Insure TN fails.

If you pay attention to news at all, by now you probably know that Haslam's proposed Insure TN plan of medicaid expansion has failed. Below are a few articles that explain who did what and how it failed and where we go from here and who were the winners and loosers.

Senate panel votes down Insure TN (7 no, 4 yes); Special session terminated

Knoxblog.com - The Senate Health Committee voted against Gov. Bill Haslam’s Insure Tennessee resolution Wednesday afternoon with seven senators voting no and four yes.

No votes: Republican Sens. Mike Bell of Riceville, Janice Bowling of Tullahoma, Rusty Crowe of Johnson City, Todd Gardenhire of Chattanooga, Brian Kelsey of Germantown, Frank Niceley of Strawberry Plains and Kerry Roberts of Springfield.

Yes votes: Republican Sens. Richard Briggs of Knoxville, Ed Jackson of Jackson and Becky Massey of Knoxville along with Democratic Sen. Jeff Yarbro of Nashville.

Lawmakers kill Haslam health plan; he says its "pointless" to try same plan again

 The Commercial Appeal - ....Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey, R-Blountville, said “the absence of a clear, written agreement between the federal government and the State of Tennessee made passage impossible. ... We could not in good conscience put our stamp of approval on a mere verbal agreement with the Obama administration.”

.....U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Nashville: “Tennesseans will die and hospitals will close as a result of our cruel state legislature. Rarely in state history have we seen such a devastating lack of leadership.”

Few lawmakers supported Haslam's Insure Tennessee

The Tennessean - House Speaker Beth Harwell, R-Nashville, said she was "torn" on whether to support the plan, pointing to possible problems with kicking people off the program if the state needed to end it. Although Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, R-Blountville, originally hinted he would support the plan, he also pointed to a mistrust with the federal government as to why passage of Insure Tennessee was "impossible."

.....Haslam said it was hard to judge what impact right-wing special interest groups like Americans for Prosperity or the Beacon Center of Tennessee played on the final outcome. But at least some Republicans acknowledged these or other groups could — and likely would — use their comments during this session to fuel the candidacy of a primary challenger.

Haslam Unsure Of Next Steps After Defeat Of Insure Tennessee

Insure Tennessee to cost $15 million a year to manage, report says

by Dave Boucher, The Tennessean, - ..."The estimated fiscal impact to commerce in the state as a result of the proposed legislation cannot be reasonably determined due to a number of unknown factors," wrote Jeff Spalding, new executive director of the Tennessee Fiscal Review Committee.

Haslam has repeatedly said the plan won't cost Tennessee any extra money: the administration says the federal government covers 100 percent of costs in the first two years, then state hospitals cover a growing share that tops out at 90 percent in 2020.
But the fiscal note — a report attached to any legislative proposal that could have a financial impact if it becomes law — estimates more than $15 million in administrative costs annually.

Recriminations begin immediately following death of Insure Tennessee

 

Top Stories

Beacon Center's statement on the Success in the Fight Against Medicaid Expansion

 Offers Real Healthcare Solutions for Low-Income Tenneseans

Press Release, The Beacon Center - The Beacon Center applauds legislators for rejecting a Medicaid expansion in Tennessee. Instead of supporting this extension of Obamacare in our state, lawmakers stood with the Beacon Center and fought for what was right, choosing taxpayers over special interest groups.

While the Beacon Center disagreed with Governor Haslam's plan, we do want to thank him for bringing an important issue to light and trying to come up with a unique Tennessee solution to this issue. We also believe those who supported "Insure Tennessee" had the best of intentions, and we look forward to working with them in the coming months to find a responsible, cost-effective, free market solution that will truly benefit low-income Tennesseans.

"While stopping the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare was a necessary first step, it is still our responsibility as Tennesseans to find affordable healthcare solutions for our most vulnerable neighbors," said Beacon CEO Justin Owen.

To that end, Beacon is calling for passage of right-to-try legislation that would allow terminally ill patients to access potentially life-saving medicine. Beacon will also work with state leaders to expand access to charity care, reduce the costs imposed by health insurance mandates, and allow Tennesseans to purchase health insurance across state lines.

"There are many things we can do to make healthcare and health insurance more affordable and accessible for all Tennesseans," said Lindsay Boyd, Beacon Director of Policy. "We look forward to rolling up our sleeves and getting to work helping those most in need."

Top Stories

CORKER SAYS TRUSTEES REPORTS ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE DEMONSTRATE URGENCY FOR REFORM

Medicare to be out of money in 12 years. 

