Medicare Advantage pay eyed for fee fix
again.
by Ault, Alicia
WASHINGTON -- With Congress scrambling to come up with the funds to
avert a physician fee cut scheduled for July, it appears once again that
Medicare Advantage is being eyed as a funding source by Democrats but as
sacrosanct by Republicans, setting the stage for several months of
political wrangling.
It also may portend a repeat of last year's battle, one that
ended with President Bush refusing to sign a legislative package that
restored physician reimbursement but slashed Medicare Advantage
payments.
The debate was front and center at a March hearing of the House
Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Health where
recommendations from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission's
(MedPAC) spring report to Congress were discussed, including the
recommendation that Congress increase physician fees by 1.5% in 2008 and
2009.
MedPAC said in its report that it supported Medicare Advantage (MA)
plans--which let beneficiaries receive coverage from private plans such
as HMOs and PPOs, and from private fee-for-service insurers. The
Commission also made the case that, for the third year in a row, the MA
plans are overpaid relative to traditional fee-for-service (FFS)
Medicare.
MedPAC Chairman Glenn Hackbarth told the subcommittee that the
commission estimates that Medicare has paid the plans $10 billion more
than it would have under traditional FFS for each of the last 3 years.
Overall, MA plans on average will be paid 13% more than conventional
Medicare providers in 2008, a 1% uptick from 2007. The profit potential
in those plans has stimulated a rush into the market and huge enrollment
growth--a 101% increase from 2006 to 2007, according to MedPAC.
Coordinated care plans, such as HMOs and PPOs, saw only an 8% increase
in enrollment during that period, al though those plans still account
for the largest number of beneficiaries enrolled in an MA. Currently,
about 20% of Medicare enrollees are in an MA plan.
Because MA plans are increasingly attractive to beneficiaries-they
often offer additional benefits--MedPAC is concerned about the growth of
the high-cost private FFS plans, said Mr. Hackbarth.
The plans are being rewarded for their costs and there is no
penalty for poor quality, he said. "Payment policy is a powerful
signal of what we value," Mr. Hackbarth said, adding, "The
benchmarks we use are a signal of what Medicare wants to buy." The
Commission "supports financial neutrality between payment rates for
the FFS program and the MA program," he said.
That fact has not been lost on the subcommittee chairman, Pete
Stark (D-Calif.), who has held multiple hearings questioning the value
and integrity of the MA plans. Republicans defended the MA program,
however. Ranking minority member Pep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.) intensely
questioned Mr. Hackbarth, eliciting the admission that MA plans had been
successful in rural areas. Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Tenn.) told Mr. Hackbarth
that "my seniors have asked me not to mess with their Medicare
Advantage plans." Rep. Johnson at one point accused the MedPAC
chairman of saying that the government is a more efficient insurer than
the private sector.
Mr. Hackbarth disagreed and clarified his position. "The
problem with this payment system is we are rewarding inefficient private
plans," he said.
ARTICLES BY ALICIA AULT
Associate Editor, Practice Trends
COPYRIGHT 2008 International Medical News
Group Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.