CMS and the Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight are issuing initial technical guidance that will help states decide how they will design, develop, and implement new or improved IT systems for the new health insurance exchanges, Medicaid and CHIP. Further IT guidance forthcoming following continuing collaboration with states. The guidance is available at http://www.hhs.gov/ociio/regulations/health_insurance_exchange_info_tech_sys.html.

To find the joint guidance or NPRM, go to www.HealthCare.gov/center/regulations/index.html.

###

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: All HHS press releases, fact sheets and other press materials are available at http://www.hhs.gov/news.

Last revised: January 03, 2011

“Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare Act,”

2011-05-31T13:00:00.000-07:00

H.R. 5, called the would shield nursing homes, hospitals, drug and medical device companies, and doctors from accountability when their misconduct harms or kills patients.
Preventable mistakes by the medical industry kill hundreds of thousands of people each year and injure millions more.
But instead of proposing reforms to prevent needless deaths and injuries, H.R. 5 would make it harder for patients to hold wrongdoers accountable, regardless of how egregious their misconduct is or how severely they have injured patients.

1. The United States health care

2011-04-19T07:55:00.000-07:00

1. The United States
> Annual Health Care Costs Per Capita: 16% (the most)
> Active Doctors Per 1,000 People: 2.43 (eighth fewest)
> Average Length of Hospital Stay: 5.5 days (ninth shortest)
> Debt as % of GDP (2010): 68.9%
> Average Life Expectancy:77.9 years (14th shortest)

The United States has far and away the least effective health care system in the OECD. Each year, the country spends $7,538 per person on health care, the equivalent of 16% of our entire GDP. This is nearly triple what Japan spends per person. Life expectancy in the United States, however, is 77.9 years, which is the eighth worst among the 34 OECD countries. Japan has the highest, at 82.7 years. Relative to the other ranked nations, the U.S. government spends the least as a percentage of total costs on health care, while American citizens pay the second most out of pocket, an average of $912 per year. Pharmaceuticals cost the U.S. an average of $897 per capita, the most spent in any country in the OECD. Unlike nations like Belgium and Germany, these massive costs per person do not yield appropriately high levels of care. The U.S. has the third-fewest hospital beds per person, behind only Turkey and Mexico. Americans also have the fifth-fewest doctor consultations per year. One likely candidate for the country’s terrible life expectancy despite massive costs is obesity, which is well known to be linked to a variety of health complications. While we only have data for 11 OECD countries, the United States has by far the highest recorded rate: nearly 34% of adults are considered unhealthily overweight. This is exactly ten times the rate in Japan – just 3.4%. And, this obesity and the problems it brings probably raise the cost to care for unhealthy people in the last year or two of their lives when they are troubled by the diseases related to their lifestyles.

Click Here for The Five Most Efficient Healthcare Systems

Read more: Who Lives the Longest – Countries With the Most and Least Effective Healthcare - 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/2011/04/19/who-lives-the-longest-countries-with-the-most-and-least-effective-healthcare/#ixzz1JyspMKVd

Fair Housing Month

2011-04-11T11:59:00.001-07:00

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has announced the launch of a national media campaign to kick off Fair Housing Month, celebrated across the country each April to commemorate the passage of the Fair Housing Act. The "Live Free" campaign will educate the public and housing providers about their fair housing rights and responsibilities.

Census 2010

2010-02-22T07:47:00.000-08:00

In Malden we have a large population of Chinese and Vietnamese to the
Malden Senior Community Center and many Foreign churches (groups) The
Immigration Learning Center in Malden that should become involved.
The Great Wall Inc should be involved.I am interested in seeing Mass
Senior Action involved in the public housing unitsCensus 2010: Key Dates
Ideas for Partners . Volunteers help paint a census
mural in neighborhood of Malden.
U.S. Census Bureau Boston Regional
Census Center
One Beacon Street, 7th Floor Boston,
MA 02108
Phone: (617) 223-3610 E-mail: Boston.
PDSP@census.gov
Overcoming Language Barriers with Questionnaire
Assistance Centers/Language Program Do you serve populations that speak
a language other than English? Are you willing to donate space for at least
15 hours a week that can be used by census employees to provide language
assistance for people completing 2010 Census forms? If so, we want to hear
from you. The Census Bureau is currently identifying facilities that can be used
as Questionnaire Assistance Centers (QAC).
We need 2,460 sites in the Boston Region alone. Questionnaire Assistance Centers
simply require a small private place in a public facility where the Census Bureau
can staff a table with translators to provide in-language assistance to help non-English speakers complete the 2010 questionnaire. Questionnaire Assistance Center will be open between mid-March and mid-April 2010.
If you would like to serve as a QAC,
please contact your partnership specialist
by December 21.In addition to in-language assistance at QACs,
the Census Bureau will also reach foreign-born
communities with questionnaire assistance guides in 59 languages available for download at www.2010census. gov. The partnership team for the Boston Region consists of over 200 people, including partnership specialists and assistants who collectively speak 18 languages.Nov - Dec 2009 Targeted recruitment for local
2010 Census operations jobs begins.Feb - Mar 2010 Census questionnaires are
mailed or delivered to households. April 2010 April - July 2010 Resdents
fill out and return Census questionnaires. Census takers visit households that did not return a questionnaire by mail.
December 2010 March 2011
By law,
Census Bureau delivers population counts
to President for apportionment. By law,
Census Bureau completes delivery of
redistricting data to states.

--

Health Care Reform

2010-02-22T07:40:00.000-08:00

President Barack Obama is putting forward a nearly $1 trillion, 10-year health care plan that would allow the government to deny or roll back egregious insurance premium increases that infuriated consumers.

Posted Monday morning on the White House Web site, the plan would provide coverage to more than 31 million Americans now uninsured without adding to the federal deficit.

It conspicuously omits a government insurance plan sought by liberals.

But it's uncertain that such an ambitions plan can pass, since Republicans are virtually all opposed and some Democrats who last year supported sweeping health care changes are having second thoughts. After a year in pursuit of his top domestic priority, Obama may have to settle for a modest fallback.

RESTART HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

2009-11-28T10:29:00.000-08:00

DEVAL L. PATRICK

GOVERNOR

TIMOTHY P. MURRAY

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
November 24, 2009 - For immediate release:
PATRICK-MURRAY ADMINISTRATION TARGETS $30.4 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL RECOVERY FUNDS TO RESTART HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Latest round of federal tax credit exchange funds to revive five more projects
BOSTON – November 24, 2009 – As part of the Patrick-Murray Administration’s Massachusetts Recovery Plan to secure the state’s economic future, Governor Deval Patrick today announced he will target an additional $30.4 million in recovery funds from the U.S. Treasury Department’s tax credit exchange program to revive five affordable housing developments stalled due to the lack of equity available in low-income housing tax credit markets. Today’s awards follow last month’s commitment from the administration to distribute $50.3 million from the Treasury program to create jobs and jumpstart 10 other projects across the state.

With today’s announcement, developments in Haverhill, Mashpee, Springfield and two in Boston will restart thanks to American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds that will fill the projects' financing gaps created when tax credits could not leverage the equity needed to support construction costs.

“We are working hard to identify and secure the resources that will further our ongoing recovery efforts, create jobs and strengthen communities,” said Governor Patrick. “Affordable housing developments are essential facets of our public infrastructure and investing in them will pay dividends now and over the long term.”

“Getting these projects moving complements our ongoing efforts to promote the development of affordable housing, which is a key part of our goal to end homelessness,” said Lieutenant Governor Timothy Murray, chair of the state’s Interagency Council for Housing and Homelessness. “I am grateful for the work done by members of federal delegation who recognized the importance of affordable housing to our overall economic recovery.”

"These investments are a lifeline for working families in Boston, Haverhill, Mashpee and Springfield struggling to make ends meet in a tough economy. It’ll put people back to work while allowing hundreds of low and moderate income families to keep a roof over their heads and help our economy on the long road to recovery," said Senator John Kerry.