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said the annual reports from the Trustees for Social Security and Medicare out today demonstrate the urgency for reform of both Social Security and Medicare. The reports indicate the Social Security Trust Fund will run out of money in 2033, three years earlier than projected last year, and the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will run out of money in 2024.

 “Today’s reports confirm what we all know but Washington has been ignoring for years: Congress must act to reform and restore solvency to Social Security and Medicare and put our country on a path to fiscal sanity. Bold entitlement reform combined with long-term deficit reduction and pro-growth tax reform that lowers rates across the board will cause the economy take off. I will continue working with my colleagues in both parties toward that end,” said Corker.

Top Stories

Thowing Grandma off the cliff

 Below is the video to which the above video is a response.
Enough of this. Can we not talk about health care reform without resorting to video showing throwing grandma off the cliff.

Top Stories

Cain, Gingrich Debate Lincoln-Douglas Style

If you were watching football and missed the Gingrich-Cain debate, you missed a great debate. Well, let us say a great discussion; there was not a lot of disagreement between the candidates. Still, it was a great event and revealed a lot about the candidates.

My view of the debate is that Gingrich won.  He is far more qualified to be President than Cain. Not, that Cain is not as qualified as was Obama when he took office or maybe any number of other Presidents. Should Cain end up being the Republican nominee and then win the Presidency, I am confident that his values and instincts are right and he could surround himself with brilliant people to carry out the right policies. Gingrich on the other hand is brilliant! He is an intellectual. He has thought issues through. He has the knowledge and ability to lead us through the treacherous days a head. 

This was an excellent format.  Letting the candidates have free range to ask each other questions and to respond and have back and forth is much more revealing about the qualifications of a candidate than ten people on a stage trying to avoid the pit-falls of a "gotcha" question. My only criticism of the debate was the sound quality. You can understand them, but the poor sound quality is a distraction. Gingrich had the advantage in that his hand-held microphone provided a clearer sound quality than whatever they were using for Cain

I have not been excited about any of our candidates.  I have yet to jump on any band wagon. I have not contributed to any of them.  My favorites were Bob Corker, Mitch Daniels and Chris Cristi but none of them ran. For a short while I liked Bachmann, then when Perry came on the scene, I liked Perry for about a week. I was then leaning toward Cain.  I am now prepared to say I am supporting Newt Gingrich. I am going to send a donation.

My dream ticket would be a Gingrich-Cain ticket.

The information below is from the C-span web site.  Follow the link below, then under "video play list," click "Cain, Gingrich Debate."

Cain, Gingrich Debate Lincoln-Douglas Style
Washington, DC
Saturday, November 5, 2011
http://www.c-span.org/Events/Cain-Gingrich-Debate-Lincoln-Douglas-Style/10737425199/

GOP presidential candidates Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich engage in a 90 minute debate hosted by the Texas Patriots PAC. There is no moderator and the two candidates discuss and respond to each other’s positions on domestic policy in The Woodlands, TX.

 The debate is divided into three parts, with each part focusing on one entitlement program – Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

 In previous media-moderated debates, Gingrich said repeatedly that should he be the GOP nominee, he would challenge President Obama to Lincoln-Douglas style debates.

 Cain has risen in the polls recently with his 9-9-9 tax plan, but the media has focused this week on two previous settlements with women alleging he sexual harassed them while he lead the National Restaurant Association. The topic will not be discussed at the debate.

 The Lincoln-Douglas debates were a series of three-hour debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas during the 1858 Illinois Senate race. In the format, one candidate would start with a 60 minute statement, and his opponent would get 90 minutes to respond.  The first speaker then got a 30 minute rebuttal. The two candidates took turns speaking first.

Top Stories

We are not entitled

by guest blogger Jeff Sullivan

The U.S. government is running a budget deficit. That should not be news to anyone reading this column, nor should it be news to anyone not living in a cave. Politicians in both major parties give speeches lamenting the problem, but with little hard evidence of what they intend to do to correct it. Some want to increase taxes, some want to reduce taxes. But one thing is certain. Government spending must decrease, both over the short and long term.

The question you may be asking, is how? Where do we cut and who will be hurt? The answer is in our entitlement programs, specifically, Social Security, Medicare and our yet to be implemented but already law, Obama-care.

To keep spending from spiraling out of control, these entitlement programs must be pared back or eliminated. The recent healthcare reform, commonly referred to as Obama-care, should be repealed before it can add to the current budget deficits. Assuming this occurs, the next steps must be to reform Social Security and Medicare.

