Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More and more Doctors are not taking Medicaid pts.
What prevents Doctors from refusing to take any other kind of insurance?
My Dentist takes one program offered by Delta, but won't doesn't take other Delta programs.
Yo bumping! Answer please.
Medicaid primary care rates are rising, on average, 73% this year, courtesy of the ACA. Good for access.
That said, most of Medicaid is privatized--they'll figure it out, right?
Yes, I have read that article.
I still know that more Docs, in 2013, are not accepting Medicaid/MediCal patients.
I also haven't seen an increase in reimbursements from MediCal.
Calif. Physicians Unsure of Timeline for Medi-Cal Pay Increases Under ACA - California Healthline
Comment?
Yes, I have read that article.
I still know that more Docs, in 2013, are not accepting Medicaid/MediCal patients.
I also haven't seen an increase in reimbursements from MediCal.
Calif. Physicians Unsure of Timeline for Medi-Cal Pay Increases Under ACA - California Healthline
Comment?
Comment on?
As I said, Medicaid primary care rates are rising this year (retroactive to January 1, whenever your state implements it). Are you asking whether that's going to happen? The answer is yes.
If you want even better access, write your state reps and governor to ask them to direct some of their surplus into increasing Medicaid specialty care rates.
Why do states have to direct their (imaginary) surpluses to a program that wasn't supposed to add a dime to the deficit?
Yes, I have read that article.
I still know that more Docs, in 2013, are not accepting Medicaid/MediCal patients.
I also haven't seen an increase in reimbursements from MediCal.
Calif. Physicians Unsure of Timeline for Medi-Cal Pay Increases Under ACA - California Healthline
Comment?
Comment on?
As I said, Medicaid primary care rates are rising this year (retroactive to January 1, whenever your state implements it). Are you asking whether that's going to happen? The answer is yes.
If you want even better access, write your state reps and governor to ask them to direct some of their surplus into increasing Medicaid specialty care rates.
Why do states have to direct their (imaginary) surpluses to a program that wasn't supposed to add a dime to the deficit?
Yes, I have read that article.
I still know that more Docs, in 2013, are not accepting Medicaid/MediCal patients.
I also haven't seen an increase in reimbursements from MediCal.
Calif. Physicians Unsure of Timeline for Medi-Cal Pay Increases Under ACA - California Healthline
Comment?
Comment on?
As I said, Medicaid primary care rates are rising this year (retroactive to January 1, whenever your state implements it). Are you asking whether that's going to happen? The answer is yes.
If you want even better access, write your state reps and governor to ask them to direct some of their surplus into increasing Medicaid specialty care rates.
Comment on lack of access, period.
Comment on what happens to states after the ACA measure increases payments for certain primary care services for Medi-Cal beneficiaries to the same level as Medicare reimbursements for two years.
Public hospitals will play an important role in providing care to those newly eligible for Medi-Cal in 2014 as well as the estimated 3.1 million Californians who will remain uninsured after implementation of the ACA. The waiver provides up to $3.3 billion in federal matching funds over five years for a new Delivery System Reform Incentive Pool (DSRIP) to help support efforts by county and University of California hospitals to improve the quality of care they provide and the health of the populations they serve.
There are four areas for which federal funding is available under DSRIP:
- Infrastructure development: investments in technology, tools, and human resources (e.g., increases in primary care capacity, telemedicine, enhanced interpretation services).
- Innovation and redesign: investments in new and innovative care delivery models (e.g., medical homes, chronic disease management systems, primary care redesign).
- Population-focused improvement: investments to enhance care delivery for the five to ten highest burden conditions in public hospital systems for the low-income populations for whom they are responsible (e.g., improved diabetes care management and outcomes, improved chronic care management and outcomes, reduction of readmissions).
- Urgent improvement in care: hospital-specific interventions that have substantial evidence of being able to achieve major and measurable improvement in care within five years.
Comment on lack of access, period.
Comment on what happens to states after the ACA measure increases payments for certain primary care services for Medi-Cal beneficiaries to the same level as Medicare reimbursements for two years.
California is in the middle of rebuilding its delivery system not only to build capacity but to better utilize what they already have. They're using more than $400 million for community health center capital development but more importantly they've gotten approval for an 1115 Medicaid waiver to build safety net capacity and implement delivery models like primary care medical homes to get more for what they've got. That includes launching a new delivery system incentive pool:
Public hospitals will play an important role in providing care to those newly eligible for Medi-Cal in 2014 as well as the estimated 3.1 million Californians who will remain uninsured after implementation of the ACA. The waiver provides up to $3.3 billion in federal matching funds over five years for a new Delivery System Reform Incentive Pool (DSRIP) to help support efforts by county and University of California hospitals to improve the quality of care they provide and the health of the populations they serve.