“Now that the winter months are upon us, it is more important than ever to see that no families are left in the cold,” said Senator Paul G. Kirk, Jr. “I commend Governor Patrick for using these tax credits to fund affordable housing opportunities and for his strong efforts to lead the economic recovery in the Commonwealth.”

Due to current tax credit market conditions, these Treasury Department recovery funds allow states to convert previously awarded tax credits into grants or low-interest deferred loans. The Patrick-Murray Administration's Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) implements the program in Massachusetts and awards funds competitively based on criteria reflecting whether projects were shovel ready for construction and secures in all other aspects of project financing and permitting. All awardees must now close within 120 days and start construction within another 45 days.

"This latest round of U.S. Treasury tax credit exchange recovery funds, coupled with the recent release of $50.3 million in awards from that same program, along with more than $45.5 million in low-income housing tax credit assistance that we also awarded last summer from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, has helped us to get some important housing developments back on track while also creating new jobs and affordable housing opportunities for families on all income levels," said Housing and Community Development Undersecretary Tina Brooks.

"We're grateful to the Commonwealth for their investment in two excellent neighborhood housing developments. The Tax Credit Exchange program is a creative approach to getting many of our important development projects moving again, despite the tight lending markets," Mayor Thomas Menino said. "These funds will not only enable the creation of new construction and permanent jobs in our City, but this also means hundreds of new affordable units of housing will be made available for Boston residents. I applaud Governor Patrick for this sound investment in Boston's neighborhoods."

“Governor Patrick has shown his commitment to housing in the Greater Boston area, especially in this community which is happy to build affordable housing,” said Representative Jeffrey Sanchez. “Finding affordable housing in the Greater Boston area is always difficult, so I am pleased that we will be able to add to the affordable housing stock and create jobs in the process.”

“We’re thrilled this federal money has been made available by the Governor,” said Senator Robert O’Leary. “Affordable housing has always been a difficulty on the Cape and Islands and I am glad this project will make more affordable units available.”

“Affordable housing certainly is needed in this area, so this is a welcome stimulus to the project,” said Representative Matthew Patrick. “This is a great initiative to create that needed affordable housing.”

“These funds are essential to the work of Urban Edge, a major CDC in my district, and will offer tremendous benefit to our community,” said Representative Liz Malia.

PROJECT AWARDS:

•The Pine Street Inn, Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corp. and New Atlantic Development will receive $3,590,843 to develop the 35 Creighton Street Residences in Jamaica Plain (Boston). This project is part of the redevelopment of the former Blessed Sacrament church campus. This development will utilize green design elements to offer 28 single room occupancy units for homeless individuals transitioning from shelter to permanent housing. It is estimated that this project will create or retain 26 jobs.
•Urban Edge will receive $9,940,517 to develop the Jamaica Plain (Boston) apartments. This is a scattered site development with 103 existing affordable units located in eleven properties in Jamaica Plain. Incorporating green design, over 70% of the units in the project contain three or four bedrooms. All of the 103 units will be restricted for rental to households earning less than 60% of area median income, with 15 of the 103 units further restricted for occupancy by extremely low income families. It is estimated that the project will create or retain 95 jobs.
•The Community Builders will receive $4,060,704 to build the first phase of Mashpee Village. This is a two-phase project involving high priority capital improvements to an existing fully occupied affordable housing property. The project will deliver 145 affordable family units, with 52 of the units affordable to extremely low income households. It is estimated that 47 jobs will be created or retained through the rehabilitation of the project.
•Forest City will receive $4,746,153 for this renovation of Hamel Mill Lofts, an historic shoe factory in Haverhill. Located adjacent to the commuter rail station, the property is already under construction and when complete will offer 305 new units of housing, of which 61 will be affordable to low income households. It is estimated that the construction of the project has generated or will generate more than 500 jobs.
•Flores and Elm Street Development and the New England Farm Workers Council will receive $8,097, 586 for the Borinquen Apartment project in Springfield. This is a scattered site development with the first phase of 41 existing affordable units located in two historic buildings on Springfield’s Main, Huntington, and Greenwich streets. Over 65% of the units contain two or more bedrooms. All of the 41 units will be restricted for rental to households earning less than 60% of area median income, with 8 of the 41 units further restricted for occupancy by extremely low income families. The project will create or retain an estimated 60 jobs.
Investments in housing and economic development are critical components of Governor Patrick’s Massachusetts Recovery Plan, which combines state, federal and, where possible, private efforts to provide immediate and long-term relief and position the Commonwealth for recovery in the following ways:

• Deliver immediate relief by investing in the road, bridge and rail projects that put people to work today and providing safety net services that sustain people who are especially vulnerable during an economic crisis;

• Build a better tomorrow through education and infrastructure investments that strengthen our economic competitiveness, prepare workers for the jobs of the future, and support clean energy, broadband, and technology projects that cut costs while growing the economy; and

• Reform state government by eliminating the pension and ethics loopholes that discredit the work of government and revitalize the transportation networks that have suffered from decades of neglect and inaction.

For more information, please visit www.mass.gov/recovery.
Home >
Contact:
Kyle Sullivan
Kim Haberlin
Alex Goldstein
617-725-4025
Phil Hailer(DHCD)
617-573-1104

Budget Office Sees Hurdles in Financing Health Plans

2008-12-19T06:03:00.000-08:00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

December 19, 2008

By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — The Congressional Budget Office said Thursday that many of the health care proposals championed by President-elect Barack Obama and other Democrats would carry a high price tag and would generate only modest savings.

The budget office, an influential voice in the work of Congress, analyzed 115 options, including proposals to expand coverage and slow the growth of health spending.

Some of the options, including proposals to increase taxes on cigarettes and nondiet soft drinks, are sure to meet stiff political opposition.

One bright spot in a generally bleak picture was the estimate of potential savings from a requirement for doctors and hospitals to use health information technology, including electronic medical records, as a condition of participating in Medicare.

Such a requirement could save the federal government $7 billion in the first five years and a total of $34 billion over 10 years, by reducing medical errors and avoiding unnecessary tests and procedures, the budget office said. It “would also lower health insurance premiums in the private sector,” the report said.

Without action by Congress, the report said, health costs will continue to soar, the number of people without insurance will rise by nearly one million a year, to a total of 54 million in 2019, and spending on health care will increase to 25 percent of the gross domestic product in 2025, up from 16 percent in 2007.

In keeping with its duty to provide objective, impartial analysis, the budget office did not endorse any options, but it fleshed out many ideas circulating on Capitol Hill.

Democrats and many Republicans say they will make a serious effort to overhaul the health care system in 2009. Those changes are essential for economic recovery, they say.

But Mr. Obama and other Democrats have not been precise about the cost of their proposals, nor have they said in detail how they would pay for them. One of the Democrats’ favorite proposals, rolling back tax cuts for high-income people, is already scheduled to occur in 2011, so, under the bookkeeping rules used by Congress, it would not produce a windfall of new revenue.

Lawmakers from both parties said they would pay close attention to the cost of new federal subsidies for health coverage because these subsidies — unlike the one-time bailouts for banks and other financial institutions — would be recurring federal obligations for years to come.

Requiring employers to provide health insurance to their employees or pay a fee to the federal government would bring in $47 billion of new federal revenue in the next 10 years, the report said.

A proposal to establish a national insurance pool for people who cannot obtain coverage on their own in the individual market would cost $16 billion in the next decade, it said.

Mr. Obama and many other Democrats want the government to negotiate with drug manufacturers to get lower prices for Medicare beneficiaries.

The Congressional Budget Office said such negotiations “would produce small if any savings” because the government would not have enough leverage to secure significant discounts beyond those already obtained by private insurance companies that manage the Medicare drug benefit.

But the budget office said Medicare could save $110 billion in the next 10 years if Congress simply imposed a form of price controls, requiring drug makers to provide the government with a 15 percent rebate, or discount, on brand-name drugs covered by the new Part D of Medicare.

Eliminating a notorious gap in Medicare coverage of prescription drugs, known as a doughnut hole, would cost more than $130 billion over 10 years, the report said.

