Category Archives for Congress

LTC Must Be Placed on Candidates’ Radar Screen

Published in the Woonsocket Call on May 29, 2016

Presidential candidates might just think twice about their political campaign positions on long-term care. With the graying of nation’s voters, Congress will be pushed to put long-term care on its policy agenda. When the dust settles after the Democratic and GOP conventions, the winning candidates must address long-term care issues in their debates before the November election.

In 2013, America’s age 65 or older population made up only 14 percent of the total population, but by 2040, this demographic group will nearly double to comprise about 22 percent. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services the majority of these individuals will require some form of long-term care services (specifically, help with activities of daily living—such as cooking, bathing, or remembering to take medicine—that can be provided in a home or institutional setting.)

Misconceptions About Medicare and Social Security

Survey results in a 17 page report, “Long-Term Care in America: Expectations and Preferences for Care and Caregiving, released by Associated Press (AP)-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, notes that most older Americans expect Medicare and Social Security to pay for long-term care services while these federal programs generally do not. The survey findings also indicate that respondents, age 40 and over, strongly supported public policies that help a person save for long-term care services and for those that defray the cost of care giving, including state paid family leave programs.

“This survey provides much-needed data on how people perceive the issue of long-term care in the United States,” says Trevor Tompson, director of The AP-NORC Center, in a statement released on May 16, 2016 with the survey findings… “The need for long-term care services and support to assist seniors with activities of daily living is increasing exponentially. Financing high-quality services so that the costs are manageable for families and governments will remain a big challenge for decision-makers,” he added.

“Older Americans of today and tomorrow have a 50 percent chance of living with substantial and often expensive daily needs,” adds Dr. Bruce A. Chernof, President and CEO of The SCAN Foundation. “Medicare and Social Security were not built to cover long-term care, leaving American families unprotected, and as the survey shows, unaware of this fact,” he says.

The AP-NORC survey found that while older Americans’ confidence in being financially prepared to pay for long-term care services remains low overall, there has been a slight increase in public confidence over the past four years, consistent with other measures of consumer confidence post-recession, according to the Consumer Confidence Index. In 2013, 27 percent reported feeling very or extremely confident in their ability to pay for long-term care, increasing to 29 percent in 2014, 32 percent in 2015, and 36 percent in 2016.

The polling finds reveal that a widespread misconception as to what Medicare covers for long-term care services. Older respondents, with an annual household incomes less than $50,000, are more likely to expect to rely on government programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, while those with higher incomes expect to rely more on personal savings to pay for their needed long-term care services. Still, 3 in 10 of these wealthier older Americans report that they will rely on Medicare to support their care as they age. This reflects common misperceptions among older Americans about the long-term care services that Medicare covers, notes the AP-NORC survey.

Thumbs Up to Aging in Place

Seventy seven percent of the survey respondents would prefer to “age in place” and receive care in their own home, w with far fewer preferring to receive care in a senior community (11 percent), a friend or family member’s home (4 percent), or a nursing home (4 percent). Among those respondents who prefer to receive care at home, there are gender differences in preferences for who provides that care: men would prefer to receive care from a spouse (51 percent vs. 33 percent), and women would prefer to receive care from their children (14 percent vs. 35 percent).

There is widespread support for policies to help caregivers face the costs of providing long-term care, with 72 percent supporting state programs to provide paid family leave, 83 percent supporting tax breaks for caregivers, and 73 percent supporting a Social Security earnings credit for caregivers taking time out from the workforce to provide care.

According to the AP-NORC survey, forty-three percent of the survey respondents have either been caregivers in the past or currently providing long-term care to a family member or close friend. Among those with experience as caregivers, 4 in 10 report having to miss work to provide care.

The researchers found that prior experience with long-term care is associated with greater support for several public policies to help people finance long-term care and to help alleviate costs for caregivers. These individuals expressed higher levels of concern about aging and are more likely to anticipate that it is at least somewhat likely that a loved one will need care in the next five years, compared to those without direct care giving experience.