There are four areas for which federal funding is available under DSRIP:
- Infrastructure development: investments in technology, tools, and human resources (e.g., increases in primary care capacity, telemedicine, enhanced interpretation services).
- Innovation and redesign: investments in new and innovative care delivery models (e.g., medical homes, chronic disease management systems, primary care redesign).
- Population-focused improvement: investments to enhance care delivery for the five to ten highest burden conditions in public hospital systems for the low-income populations for whom they are responsible (e.g., improved diabetes care management and outcomes, improved chronic care management and outcomes, reduction of readmissions).
- Urgent improvement in care: hospital-specific interventions that have substantial evidence of being able to achieve major and measurable improvement in care within five years.
It's not just about coverage, it's about building a delivery system that works, including for those getting coverage for the first time. These efforts go hand in hand.
What's likely to happen is that they will LOSE...in DROVES!The GOP has been playing a very interesting game with its doomsday predictions lately. They've gone so far as to start spreading the idea--with the helpful assistance of the rightwing infotainment complex--that health insurance premiums are about to jump 400%.
But now that the actual prices for next year are starting to trickle out and aren't confirming their predictions (see: Premiums drop, coverage expands in Washington's exchange; Surprisingly low premium rates submitted for Oregon exchange; 13 insurers approved for California's exchange submit low premiums; etc), what happens?
It Looks Like Obamacare May Not Be A 'Train Wreck' After All - Business Insider
After weeks of talk about implementation "train wreck" for the Affordable Care Act, supporters of the law finally got some good news Thursday.
Insurance premiums in California's health care exchange will provide plans that range from a 2 percent increase to a 29 percent decrease in premiums, compared to current insurance rates.
Covered California, the state agency in charge of the state's health insurance exchange, announced on Thursday that the state will provide 13 insurance plans next year. Medium-level "bronze" and "silver" health insurance plans came in nearly $200 lower a month than predicted, according to the Washington Post's Sarah Kliff.The most important part to Blumberg, however, is that premiums will cost much lower than was expected. In 2009, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that a "silver plan" would cost an average of $5,200 per year. In reality, at least in California, it will cost approximately $3,312, or $276 per month.
That leads to an interesting scenario, posed by Ezra Klein this morning as he considered some very good news for Obamacare:
Of course, California and Oregon are managing Obamacare particularly well. But the state-by-state nature of the Affordable Care Act creates really unusual political dynamics around how the law is perceived in its first year.
Imagine its the end of 2014. California now boasts a working, near-universal health-care system. Nothing perfect, but clearly a a success after the first year of implementation. Texas, meanwhile, is a bit of a mess. They didnt allow the Medicaid expansion so the states poorest residents got nothing. They didnt help with the exchanges, or the outreach, so there arent many choices, and premiums arent as low one might hope.
Viewed in isolation, Texass problems would be deadly for the law. But viewed next to California, they might mainly be a problem for the political class in Texas, which has failed to implement a clearly workable law.
It seems pretty clear that Medicaid can be a winning issue for state-level Dems next year in states that fail to expand the program. But what about exchanges, particularly in those states in which the leadership decided that the federal government could do a better job than the state at overseeing its marketplace?
If a neighboring state that opted to design and run its own exchange is seeing in some cases double digit decreases in premiums next year relative to comparable plans this year, how do residents of a state react, particularly if their federally-facilitated exchange is shall we say less than robust?
In other words, the GOP has gone all in on the doomsday prediction that Obamacare is inherently unworkable--the cracks in the facade of that claim are starting to grow pretty quickly, thanks to the outlandishness of the claims they've been making. So at what point does the effort by leaders in some states to sabotage reform in their own states begin to backfire, as their responsibility for attempting to deprive their residents of what are going to become increasingly obvious benefits comes into focus?
There seems to be a lot of agreement that Obamacare is going to be a major issue in states in the 2014 elections. I have to say, I certainly hope that's the case.
The GOP has been playing a very interesting game with its doomsday predictions lately. They've gone so far as to start spreading the idea--with the helpful assistance of the rightwing infotainment complex--that health insurance premiums are about to jump 400%.