Research to compare the effectiveness of different drugs and treatments might help doctors and patients make better decisions.

But it would not save the government much — $1.3 billion in the next decade — and it would reduce total spending on health care in those years by less than one-tenth of 1 percent, the budget office said.

The federal government could save $12 billion in the next decade if it established a procedure for approval of generic versions of expensive biotechnology drugs, the report said. It did not estimate the additional savings for consumers and employers, which could be substantial.

The report sets forth an elaborate proposal that would allow doctors and hospitals to share in the savings if they improve the quality and reduce the cost of care for people on Medicare.

Under the proposal, Medicare would pay bonuses to groups of doctors who met certain performance measures.

In response to such financial incentives, the report said, doctors would become more efficient and would reduce “the volume and intensity of services provided to their patients,” saving $5 billion for Medicare in the next decade.

In one particularly sobering chapter, the report notes that, under existing law, Medicare will cut fees paid to doctors by 21 percent in 2010 and by about 5 percent in each of the next few years.

To avoid such cuts and freeze payment rates at their 2009 levels would cost the government $318 billion over the next decade, the report said.

Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map

KENNEDY ESTABLISHES COMMITTEE WORKING GROUPS ON HEALTH REFORM

2008-11-30T07:19:00.000-08:00

November 18, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Washington, DC— Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, today established three working groups of the committee to deal with critical issues of health reform. Under Senator Kennedy's direction, the working groups will concentrate on three areas essential to comprehensive reform: (1) prevention and public health, (2) improvements in the quality of care, and (3) insurance coverage. Senator Tom Harkin will lead the working group on prevention and public health, Senator Barbara Mikulski will lead the working group on improvements in quality, and Senator Hillary Clinton will lead the working group on insurance coverage. Senator Kennedy released the following statement:

"Our committee is fortunate to have the services of major leaders who are committed to improving health care for the American people. Senator Harkin, Senator Mikulski, and Senator Clinton have generously offered to step forward and assume an expanded role on critical aspects of health reform. I commend them for their leadership, and I look forward very much to working with them, with all our colleagues on the committee and throughout Congress, and with the Obama Administration to achieve the goal at long last of quality, affordable health care for all Americans."

###

Press Contact
Anthony Coley/ Melissa Wagoner (202) 224-2633

--
Howard McGowan
MaldenSenior

US Sen Baucus to Unveil Health-Policy Vision Wednesday November 12

2008-11-12T06:59:00.000-08:00

By Patrick Yoest, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- A top Senate Democrat will make his pitch on broad- scale health-care overhaul to cover more people without insurance, with a growing consensus emerging that Congress will have to tackle health issues with a single bill.

Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., will unveil a package Wednesday that has been billed as his vision for comprehensive health-care change. Baucus, along with Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., controls the bulk of Senate jurisdiction over health-care issues.

Kennedy aides have said that he plans to move aggressively on health care in 2009, with the arrival of President-elect Barack Obama providing a boost to Democratic efforts to bring about fundamental change. But Kennedy will need the cooperation of Baucus, who could have a more cautious approach.

"I'm looking for Baucus to establish a strong centrist position that will give Obama real insight into what's happening in the Senate," said Alexander Vachon, a health-policy consultant and a former Finance Committee staffer.

It won't be the first time Baucus has discussed major health-care changes. Last year, he drew up a series o of principles on providing universal coverage, including the idea of "pooling" individuals and small businesses to allow them to get more competitive rates for health insurance.

It appears that the pooling concept will be part of the proposal Baucus offers Wednesday as well.

"Sen. Baucus has long said that he believes that pooling arrangements should be a necessary part of comprehensive heatlh-care reform, and he intends to discuss that in detail that at tomorrow's press conference," said Baucus spokeswoman Carol Guthrie.

The legislative process for incorporating competing policy ideas on health care is an initial hurdle for congressional Democrats, who are keen to avoid President Bill Clinton's failure to enact a health-care overhaul in 1993. Kennedy staffer Michael Myers said Nov. 6 at a Families USA event that a "one- bill strategy" is in the works in the Senate, which would preclude tackling health care changes piecemeal.

"Certainly as politicians, people will want to say 'here was my idea, I was a leader on health care," Myers said, but added that "I think there's a growing recognition that the best way, maybe the only way that this gets done is for Democrats to unite behind a single bill."

It is unclear exactly what a single-bill strategy means. Guthrie said that Baucus is seeking a "consensus product" and has reached out to Sen. Kennedy, but the single-bill concept would have even larger significance if Baucus announces he wants an overarching health package to also include items such as a Medicare reimbursement fix for physicians.

Such an approach could put Baucus into conflict with Rep. Pete Stark, D- Calif., who on Monday said he wants to pass a series of policy initiatives -- including expanding the state children's health-insurance program, chnages in Medicare reimbursements for physicians and health technology legislation -- in advance of a broad health-care measure. Starks chairs the House Ways and Means health subcommittee.

The idea of a comprehensive approach that ties measures to cover more uninsured people to other health-care initiatives has gained the support of some who assert that it will be easier to accomplish a fundamental restructuring of the health-care system.

"You could do all that in a comprehensive package," said Karen Ignagni, president and chief executive of America's Health Insurance Plans, a health insurers' trade group. "To approach this comprehensively actually gives you an opportunity to lay out the issues.

Much depends on Obama, whose transition team is meeting with congressional staff to lay out the groundwork for health overhaul. Stark said that, upon receiving Obama's health policy priorities, he expected the House and Senate to each produce bills that would see a conference to reconcile them -- a process that would require long, difficult negotiations.

"I think we are awaiting the president-elect's program, and when it arrives, we will proceed in regular order," Stark said on Monday.

-By Patrick Yoest, Dow Jones Newswires; 202

Health Care Agenda

2008-11-06T18:52:00.000-08:00

Democrats Pick Up House, Senate Seats; Newspapers Examine Implications For Health Care, Other Issues
06 Nov 2008

KaiserDemocrats on Tuesday increased their majorities in the Senate and the House and next year likely will seek to pass legislation to expand health insurance to more U.S. residents, among other bills, the Wall Street Journal reports (Hitt/Mullins, Wall Street Journal, 11/5). In the Senate, Democrats and two independents who caucus with them will increase their majority from 51 seats to at least 56 seats, with four races still undecided as of Wednesday morning. Republicans will hold at least 40 seats. In the House, Democrats will increase their majority from 236 seats to at least 252 seats, with 10 races undecided. Republicans will hold at least 173 seats (CNN.com, 11/5).

According to the Boston Globe's "Political Intelligence" blog, Democrats next year first will "address the low growth, high unemployment and economic strain on American workers," and in the "longer term," they are "hopeful they can complete a health care plan." The larger majorities might allow Democrats to pass a "slew of legislation that was blocked by the Bush administration" or that "failed to pass by small margins in the House or Senate," such as bills to expand SCHIP and allow expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, the Globe's "Political Intelligence" blog reports (Milligan, "Political Intelligence," Boston Globe, 11/4).

However, as a result of the record federal budget deficit, the recently enacted $700 billion bailout for Wall Street firms and the "threat of a deep recession, Democrats will have to limit or postpone any big new spending programs, such as ones to expand health care," Reuters reports (Ferraro/Cowan, Reuters, 11/5).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

© 2008 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/128375.php

Main News Category: Health Insurance / Medical Insurance

Also Appears In: Public Health,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Save time! Get the latest medical news headlines for your specialist area, in a weekly newsletter e-mail. See http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/newsletters.php for details.

Send your press releases to pressrelease@medicalnewstoday.com

Kerry-Grassley Bill At home Care

2008-11-06T16:48:00.000-08:00

----------------------------------------------------------------------
07/24/2008

Kerry-Grassley Bill Increases At-Home Care For Those In Need

WASHINGTON, D.C. – As millions of Americans face significant challenges when it comes to caring for loved ones who needs significant support, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today introduced the “Empowered at Home Act.” The bill seeks to increase access to home and community based services by giving states new tools and incentives to make these services more available to those in need.