Finally, one-third of the survey respondents reported having done no planning at all for their own long-term care needs. This 2016 finding is similar to the 31 percent who said the same in 2015 and remains lower than the 47 percent and 44 percent who said they had done no planning in 2014 and 2013, respectively.
One Size Does Not Fit All

Meghan Connelly, Chief Program Development at Rhode Island’s Division of Elderly Affairs, provides some thoughts about the findings of the AP-NORC survey. “Long-term care options are not “one-size-fits-all”. In Rhode Island, there are a number of choices one can make, ranging from living independently and receiving care at home to nursing home care. This report highlights that consumers want options when it comes to making these decisions for themselves, or assisting loved ones with long term care choices,” she says…

Connelly adds, the AP-NORC survey “supports the findings of past research: that the overwhelming majority of people want to receive long term care services at home,” noting that in the Ocean State there are many home- and community-based care options. She says that”home care may be available through a physician’s office; at the time of discharge from a hospital or nursing home; or through referrals to state-subsidized programs administered by agencies under the Executive Office of Health and Human Services.”

“The AP-NORC survey also underscores the need to adopt progressive financial policies that support family caregivers who provide the greatest percentage of needed long term care to their elderly or disabled loved ones at home,” warns Connelly.

Greg Crist, Senior Vice President of Public Affairs at the Washington, D.C.-based American Health Care Association (AHCA), notes, “This data generally tracks what our own research has shown: Americans don’t think of this topic every day, and honestly, this is a topic they’d rather avoid. No one likes the thought of aging, and with that aging, the increasing likelihood they will help in their later years. No one welcomes a loss of independence. But here’s the good news – the sector is adapting and innovating.”

Crist asserts nursing homes are meeting the challenge of caring for aging baby boomers. “We’re meeting the growing demands of Boomers, particularly as clinical needs grow, but also in offering amenities such as custom dietary menus, social media communities, and personal rehab care plans that speed recovery times. Whether in Rhode Island or elsewhere, this is an evolving health practice, recognizing that change is needed to meet the new preferences of older Americans,” notes Crist.

Listen to the Older Voters

The AP-NORC survey findings mirror other “long-term care perception” studies released by AHCA and AARP. Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and GOP standard bearer Donald Trump must not forget the needs of America’s exponentially growing older population. These older voters do not want to fall through the nation’s public policy safety net when they require the most assistance, paying for costly long-term care services. As the survey report notes, older Americans strongly support Family Leave programs and also call for government administered Long Term Care Insurance programs.

For a copy of the report go to http://www.longtermcarepoll.org/Pages/Polls/long-term-care-in-america-expectations-and-preferences-for-care-and-caregiving.aspx..

AOA Reauthorization Bill Goes to President Obama for Signing

Published in Woonsocket Call on April 10, 2016

The Older American’s Act (OAA) current authorization expired in fiscal year 2011 because lawmakers were unable to reach an agreement on its reauthorization. On a bipartisan basis, Congress has finally passed the long-stalled legislation reauthorizing the OAA when the Senate passed the House-amended bill on April 7. Three weeks earlier the House had passed an amended version of S. 192, the Older Americans Act Reauthorization Act of 2016, by a unanimous voice vote. This legislative proposal amended the bill passed by the Senate on July 16, 2015. Now the passed legislation goes to President Obama, once signed it becomes law.

The very bi-partisan Senate reauthorization bill was sponsored by Chairman Lamar Alexander (TN) and Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA), of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, and had 27 co-sponsors from each party.

OAA Authorization Has Lots of Positives

OAA’s latest reauthorization offers new support for modernizing multipurpose senior center, highlights the importance of addressing senior’s economic needs, permanently requires health promotion and disease prevention initiatives to be evidence-based, and promotes chronic disease self-management and fall prevention.

The law also includes: stronger elder justice and legal services provisions; needed clarity for caregiver support and Aging and Disability Resource Centers; new opportunities for intergenerational shared sites, and promotes efficient and effective use of transportation services.

Legislative inertia and a general undercurrent of opposition to any government programs by some members of Congress slowed consideration of the bill , says Dan Adcock, Director of Government Relations and Policy for the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM). “You need champions to break through the ‘legislative inertia’ and OAA just did not have enough,” he says.

Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Patty Murray (D-WA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) along with Reps. John Kline (R-MN) and Bobby Scott (D-VA) worked hard to finally get the Senate and House to pass this year’s OAA reauthorization, Adcock noted, stressing that there was no opposition to the bill when it passed the House and Senate on voice votes

While the passed OAA reauthorization bill has many positives, its chief weakness is that it does not raise the funding authorization level enough, says Adcock. “Unfortunately, the Older Americans Act has suffered under flat funding and sequestration cuts for several years and will need significant increases in appropriations to meet the critical demands of a senior population that will nearly double by 2030, warns Adcock, noting that that an increase of 12 percent a years is needed for the next several years to raising funding to an acceptable level.

“AARP urges President Obama to quickly sign this bill,” said AARP CEO Jo Ann Jenkins. “We are appreciative of the bipartisan work to get this bill passed. Reauthorizing the OAA will help the millions of vulnerable older Americans who depend on the programs and services that the OAA helps to fund.

“Reauthorizing the OAA is as important as ever to modernizing and improving the aging services network in our country. It’s passage reflects the heroic efforts of many advocates working together to educate Congress about how programs funded by the OAA support older Americans,” observed Steven R. Counsell, MD, AGSF, American Geriatrics Society President.

Adds Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), who serves on the Senate Select Committee on Aging, “I am glad we were able to reauthorize and improve the Older Americans Act. This legislation authorizes more funding for meals and social services seniors depend on. It includes new protections against elder abuse, which I’ve been fighting to pass. And it gives residents of long-term care facilities-who often can’t communicate their wishes-a stronger advocate to speak on their behalf.”

Ratchet Up AOA Funding

For more than 50 years the Administration on Aging with its National Aging Network (State Units on Aging and Area Agencies on Aging) has provided federal funding, based on the percentage of the locality’s population 60 and older, for nutrition and supportive home and community-based services, disease prevention/health promotion services, elder rights programs, the National Family Caregiver Support Program and Native American Program.

Aging advocates will tell you that Congressional funding has not kept with the rising inflation or the increased demands of an aging society. Deep Congressional budget cuts, push by the GOP, have significantly reduced OAA’s ability to provide services to those on increased waiting lists. Being “penny-wise and pound foolish” should not be the way Congress looks at future OAA reauthorizations. NCPSSM’s Adcock will tell you that programming geared to helping seniors to age in place at home in their communities can save billions by reducing costly nursing facility and hospital stays.

Hopefully, the President is expected to sign it in a week or two. Hopefully he signs this it quickly on Monday .

Congressional Panel Looks Over Medicare

Published in Woonsocket Call on March 20, 2016

Last Wednesday’s hearing of House Ways and Means Health Subcommittee signals the panel’s interest to bring Medicare, a federal health insurance program for people age 65 and over, into the 21st century to meet the needs of its current 55.3 million beneficiaries.

At the March 16 hearing, Chairman Pat Tiberi (R-OH), stated that “Today’s seniors [are] inundated with an array of confusing deductibles, coinsurance and copayments with no protection from high health care costs unless they enroll in a private plan. Despite major improvements and innovations in the health care sector that have transformed how care is delivered, traditional Medicare has barreled through the last 50 years on the same trajectory of increased costs and little innovation.”

In addition to the structural challenges facing the program, critical parts of Medicare are expected to run out of money by 2026. In other words, the benefits Americans were promised stand to disappear if policymakers don’t act soon, says Tiberi.

Putting the Spotlight on Medicare

Tiberi’s March 16 Health Panel hearing, entitled “Preserving and Strengthening Medicare,” held in room 1100 of the Longworth House Office Building, brought together three witnesses to discuss ways to sustain the nation’s Medicare program and to keep it from going bankrupt. From both sides of the aisle and expert witnesses all agreed that the federal government’s current approach to delivering high-quality health care is not working. As a result of an outdated Medicare program and harmful Obamacare policies, today’s seniors “must navigate a disjointed program, face rising health care costs, and have fewer healthcare choices,” says the GOP panel chairman.

“Of federal entitlements, Medicare presents the most difficult challenges,” says Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Robert Moffit, warning that the Trust Fund “faces insolvency in 2026.”