But now that the actual prices for next year are starting to trickle out and aren't confirming their predictions (see: Premiums drop, coverage expands in Washington's exchange; Surprisingly low premium rates submitted for Oregon exchange; 13 insurers approved for California's exchange submit low premiums; etc), what happens?
It Looks Like Obamacare May Not Be A 'Train Wreck' After All - Business Insider
After weeks of talk about implementation "train wreck" for the Affordable Care Act, supporters of the law finally got some good news Thursday.
Insurance premiums in California's health care exchange will provide plans that range from a 2 percent increase to a 29 percent decrease in premiums, compared to current insurance rates.
Covered California, the state agency in charge of the state's health insurance exchange, announced on Thursday that the state will provide 13 insurance plans next year. Medium-level "bronze" and "silver" health insurance plans came in nearly $200 lower a month than predicted, according to the Washington Post's Sarah Kliff.The most important part to Blumberg, however, is that premiums will cost much lower than was expected. In 2009, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that a "silver plan" would cost an average of $5,200 per year. In reality, at least in California, it will cost approximately $3,312, or $276 per month.
That leads to an interesting scenario, posed by Ezra Klein this morning as he considered some very good news for Obamacare:
Of course, California and Oregon are managing Obamacare particularly well. But the state-by-state nature of the Affordable Care Act creates really unusual political dynamics around how the law is perceived in its first year.
Imagine its the end of 2014. California now boasts a working, near-universal health-care system. Nothing perfect, but clearly a a success after the first year of implementation. Texas, meanwhile, is a bit of a mess. They didnt allow the Medicaid expansion so the states poorest residents got nothing. They didnt help with the exchanges, or the outreach, so there arent many choices, and premiums arent as low one might hope.
Viewed in isolation, Texass problems would be deadly for the law. But viewed next to California, they might mainly be a problem for the political class in Texas, which has failed to implement a clearly workable law.
It seems pretty clear that Medicaid can be a winning issue for state-level Dems next year in states that fail to expand the program. But what about exchanges, particularly in those states in which the leadership decided that the federal government could do a better job than the state at overseeing its marketplace?
If a neighboring state that opted to design and run its own exchange is seeing in some cases double digit decreases in premiums next year relative to comparable plans this year, how do residents of a state react, particularly if their federally-facilitated exchange is shall we say less than robust?
In other words, the GOP has gone all in on the doomsday prediction that Obamacare is inherently unworkable--the cracks in the facade of that claim are starting to grow pretty quickly, thanks to the outlandishness of the claims they've been making. So at what point does the effort by leaders in some states to sabotage reform in their own states begin to backfire, as their responsibility for attempting to deprive their residents of what are going to become increasingly obvious benefits comes into focus?
There seems to be a lot of agreement that Obamacare is going to be a major issue in states in the 2014 elections. I have to say, I certainly hope that's the case.
One thing no liberals have addressed is the fact that congress and the IRS want to be exempt from Obamacare. They should know more about it than anyone and they don't think it's good for them. If it's not good for them, how the hell can it be good for any of us?
What's likely to happen is that they will LOSE...in DROVES!The GOP has been playing a very interesting game with its doomsday predictions lately. They've gone so far as to start spreading the idea--with the helpful assistance of the rightwing infotainment complex--that health insurance premiums are about to jump 400%.
But now that the actual prices for next year are starting to trickle out and aren't confirming their predictions (see: Premiums drop, coverage expands in Washington's exchange; Surprisingly low premium rates submitted for Oregon exchange; 13 insurers approved for California's exchange submit low premiums; etc), what happens?
It Looks Like Obamacare May Not Be A 'Train Wreck' After All - Business Insider
After weeks of talk about implementation "train wreck" for the Affordable Care Act, supporters of the law finally got some good news Thursday.
Insurance premiums in California's health care exchange will provide plans that range from a 2 percent increase to a 29 percent decrease in premiums, compared to current insurance rates.
Covered California, the state agency in charge of the state's health insurance exchange, announced on Thursday that the state will provide 13 insurance plans next year. Medium-level "bronze" and "silver" health insurance plans came in nearly $200 lower a month than predicted, according to the Washington Post's Sarah Kliff.
That leads to an interesting scenario, posed by Ezra Klein this morning as he considered some very good news for Obamacare:
Of course, California and Oregon are managing Obamacare particularly well. But the state-by-state nature of the Affordable Care Act creates really unusual political dynamics around how the law is perceived in its first year.