“Far too many elderly or disabled Americans can’t get the help they need in their home and community,” said Sen. Kerry. “Home- and community-based services are high-quality, cost-effective, and help many people live independent lives, but Medicaid continues to favor nursing homes. It’s a problem when the nation’s largest purchaser of long-term care services is tilted towards nursing homes rather than home and community based services. This bill will level the playing field and give families real choices to care for their loved ones, and give cash-strapped states new tools to provide cost-effective long-term care options to the most vulnerable.”

“Being able to live at home greatly improves quality of life because people can be with loved ones and have the dignity that goes with greater independence,” said Sen. Grassley. “This bill encourages states to help make that possible, which is also fiscally smart because institutional care is the most expensive form of long-term care that Medicaid pays for. This bill also empowers individuals to manage the financial burdens that come with caregiving needs.”

The “Empowered at Home Act” has four basic parts:

First, it will improve the Medicaid HCBS State Plan Amendment Option by giving states more flexibility in determining eligibility for which services they can offer under the program, which will create greater options for individuals in need of long-term supports. In return we ask that states no longer cap enrollment and that services be offered throughout the entire state.

Second, the bill ensures that the same spousal impoverishment protections offered for new nursing home beneficiaries will be in place for those opting for home and community based services. In addition, low-income recipients of home and community based services will be able to keep more of their assets when they become eligible for Medicaid, allowing them to stay in their community as long as possible.

Third, the Empowered at Home Act addresses the financial needs of spouses and family members caring for a loved one by offering tax-related provisions to support family caregivers and promote the purchase of meaningful private long-term care insurance.

Finally, the bill seeks to improve the overall quality of home and community based services available by providing grants for states to invest in organizations and systems that can help to ensure a sufficient supply of high quality workers, promote health, and transform home and community based care to be more consumer-centered.

The “Empowered at Home Act” has gained support of numerous health organizations including National Council on Aging, Alzheimer’s Association, American Geriatrics Society, Trust for America’s Health, and SEIU.

###

Offices Locations
Washington D.C.
304 Russell Bldg.
Third Floor
Washington D.C. 20510
(202) 224-2742 Boston
One Bowdoin Square
Tenth Floor
Boston, MA 02114
(617) 565-8519 Springfield
Springfield Federal Building
1550 Main Street
Suite 304
Springfield, MA 01101
(413) 785-4610 Fall River
222 Milliken Place
Suite 312
Fall River, Ma 02721
(508) 677-0522

At Work In Congress | Working For MA | How Can I Help You? | About John | MA Resources | Newsroom | Contact
Sitemap | Privacy Policy | TBA

Health care takes a back seat in the election

2008-10-12T09:20:00.001-07:00

By: Lelia Chaisson
Posted: 10/9/08
Two years ago, Americans couldn't get enough of the health care debate. With Massachusetts leading the way to universal coverage, health care dominated the headlines. Forty-seven million uninsured, staggering U.S. expenditures on medical technology and lagging U.S. health statistics were disturbingly familiar, and it seemed certain that America was on its way to health care reform.

So what happened?

Right in the middle of our attempt to fix the "broken system," health care lost its momentum, much as it did in the 1990s with Hillary Clinton's failed attempt to revolutionize it. In both cases, huge movements swiftly lost their authority and eventually faded into the background, leaving Americans to deal with the ever increasing costs of health care. It seems that, despite the perpetual health care calamity in America, every time we get close to making some progress, health care disappears from the headlines.

Health care has once again taken a back seat in the 2008 election, despite the fact that recently published reports show that access to health care remains a considerable problem for more American families than ever before. Indeed, the Center for Studying Health System Change recently disclosed that almost one in five families struggled to pay medical bills last year; Twenty percent of those having problems even considered declaring personal bankruptcy. Nor is the issue limited to those without medical insurance. Reports indicate that of the 57 million Americans under pressure, 43 million have some form of insurance. The health care crisis is far from over, yet real reform is not even on the horizon.

Why is it so hard to get the ball rolling on health care? It's not because Americans don't want health care reform. While the issue has slipped behind the financial crisis and the Iraq war in the current election, it remains firmly in the top three issues among all demographics. Nor is it for lack of ideas. Over the years myriad diverse plans have been proposed by Republicans and Democrats alike.

I can only conclude that the standstill is due to the public's wishy-washiness. Americans simply don't know what they want. Or, rather, they know what they want, but they aren't willing to take any of the necessary steps to get it. What is perhaps the most interesting thing about this debate is the combination of America's conviction that every person should have access to affordable, high-quality care, and its simultaneous skepticism concerning every proposed plan for change.

Just look at the public's reaction to some of the ideas for reform. To the suggestion that we require coverage for every American to promote preventive care comes the loud retort that forcing everyone to have insurance is un-American. To the notion that we should cut spending on costly, infrequently used procedures comes the cry that Americans should have access to any medical procedure they could ever possibly want, nevermind the price tag.

Now, I'm not saying that all of these ideas are perfect. I'm just pointing out the irony that Americans demand affordable coverage and access for all, yet reject any policy that has the potential to address these problems.

America's fickleness has reared its head once again in the current election. On the one hand, Barack Obama has suggested creating a national health plan available to all Americans, with guaranteed eligibility, benefits similar to those offered in the plan available to members of Congress and subsidies for those who do not qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need financial aid.

Seemingly, his plan has addressed every criticism. No mandate for universal coverage. Affordable care for every American. Guaranteed access. Choice between private and employer-based coverage.

The public's reaction? Obama's plan is too costly and will create too much regulation.

Senator McCain, on the other hand, wants nothing close to a national health care plan, and instead advocates stimulating the private market and doing away with tax breaks for employer-based health insurance.

Now, come on. Voters say they want to ensure affordable coverage for every American. They say they want to take some of the power away from greedy insurance companies that deny care to the sick and disadvantaged. Is there really any question as to which plan will better address these issues? Granted, Obama's plan is going to be expensive. But let's be serious. Doing away with tax breaks will encourage employers to do away with their health care plans. And a $5,000 tax credit will be a drop of water in a sea of health care costs, which now average $12,680 a year for U.S. families. In addition to this, it is widely speculated that McCain's plan will leave millions of people uninsured and give more power to the insurance companies everyone despises.

But, in the end, no matter who gets elected, I doubt we'll ever get far enough to see either of these plans enacted. America loves to talk the talk, but won't walk the walk. When given the choice of actually addressing their constantly reiterated concerns about health care or doing nothing, Americans consistently choose the latter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Copyright 2008 News-Letter

Debit Card For unbanked Americans

2008-10-04T11:10:00.000-07:00

Comerica Bank Named as Card Issuer
Washington, D.C. - (Jan. 4, 2008) - The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Financial Management Service (FMS) has designated Comerica Bank as its financial agent in a new initiative to give millions of unbanked Americans the option of using a prepaid debit card for receiving Social Security and other federal benefit payments. The "Direct Express®" card provides a safer and more convenient alternative to paper checks. Comerica Bank was selected, in part, because of its experience as a prepaid card issuer for millions of benefit recipients, particularly for state government programs.

"Direct Express represents a significant step forward in the evolution of federal benefit payments," said FMS Commissioner Judy Tillman. "The explosive growth in the prepaid card industry offers an important opportunity for Treasury to give unbanked payment recipients secure, easy access to their funds, at low or no cost to the cardholder. We ultimately would like to see an all-electronic Treasury - with all the security, efficiency and cost savings that would entail. This card takes us closer to that goal by combining the best in payment innovation with sound public policy. If every unbanked federal check recipient signed up to use the card, it would save taxpayers about $44 million per year."

The Treasury estimates that four million Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) check recipients do not have bank accounts, placing them at greater risk of check delivery delays due to poor weather, national or local emergencies, and other check related problems, such as lost or stolen checks. In fact, nine times out of 10, problems with Social Security payments are linked to paper checks, not direct deposit.