Full Social Security benefits are currently available to retirees 66 or older, gradually increasing to 67 for individuals born on 1960 or afterwards. Medicare benefits are currently available to all individuals 65 or older. These arbitrary ages were set at a time when the average life span was much lower than it is today. As such, an increase in the age at which individuals can receive benefits appears to be reasonable and sound.

The age at which individuals can receive Medicare and Social Security benefits should be gradually increased, at a set rate of 4 months for every year beginning immediately. This would mean that in 2011, individuals would be eligible to receive Medicare benefits at 65 years and four months of age and eligible to receive Social Security benefits at 66 years and four months. Each year would add another four months to the age at which individuals could receive benefits. This would continue in perpetuity. The result would be a continual reduction in the population served by Medicare and Social Security, and a likewise reduction in payouts by the respective programs.

Making these changes would not reduce benefits for current recipients of Social Security or Medicare, but would ease the financial burden these two programs face. Those of us under the ages would have to work longer to be eligible for benefits, but the increase in ages would be gradual enough not to be an excessive burden closer to retirement age. For myself, at age 40, it would mean that I would be eligible to receive Medicare benefits at the age of 77 years and four months and Social Security benefits at 78 years and eight months. Given the projected life span of individuals like myself who were born in 1969, it is possible that I will never receive benefits from either program.

And that is how it should be. Even in America, we are granted by our Constitution only the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nowhere is the promise of a monthly check or free medical care should I happen to need either. While well meaning, these two entitlement programs have enabled generations of Americans to buy into the fallacious idea that government can and should solve our problems. As a result, government spending has run amuck and Americans have abandoned the ideals upon which this country was founded.

Our God given talents and the decisions we make throughout their lifetime should decide each individual’s fate. Those of us that work hard, invest wisely and refrain from self-destructive choices should reap the benefits of our labors. Those of us that choose a different path should reap the benefits of their choices as well. This is precisely what the framers of our Constitution intended and it is to what each free-thinking individual should aspire.

Jeff Sullivan is an electrical engineer residing in Nashville. He is married with two young children and he is working to see the American experiment in Socialism reversed come November.

Top Stories

The Health Care Hail Mary Pass

I do not know a single person who is opposed to health care reform. The health care system needs reformed. We need real reform however, not this bill that is before us. We need tort reform, we need the ability to purchase insurance across state lines, we need to let individuals own their own insurance plan, we need health savings accounts; we do not need this monstrosity which will raise insurance premiums for many Americans and bankrupt Medicare. Slashing funding for Medicare while putting million more on the Medicare rolls? What kind of logic is that? I have a hard time believing that anyone really believes that what is before us is a good bill. It appears the Democrats want to pass something-anything, just so they can say they "reformed" health care.

Top Stories

Which insurance company denies the most claims?

An argument for a government health insurance company:
Those evil insurance companies make money by denying people services and there is a lot of red tape in getting claims processed.

Fact:
The government health care company known as Medicare denies claims at almost twice the rate of private insurance companies and the red tape is worse.

Are you Living in Denial
By Robert Anthony, Physician Practice

[excerpt] Did you know Medicare denies up to 22 percent of medical services, depending on the specialty? If you're in dermatology (the lowest denial rate, at 5.5 percent) or pediatric medicine (a mere 6.22 percent), then you're one of the lucky ones. But if you're an anesthesiology practice (with a daunting 18.55 percent denial rate) or an obstetrics and gynecology practice (the highest, with a whopping 22.42 percent), then Medicare denials can easily become daily occurrences.

"The problem with Medicare is that you can talk to four different people and get four different answers," says Darlene Helmer, CPC, ANP-C, billing manager for Physician Anesthesia Associates of Towson, Md., and co-chair of the Third Party & Reimbursement committee of the Maryland Medical Group Management Association. "They don't always know their own regulations, so you have to be the expert on [them]." (link)

This article shed light on the red tape problems with Medicare and examines the denial claim problem. Given the high claim denial rate of Medicare and the red tape, why does one think a new government "public option" would perform any better than the current public option known as Medicare? I don't understand it.

For more evidence of the claim denial rate of the government compared to private insurance companies, see the chart below. Notice that the Medicare denial rate is 6.85%, compared to a range of 2.68 to 6.80 for other listed insurance companies. For a more detailed discussion of the numbers in the chart below follow this link: HSA Benefits Consulting.

Top Stories