Imagine its the end of 2014. California now boasts a working, near-universal health-care system. Nothing perfect, but clearly a a success after the first year of implementation. Texas, meanwhile, is a bit of a mess. They didnt allow the Medicaid expansion so the states poorest residents got nothing. They didnt help with the exchanges, or the outreach, so there arent many choices, and premiums arent as low one might hope.
Viewed in isolation, Texass problems would be deadly for the law. But viewed next to California, they might mainly be a problem for the political class in Texas, which has failed to implement a clearly workable law.
It seems pretty clear that Medicaid can be a winning issue for state-level Dems next year in states that fail to expand the program. But what about exchanges, particularly in those states in which the leadership decided that the federal government could do a better job than the state at overseeing its marketplace?
If a neighboring state that opted to design and run its own exchange is seeing in some cases double digit decreases in premiums next year relative to comparable plans this year, how do residents of a state react, particularly if their federally-facilitated exchange is shall we say less than robust?
In other words, the GOP has gone all in on the doomsday prediction that Obamacare is inherently unworkable--the cracks in the facade of that claim are starting to grow pretty quickly, thanks to the outlandishness of the claims they've been making. So at what point does the effort by leaders in some states to sabotage reform in their own states begin to backfire, as their responsibility for attempting to deprive their residents of what are going to become increasingly obvious benefits comes into focus?
There seems to be a lot of agreement that Obamacare is going to be a major issue in states in the 2014 elections. I have to say, I certainly hope that's the case.
As should happen.
To BE a QHP you MUST meet the standards set forth by said Exchange...as Greenie said 3 tiers of plans ALL covering the same things.....and they ALL have to charge the same premiums.
Are you an idiot (don't answer, rhetorical question)? Every insurer charges different premiums for their plans.
A 40-year-old in Modoc County can buy Anthem's bronze PPO plan for $234, Blue Shield's bronze EPO for $266, Kaiser Permanente's bronze HMO for $261, etc.
This is even more embarrassing than the time you claimed there's a public option because you don't know how to use THOMAS. Buy a fucking clue.
Comment on lack of access, period.
Comment on what happens to states after the ACA measure increases payments for certain primary care services for Medi-Cal beneficiaries to the same level as Medicare reimbursements for two years.
California is in the middle of rebuilding its delivery system not only to build capacity but to better utilize what they already have. They're using more than $400 million for community health center capital development but more importantly they've gotten approval for an 1115 Medicaid waiver to build safety net capacity and implement delivery models like primary care medical homes to get more for what they've got. That includes launching a new delivery system incentive pool:
Public hospitals will play an important role in providing care to those newly eligible for Medi-Cal in 2014 as well as the estimated 3.1 million Californians who will remain uninsured after implementation of the ACA. The waiver provides up to $3.3 billion in federal matching funds over five years for a new Delivery System Reform Incentive Pool (DSRIP) to help support efforts by county and University of California hospitals to improve the quality of care they provide and the health of the populations they serve.
There are four areas for which federal funding is available under DSRIP:
- Infrastructure development: investments in technology, tools, and human resources (e.g., increases in primary care capacity, telemedicine, enhanced interpretation services).
- Innovation and redesign: investments in new and innovative care delivery models (e.g., medical homes, chronic disease management systems, primary care redesign).
- Population-focused improvement: investments to enhance care delivery for the five to ten highest burden conditions in public hospital systems for the low-income populations for whom they are responsible (e.g., improved diabetes care management and outcomes, improved chronic care management and outcomes, reduction of readmissions).
- Urgent improvement in care: hospital-specific interventions that have substantial evidence of being able to achieve major and measurable improvement in care within five years.
It's not just about coverage, it's about building a delivery system that works, including for those getting coverage for the first time. These efforts go hand in hand.
Nothing the Govt has ever run has been cheaper or better and you want the Govt to run your HC??
You want your HC run by a bunch of beurocrats in DC??
You have got to be insane my friend.
Nothing the Govt has ever run has been cheaper or better and you want the Govt to run your HC??
You want your HC run by a bunch of beurocrats in DC??
You have got to be insane my friend.
Medicare proves your premise wrong.
Nothing the Govt has ever run has been cheaper or better and you want the Govt to run your HC??
You want your HC run by a bunch of beurocrats in DC??
You have got to be insane my friend.
Medicare proves your premise wrong.