Financial Flexibility and Security

The Direct Express card will be introduced in spring 2008 and will be phased into national distribution by the end of the summer. Direct Express card holders will benefit from improved financial flexibility and security as compared to paper check recipients.

Each month, payments will be automatically deposited on the Direct Express card account on the federal beneficiary's designated payment day - which means people will have faster access to their money than they would if they had to cash a paper check. Card holders will be able to access their money at ATMs and financial institutions nationwide. They will be able to use their card to get cash back and make purchases at retail locations, as well as pay bills and make purchases online. In addition, these accounts are PIN-protected, FDIC-insured, and subject to federal consumer protection regulations (Regulation E).

"Millions of federal beneficiaries remain outside the banking system, which means they don't have access to payment methods that most Americans take for granted, such as getting cash at an ATM or paying with a card at a store," said Nora Arpin, Director of Government Electronic Solutions for Comerica Bank. "The Direct Express card provides an opportunity for people outside of the banking system, either because of personal choice or perhaps their inability to obtain a bank account, to gain a foothold in the financial mainstream."

The Treasury has already experienced significant success in increasing electronic payments with its Go Direct campaign, which is aimed at motivating banked federal benefit recipients to switch from paper checks to direct deposit. To date, Go Direct has achieved more than 1.6 million direct deposit conversions.

"Direct Express" is a registered trademark of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service.

Last Updated: Thursday January 03, 2008

Nursing Home Tansparency and Quality of Care Improvement ACT

2008-10-01T13:14:00.000-07:00

September 30, 2008

A report by the HHS Inspector General’s Office has gotten a great deal of press attention, and we wanted to provide you access to the report in case you get questions from the media or others. The report uses OSCAR data to show trends in deficiencies from 2005 – 2007 and is contained in a memorandum from Inspector General Daniel Levinson to Kerry Weems, the Acting Administrator at CMS. You can access it on the OIG website, Trends in Nursing Home Deficiencies and Complaints (OEI-02-08-00140) http://intranet/oiginternet/oei/reports/oei-02-08-00140.pdf.

Among the highlights of the findings:

The percentage of nursing homes with deficiencies increased from 91.1% in 2005 to 91.9% in 2007.
The average number of deficiencies per nursing home increased from 6.4% to 7.0%. 74% of deficiencies in 2007 were for quality of care violations.
94% of for-profit facilities were cited in 2007, compared with 88% of nonprofits and 91 percent of government-owned nursing homes. For-profit nursing homes also had a higher average number of deficiencies.
7.3% of chain-operated facilities were cited in 2007, compared with 6.7% of single-owned facilities.
There was a slight increase in the scope and severity of deficiencies cited, with a higher percentage of for-profit nursing homes cited for immediate jeopardy or actual harm (17% versus 15% for nonprofit and government facilities).
Facilities with substandard quality of care deficiencies increased from 3.0% of nursing homes in 2005 to 3.6% in 2007. Again, for-profit nursing homes had higher citations—4.2% compared to 2.3% for nonprofits and 3.0 for government facilities.
The number of substantiated complaints fell from 14,781 in 2005 to 14,394 in 2007. Only about 39% of complaints were substantiated. About 20% of substantiated complaints involved abuse or neglect.

The report does not address an issue raised in a previous OIG report and in repeated Government Accountability Office (GAO) studies: undetected care problems and the under-citing of deficiencies. A GAO report published last spring found that when federal surveyors did comparative (look-behind) surveys, about 15% of the federal surveys “identified state surveys that failed to cite at least one deficiency at the most serious levels of noncompliance—actual harm and immediate jeopardy.” (See Nursing Homes: Federal Monitoring Surveys Demonstrate Continued Understatement of Serious Care Problems and CMS Oversight Weaknesses GAO-08-517, May 9, 2008.) The GAO attributes understatement of deficiencies to surveyors’ weak investigative and analytical skills.

In spite of shortcomings in the study, it provides an opportunity for advocates to make a case to the press and policymakers for the Nursing Home Transparency and Improvement Act (S. 2641), sponsored by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Herb Kohl (D-WI), and its House companion bill, the Nursing Home Transparency and Quality of Care Improvement Act (HR 7128), introduced last week by Representatives Pete Stark (D-CA) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). The bills will provide the public better information about nursing homes’ owners and operators, expenditures, staffing levels, and sanctions, and will provide better tools for the government to monitor and sanction chains. It also lends support to passage of the Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act, S. 2838 and HR 6126, which would invalidate providers’ efforts to force residents and their families into arbitration when a resident was neglected or abused.

Home Act S 3327

2008-09-12T12:11:00.000-07:00

Empowered at Home Act Introduced
Cosponsors Needed
August 4, 2008: The Empowered at Home Act, S. 3327, would increase the number of older adults and people with disabilities who are eligible for Medicaid coverage for adult day services and home care. Just introduced by Sens. Charles Grassley (R-IA) and John Kerry (D-MA), it now needs more cosponsors to move it forward in the Senate.

The legislation strengthens the Medicaid home and community-based state plan option under Section 1915(i) waivers by making income eligibility standards the same for Medicaid coverage of home- and community-based services and institutional care (300% of SSI). Limitations on the scope of services allowable under 1915(i) waivers would disappear, and states would no longer be able to limit the number of individuals eligible for home and community-based services. A new 1915(k) waiver would concentrate services and funding for individuals who are high risk of institutionalization. State grants also would be available for consumer-directed care. We are especially pleased that the bill promotes and protects community living with spousal impoverishment protections for home- and community-based services recipients.

Please urge your senators to sign onto this legislation to make home- and community-based services more available under the Medicaid program.
Take Action Now!

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

2008-09-08T06:42:00.000-07:00

Fannie was created during the depths of the Great Depression, and Freddie in 1970, to help make mortgages more affordable for homeowners. The companies buy billions of dollars in mortgages each month from commercial lenders. Some are sold to investors as mortgage-backed securities; others are held by the companies in their own investment portfolios.

The plan represents a cease-fire in a decades-long ideological battle over the proper role of the companies. Free-market conservatives see the companies as extensions of “big government,” while Democrats have protected them as the main vehicle to promote affordable housing for middle- and lower-income people.

MEDICARE PROBLEM DONUT HOLE

2008-09-02T06:34:00.000-07:00

September 2, 2008
Editorial
Medicare’s Troubling Drug Gap
Probably no aspect of the new Medicare drug program has caused more confusion and irritation than the notorious “doughnut hole,” a gap in coverage that forces people who had been getting their drugs cheaply to suddenly pay the full price out of pocket. Now, for the first time, an analysis has quantified what happened last year when millions of beneficiaries fell into the gap. For patients with serious chronic conditions, the medical implications were very troubling.

Congress crafted the “doughnut hole” to limit federal spending on the drug benefit. Beneficiaries pay only deductibles and co-payments, with the rest covered by their insurance plan, until their drug purchases reach a specified limit. Last year, the gap began when beneficiaries purchased $2,400 worth of drugs. Then they fell into the doughnut hole and had to pay the full cost until their out-of-pocket spending reached $3,850, at which point they qualified for catastrophic coverage.

Last year, an estimated 3.4 million beneficiaries reached the coverage gap, according to a study by researchers at the Kaiser Family Foundation, Georgetown University and the National Opinion Research Center, or NORC, at the University of Chicago. Beneficiaries taking drugs to treat such chronic conditions as Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, depression, osteoporosis and high blood pressure were especially likely to reach the gap.

What’s disturbing is that 15 percent of the beneficiaries taking drugs in eight categories said they stopped taking their medications when they reached the gap. Another 1 percent reduced their use by skipping doses, and 5 percent switched to another drug that was cheaper but might or might not be as effective.

For the 10 percent of diabetics who stopped taking their medication after reaching the gap, the health consequences could be immediate and serious. For those with high cholesterol or osteoporosis, the harm could take longer to show up but could still be serious.

There is no easy solution short of increasing federal spending or finding a way to drive down the cost of drugs. The program has helped millions of older Americans. The next administration and Congress will have to revisit the wisdom and need for the gap.

Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

2008-08-28T14:59:00.000-07:00

The $300 billion housing bill signed into law on July 30 by President Bush helps stretched homeowners renegotiate their mortgages and provides tax credits to first-time buyers.

But it also addresses three major criticisms of reverse mortgage loans, which are increasingly popular among homeowners 62 and older who use the money for living expenses, health care, prescription drugs or to pay off an existing mortgage.

With a reverse mortgage, you can tap your home equity without having to make monthly payments. Instead the bank pays you. The loan comes due only when you die, sell or move away permanently. The amount you get depends on the home’s value, location, interest rates and the age of the youngest borrower if there are co-owners.

The new bill raises the amount you can get from the mortgage and lowers the cost of getting it.

Most reverse mortgages today are Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs), which are insured by the Federal Housing Administration. Up to now, HECM has capped a home’s appraisal, which affects the loan amount. The loan limit depends on the county where the home is located and ranges from $200,160 to $362,790.

While the new limit has not been finalized, the bill will increase the amount significantly. “The higher limit will give homeowners access to more cash from their home equity,” says Peter H. Bell, President of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association.

A second criticism has been that the transaction fees for reverse mortgages are too high. An AARP Public Policy Institute study in December 2007 found that high costs were one of the main reasons why eligible homeowners decided against a home mortgage.

The new bill will make HECMs less expensive for many borrowers. Origination fees had been a flat 2 percent of the home’s value, but the new bill reduces that to 2 percent of the first $200,000 of the home’s value, and then 1 percent after that. Also, the fee is capped at $6,000.

And finally, the new bill puts an end to one of the main problems related to reverse mortgages: lenders cross-selling other financial products. The new law forbids requiring the purchase of an annuity, insurance product or investment product as a condition of the loan.

“These prohibitions will protect borrowers from aggressive marketers who try to get them to invest proceeds they receive from their reverse mortgages unwisely,” said David Certner, AARP legislative policy director. “For example, pushy marketing tactics used by some originators encourage borrowers to purchase deferred annuities or long-term care insurance products that are costly and generally not in the borrower’s best interest.”

But despite these changes, says Bell, “the most important safeguards remain talking candidly with your reverse mortgage counselor and dealing only with individuals and companies you know and trust, or have thoroughly checked out.”

AARP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cathie Gandel lives in New York and writes about business and finance

Medicare

2008-08-21T07:50:00.000-07:00

HOW IS MEDICARE FINANCED AND WHAT ARE
MEDICARE’S FUTURE FINANCING CHALLENGES?
Funding for Medicare comes primarily from payroll tax
revenues, general revenues, and premiums paid by
beneficiaries.
Medicare is funded as follows:
􀁹 Part A, the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund, is financed
largely through a dedicated tax of 2.9 percent of earnings paid
by employers and their employees (1.45 percent each). In
2007, these taxes are estimated to account for 86 percent of the
$216 billion in revenue to the Part A Trust Fund.
􀁹 Part B, the
Supplementary Medical
Insurance (SMI) Trust
Fund, is financed
through a combination
of general revenues
and premiums paid by
beneficiaries.
Premiums are
automatically set to
cover 25 percent of
revenues in the
aggregate. In 2007,
Part B revenue is estimated to be $194 billion.
􀁹 Part C is not separately financed.
􀁹 Part D is financed through general revenues, beneficiary
premiums, and state payments for dual eligibles eligible for drug
coverage under state Medicaid programs prior to 2006. In 2007,
Part D revenue is projected to be $64 billion, 78 percent of
which will be from general revenues.

The bill, H.R. 562, the Medicare Long-Term Care Hospital Improvement Act of 2007

2008-07-23T12:38:00.000-07:00

, would make changes to the Social Security Act that could help make quality long-term health care more available to seniors. The bill would establish criteria for long-term care hospitals (LTCH) and patient criteria for payment to an LTCH.

Though this bill is just one of many health care bills before Congress right now, seeing the effect an inability to afford long-term health care has on our aging population and their families impassioned me to co-sponsor this legislation. As Congress continues to explore the broad reforms needed in the Medicare and Social Security programs, the specific need of long-term health care must not be overlooked. Our nation’s seniors who spent their lives embodying the American work ethic have truly earned it

Medicare

2008-07-16T05:59:00.001-07:00

By ROBERT PEAR
Published: July 16, 2008
WASHINGTON — President Bush on Tuesday vetoed a bill protecting doctors from a Medicare pay cut, but both houses of Congress swiftly overrode the veto with large bipartisan majorities, so the bill is now law.

Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times
Representative John D. Dingell addressed the many Medicare beneficiaries there.
The vote in the House was 383 to 41, with 153 Republicans defying the president. In the Senate, the vote was 70 to 26, with 21 Republicans voting to override.

The bill won more support on Tuesday than when it was first approved. The tally in the House last month was 355 to 59, with 129 Republicans voting for passage. The crucial vote in the Senate was 69 to 30, with 18 Republicans voting yes.

The measure is the fourth bill to be enacted over the president’s veto, and two of those were farm bills.

Mr. Bush has been getting his way on many foreign and national security issues, obtaining money for the Iraq war, persuading Congress to pass new wiretapping legislation and fending off restrictions on harsh interrogation techniques like waterboarding.

But Democrats have gained the upper hand on many domestic issues, passing a water projects bill over the president’s veto and forcing the White House to accept new education benefits for veterans who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.

After experiencing many setbacks on health legislation in recent years, Democrats rejoiced in a resounding victory on Tuesday.

The vote “renews the light of hope for those who need our help the most, senior citizens who depend on Medicare,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader.

The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, said: “Seniors’ organizations and disabilities groups support this legislation. Just about every health-care-providing group in our country supports this legislation, except one, and that is some in the health insurance industry. I guess the president is voting with them and not with America’s seniors.”

The political dynamic was illustrated by Representative Marilyn Musgrave of Colorado, a conservative Republican who boasted that she was voting against the wishes of her party. “I am proud to continue my fight against the White House on behalf of Colorado doctors and seniors,” Mrs. Musgrave said. The votes on Tuesday ended a long string of victories for the health insurance industry.

In his veto message, Mr. Bush said he objected to the bill because it would cut federal payments to Medicare Advantage plans and slow the growth of such plans, offered by insurance companies as an alternative to traditional Medicare.

“I support the primary objective of this legislation, to forestall reductions in physician payments,” Mr. Bush said. “Yet taking choices away from seniors to pay physicians is wrong.”

Many independent studies have found that the private plans, sold by insurers like Humana and UnitedHealth, cost the government more per person than traditional Medicare. But Mr. Bush said that reducing payments to the plans would force them to “reduce benefits to millions of seniors.”

The bill also sets strict standards for the marketing of private plans, to curtail high-pressure sales tactics that have prompted complaints from beneficiaries and state insurance regulators.

The main purpose of the bill is to cancel a 10.6 percent cut in Medicare payments to doctors that took effect on July 1.

Little-noticed provisions of the bill would reduce the beneficiary’s co-payment for mental health services and increase assistance to low-income people on Medicare. In addition, the bill would delay a competitive bidding program for suppliers of medical equipment like oxygen tanks and power wheelchairs.

Competition “should be expanded, not diminished,” Mr. Bush said.

The American Medical Association and AARP, the advocacy group for older Americans, lobbied for the bill, deluging members of Congress with messages warning that doctors would be less likely to take Medicare patients if their fees were cut.

Four Republican senators switched sides and voted for the bill on Tuesday. The senators — Christopher S. Bond of Missouri, Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, and Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker of Mississippi — had voted against consideration of the bill on three previous occasions.

Representative Lois Capps, Democrat of California, said the veto showed that Mr. Bush “would rather cozy up to his friends in the insurance industry than improve access to health care for seniors and those with disabilities.”

But Representative Jim McCrery, Republican of Louisiana, said the bill “just kicks the can down the road” and does not fix fundamental flaws in the formula for paying doctors. In 18 months, Mr. McCrery said, doctors will face a 20 percent cut in their Medicare payments.

More Articles in Washington »Need to know more? 50% off home delivery of The Times.

Past Coverage
DOCTORS PRESS SENATE TO UNDO MEDICARE CUTS (July 7, 2008)
DEMOCRATS PRESS HOUSE TO PUSH TO EXPAND HEALTH CARE BILL (July 23, 2007)
Bush Threatens Veto of Medicare Drug Bill, but a Senator Is Seeking a Middle Ground (January 12, 2007)
BUSH VOWS VETO OF ANY CUTBACK IN DRUG BENEFIT (February 12, 2005)
Related Searches
Vetoes (US) Add Alert
Medicare Add Alert
Senate Add Alert
House of Representatives Add Alert
More Articles in Washington »Advertise on NYTimes.comMOST POPULAR
E-Mailed Blogged Searched Well: Drugs to Build Bones May Weaken Them
Everybody’s Business: Lessons in Love, by Way of Economics
Want Obama in a Punch Line? First, Find a Joke
Scientist at Work | Edward O. Wilson: Taking a Cue From Ants on Evolution of Humans
Findings: A New Frontier for Title IX: Science
Calm Down or Else
In Paris, Burgers Turn Chic
Country, the City Version: Farms in the Sky Gain New Interest
Op-Ed Contributor: My Plan for Iraq
Going Down the Road: Places Captured in Time, but Not Frozen There
Go to Complete List » Want Obama in a Punch Line? First, Find a Joke
A New Frontier for Title IX: Science
Taliban Breached Base in Clash
At the Uneasy Intersection of Bloggers and the Law
Post and Daily News Explore Print Pact
Planned Guns N' Roses Deal Underscores Power of Video Games to Sell Songs
Buy.com Deal With EBay Angers Sellers
Court Backs Bush on Military Detentions
Abortion Proposal Sets Condition on Aid
From the Inside, Jerry Yang Looks Out for Yahoo
Go to Complete List » \"share with\" video
obama
july 13, 2008
affiliate video
ben stein
new yorker
china
news, stocks, funds, companies
american financial group growth
maureen dowd
Go to Complete List »
nytimes.com/travel

Lisbon comes alive
Also in Travel:

36 hours in Dublin
Spying on Bucharest's cool underground
Sicily, through the eyes of the leopard
Advertisements
Need to know more?

Get 50% off home delivery of The Times.

All the news that's fit to debate.

Ads by Google what's this?

Arby's Franchises
Want Something Different, Something Better? Apply Now to Own An Arby's!
www.Arbys.com

Inside NYTimes.com
Sports » Art & Design » Dining & Wine » Opinion » U.S. » Opinion »

Blazing a Trail from a Reservation to Ownership
Anger and Lawsuits on Cruise Ship Art Auctions
At Oceana, the Voyage Continues
Anger and Dismay at the Sale of a City Treasure
Letters: Grown-Ups, Let the Kids Play Wiffle Ball!

Home World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map

Long term health care at home

2008-07-15T09:06:00.000-07:00

A Balancing Act: State Long-Term Care Reform, is the first to examine Medicaid spending on long-term care for older people and adults with physical disabilities, separate from other LTC users such as people with mental retardation/developmental disabilities (MR/DD).

Nationally, 75 percent of Medicaid LTC spending for older people and adults with physical disabilities pays for institutional care in nursing homes. In contrast, states have done a much better job balancing Medicaid LTC for people with MR/DD, spending just 39 percent on institutional care. The majority of funds now supports people in home and community-based settings.

"We recognize the success state Medicaid programs are having providing home and community based services to people with mental retardation/developmental disabilities," said AARP Pennsylvania State Director Dick Chevrefils. "It proves that balancing long-term care is doable and should be used as a model to help states provide home and community based services for older adults."

As part of its Commonwealth Long-Term Living Project, Pennsylvania set a goal of 50 percent home-based care to 50 percent institutional care for all long-term care populations by FY 2011-12. Unfortunately, the recently passed 2008-09 state budget included no new spending to reduce existing HCBS waiting lists for Pennsylvania's lottery-funded OPTIONS program.

The report examines Medicaid LTC funding because it is the primary payer for LTC in the country. "This underscores the need for better government and private sector financing options for long-term care. Americans have few options to plan and pay for their long-term care. Balancing Medicaid LTC options will require a commitment from our state officials and cooperation from federal authorities. HCBS can be both cost-effective and responsive to the preferences of older people and adults with disabilities," said Chevrefils.

The new report includes state rankings and can be found at: http://www.aarp.org/research/longtermcare/programfunding/2008_10_ltc.html.

Massachusetts FY '09 State Budget Update

2008-07-07T12:19:00.000-07:00

Massachusetts FY '09 State Budget Update
Dear Howard,

Last Thursday, before departing to observe the July 4th holiday, Massachusetts legislators approved next year's state budget.

The Commonwealth is facing fiscal challenges. However, the Massachusetts Legislature chose to fund critical programs and services for our residents.

Prescription Drug Costs
-New program and funding for evidence based outreach and education program.

Prescription Advantage
- Full funding.
- Maintained structural integrity and hold enrollees harmless by keeping cost sharing at 2007 levels and prohibiting increases without legislative approval.
- Ongoing open enrollment.

Long Term Care Continuum
- Adequate funding for a long term care continuum, that includes high quality, affordable skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, senior housing, and home and community based services, to meet the needs of our aging population.
- Adequate funding to provide home and community based care that enables older and disabled persons to remain healthy and independent.
- Adequate funding of skilled nursing facilities -- which often care for the most frail and vulnerable individuals; including the nursing home criteria known as "Score 3".
- New funding to rebalance the system to allow for more home and community based care.
- Increased funding for the Councils on Aging and Senior Centers.

Health Care Reform
- Adequate funding to implement the new health care reform law so that consumers will have access to affordable insurance products with meaningful benefits.
- Outreach grants to educate residents and assist in enrolling them in health care insurance coverage.

Money Management Program
- Maintained funding to operate the program statewide.

Please make 2 important calls today!
1. Contact Representative Christopher Fallon and Senator Richard Tisei at (617) 722-2800 and thank them for continuing to support important programs and services that help our residents remain healthy, independent and economically secure.
2. Contact Governor Patrick at (617) 725-4000 and urge him to approve the budget as submitted.

Thank you again for your continued advocacy on these very important matters.

CARING FOR AN AGING AMERICA

2008-07-02T05:34:00.000-07:00

Caring for an aging america act

1. Sen. Boxer Introduces Health and Long-Term Care Workforce Bill
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced S. 2708, the Caring for an Aging America Act, on March 5. The bill would address the emerging gap between the increasing number of older Americans and the serious lack of providers trained in caring for their medical, health, and social support needs. NCOA supports the proposal.
The bill would provide $130 million over five years to recruit and retain trained healthcare professionals and direct-care workers by providing them with loan forgiveness and career advancement opportunities. Specifically, the legislation would:
• Establish a Geriatric and Gerontology Loan Repayment Program for health professionals who complete specialty training in geriatrics or gerontology and agree to provide full-time clinical practice and service to older adults for a minimum of two years.
• Expand eligibility for the Nursing Education Loan Repayment Program to include registered nurses who complete specialty training and provide nursing services to older adults in long-term care settings.
• Offer specialty training in long-term care services through the existing Career Ladders Grants Program.
• Create a Health and Long-Term Care Workforce Advisory Panel for an Aging America to identify incentives for recruitment and retention of new populations of clinicians and providers to serve vulnerable older adults

Recomended Federal Programs to Support Seniors

2008-06-27T12:36:00.000-07:00

10 Government Programs You Can Access for Mom or Dad

By Leonard J. Hansen

Caregiving for a parent may stretch the budget as well as your endurance -- that is, if you aren’t aware of scores of federal, state and even local government programs.

Access to assistance is as close as your computer, and, in most cases, you can apply online. Start by accessing two sites:

www.Govbenefits.gov - Gather up all the information you can on your parent’s health, disability, income, wealth (as in property owned), whether a military veteran, education level and more. Access this site and answer every question that you can. Then, push the button and, within minutes, the site will respond with a list, details and access information for many, even scores, of beneficial government programs, supplements and/or services.

www.Benefitscheckup.org - This non-profit site will ask many of the same questions but may report added programs, details and contacts.

Here is a guide to the top 10 programs everyone who is caring for an aging parent should know about:

1. Medicare

There is more to Medicare than just the Part A hospital and Part B medical insurance coverage. If your parent is 65 or older and collecting Social Security, the insurance premiums are deducted from monthly benefits. Part D prescription drug coverage is subsidized by Medicare through payments to private company insurers who then fund an average of 90 percent of the cost of prescription drugs. If your parent is considered low income, receiving only Social Security, Medicare may subsidize all but about $10 of the monthly premiums. Ask and you may find a great cost saving for your parent.
Medicare: www.medicare.gov Medicare Part D: www.medicare.gov/pdphome.asp

2. Social Security

If your parent’s Social Security benefits were earned based on lower-paying jobs, and if the benefits are the only source of income, there may be a larger monthly benefit available by applying for its Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. The program may be operated federally or in conjunction with your state government. The welfare-based Medicaid program is also administered through the Social Security Administration, though the operation may be directed by your state government.
www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/handbook.21handbook-2100.html

3. Administration on Aging (AoA)

The AoA administers many national programs and services for elders, including health insurance counseling, legal assistance, protection from elder abuse and long-term care. The banner on the website has a link to Elders and Families, your starting point. This section also offers a specific link and service For Caregivers (see the left hand column.)
www.aoa.gov

4. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

If your parent is a military veteran and has a service-related disability, you may be able to apply for an increase in benefits, particularly if the disability has worsened over time. If he or she needs continuing medical care because of the disability, an application for medical benefits, hospitalization and prescription drugs may be submitted. There are several types and levels of VA disability compensation and pension programs. The VA has been slow in processing claims the past few years, but there is continuing pressure by Congress and the Administration to speed up its service.
www.va.gov

5. HIPAA

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1966 provides your parent privacy of his or her medical records. It is a regulation and restriction program on health care providers. The protection should be of concern to you and other family members because, unless your parent signs a form designating each of you as approved to discuss your medical concerns with the physician, he or she cannot do such, even if you prove your family connection. Better sooner than later, access the HIPAA website for the information and forms, or secure the forms from a physician, and file copies with every health care professional involved in your parent’s care.
www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/consumer_summary.pdf

6. United States Department of Justice

If your parent has a disability, particularly with physical movement, learn about the Americans With Disability Act administered by the U.S. Department of Justice. Its website offers briefings and cost-free publications on the regulations to grant universal access to the disabled.
www.ada.gov/publicat.htm#Anchor-14210

7. Food and Drug Administration

Your parent is probably taking five to as many as 10 different prescription drugs, perhaps prescribed by different doctors. As caregiver, you should be aware of every one of the drugs, know its mission in the body and, particularly the side effects and conflicts with other medications. The federal Food and Drug Administration offers a giant database on every drug approved by the agency, listing active ingredients, purpose or mission of the medication, dosing recommendations and the side effects and conflicts.
www.fda.gov/cder/index.html(At the top right hand on the opening page, click the link to Drugs@FDA)

8. Your U.S. Senator

Every senator has a staff specialist on elder affairs, programs and services, probably in major cities of your state plus in Washington, D.C. The staff person can both advise and advocate for benefits or services for your parent. Know that bureaucrats listen immediately to an aide for a United States Senator.
www.senate.gov
Click the Senators link.

9. Your Congressional Representative

Most Representatives in the United States Congress also have staff specialists on elder affairs, programs and services and can provide both information and advocacy.
www.house.gov(Click the Representatives by State link)

10. Area Agency on Aging

There is a federally-mandated Area Agency on Aging in your county or city. This agency is staffed by professionals who know every elder program and service, including available funding sources, in your area. Staff is often aided by volunteers who serve as drivers for transport and Meals-on-Wheels, for respite services and other duties. Gather up the same information you collected for the two sites detailing the national, and even state, programs for which your parent may qualify and make an appointment to meet with a counselor at the Area Agency on Aging. The staff person can advise regarding programs and qualifications and even help prepare the necessary applications and documentation. Often, the counselor will even call a recommended agency, program or service to advise that your application is headed their way. Access your Area Agency on Aging through your telephone book and call the office for an appointment, at which time you should also ask if they have a website that you can access in advance of an in-person visit.

In Summary

Use these resources and you may gain a world of vital information as well as increased income and services for your parent. And you just may find your caregiving less stressful and demanding.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Leonard J. Hansen is recognized as the pioneer journalist and author writing to, for and about mature adults, founding, publishing and editing Senior World newspapers and a syndicated newspaper columnists. He has received 106 professional awards and fellowships for his journalistic and creative work. Access his website at: www.lenhansen.com

Comments (1 to 3 of 3)
skoder

Jun 11, 2008
Suggest Removal
I am caring for my aging disabled father in myhome and want to now if you can get compensated for it to cover some of the bills, we live in Phoenix, AZ. Ifanybody hasiany answers please let me know.

Valerie

4 days ago
Suggest Removal
My aunt is elderly (89) and only has social security income. She is not able to pay her Minnesota property taxes. Are there any tax assistance programs in Minnesota that could help?

HisPony

4 days ago
Suggest Removal
As a recent Retiree from the Navy I would like to add a few things about the VA:

1) If the person was released from the military for a Disability or Retired after 20 years of service, you will need thier DD 214 before contacting the VA Hospital for Medical appointments. If you don't have one, you can still contact them for a starting place to receive a replacement.

2) To increase the person's Disability Compensation you will need a Medical History from the time of departure to the present. You will also need the original Disability Rating Letter issued from the VA.

3) The biggest misconception is that a Disabled/Retired Millitary member has to go to a VA hospital to be seen!! This is not true, the person can sign up for TRICARE Prime and see a doctor that accepts TRICARE in thier home town. TRICARE has a list of approved doctors for your area. I pay $460 a year for a Family Plan that allows me to see a doctor who is only 5 miles from my home. If the person is on Medicare/Medicad the regular TRICARE will pick up all copays. Contact TRICARE and they will explain all of the details.

4) Most states now have a state sponsored Veteran Office that help Veterans and thier families through the paperwork process. A quick internet search or phone call to the VA should help you get in touch with the right people.

I am in no way affiliated with the VA or any other organization, just a retired Vet that is trying to help people get pointed in the right direction.

Jack

Submit your comment
(Words only, no HTML allowed)

Notify me when others respond

Government Programs Access for Seniors

States Should Expect Less Federal Medicaid Matching in 2014

Forgot password?

automatic cuts starting in 2013

OLDER AMERICANS ACT

Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (Deficit "Supercommittee").

Debt Ceiling Compromise and Super Committee

CLASS ACT

new federal support for states to develop and upgrade Medicaid IT systems and systems for enrollment in state exchanges

“Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare Act,”

1. The United States health care

Fair Housing Month

Census 2010

Health Care Reform

RESTART HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

Budget Office Sees Hurdles in Financing Health Plans

KENNEDY ESTABLISHES COMMITTEE WORKING GROUPS ON HEALTH REFORM

US Sen Baucus to Unveil Health-Policy Vision Wednesday November 12

Health Care Agenda

Kerry-Grassley Bill At home Care

Health care takes a back seat in the election

Debit Card For unbanked Americans

Nursing Home Tansparency and Quality of Care Improvement ACT

Home Act S 3327

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

MEDICARE PROBLEM DONUT HOLE

Medicare

The bill, H.R. 562, the Medicare Long-Term Care Hospital Improvement Act of 2007

Medicare

Long term health care at home

Massachusetts FY '09 State Budget Update

CARING FOR AN AGING AMERICA

Recomended Federal Programs to Support Seniors