At the hearing, Moffit gave his fix for revamping Medicare that have bipartisan support and promise to shore up the ailing entitlement program. He called for the Medicare program to be simplified by combining Parts A and B – including catastrophic coverage, an out-of-pocket cap, a single deductible, and uniform coinsurance in a single plan along with bringing reforms to Medigap coverage. Also, retargeting Medicare benefits to low-income enrollees can provide assistance to lower-income enrollees. Increasing Medicare’s eligibility age to 67 (the same eligibility age for Social Security) along with encouraging innovation and cultivating competition through Premium Support can put the brakes to rising program costs.

When it comes to simplifying Medicare and incorporating catastrophic coverage, Tiberi had called the need for reform a “no-brainer.” Moffitt overwhelmingly agreed, stating, “It is a no-brainer. It is absolutely a no-brainer … [seniors] do not have protection from the most important thing that health insurance should deliver, which is that ultimate protection.”

As Moffit explained, the lack of catastrophic coverage in Medicare not only puts financial strain on the beneficiary, but it also causes a significant increase in unnecessary health care spending.

Coming Up with a Commonsense Approach

In her testimony, Katherine Baicker, Harvard University Professor of Health Economic and serves on the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, also called for commonsense solutions, specifically focused on the need for increased competition. She heighten the role that Medicare Advantage program plays in promoting innovation, as well as providing more seniors flexibility, choice, and quality at an affordable cost.

Baicker emphasized, “A thriving and competitive Medicare Advantage program can be a vital contributor to high quality beneficiary care in a sustainable health care system.”

When Baicker was asked which Obamacare provisions Congress should work to immediately repeal in an effort to protect Medicare Advantage, she replied, “I would like to see the cap on quality bonuses removed … and removing the double bonus for quality so that you’re appropriately rewarding plans for delivering the high-quality care that beneficiaries are seeking out.”

Finally, Stuart Guterman, senior scholar in residence at
AcademyHealth, told the panel that he believes the nation’s largest purchaser of health care can do more to ratchet up quality, enhance quality and coordinate care and control costs. “Because of Medicare’s unique position, it can be an important testing ground for cost and quality innovations. Policies have been put in place that encourage such development, including the expanding the power of the Secretary of Health and Human Services to put pilot programs on a ‘fast track’ and to work with private payers and providers to establish multi-payer initiatives.”

At the conclusion of the two hour hearing, like Baicker, Tiberi stressed the importance of bolstering support for Medicare Advantage, which serves approximately one-third of seniors today. Obamacare cut billions of dollars from Medicare Advantage and redirected those resources toward a one-size-fits-all, Washington-run entitlement, he says.

Tiberi also noted, “If we continue to berate a system that has been widely successful…I don’t think that’s a really good way to try to figure out how we bester serve patients, seniors, in a more cost-effective value-added, comprehensive way.”

Watching from the Sidelines

But, one aging group expressed strong concerns about the Health Panel’s look at Medicare. In his released statement, Max Richtman, President/CEO of the Washington, D.C.-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security Medicare (NCPSSM), viewed the Health Panel hearing as “an Orwellian political exercise in which politicians say preserve when they actually mean privatize, and strengthen when they mean slash.”

“Republicans in the House envision a future in which millions of seniors will lose their guaranteed Medicare benefits in favor of a privatized CouponCare system in which they receive a government coupon to try and buy private insurance. Millions of seniors in Medicaid will lose their benefits due to block-granting to states without providing the resources to pay for it. The repeal of the Affordable Care Act will leave tens of millions without insurance and strip benefits from seniors in Medicare,” says Richtman in NCPSSM’s statement.

Furthermore, “The Republican leadership has offered no plans to improve benefits in Medicare or make reforms to reign in the skyrocketing price of drugs and healthcare costs system wide. Instead, the GOP vision for seniors in Medicare is they must just do more with less. Stagnant wages are grinding away at the middle class’s ability to save for retirement. Many employers have significantly scaled back or eliminated the traditional retirement benefits offered to their employees. As a result, current and future retirees simply cannot afford proposals to cut benefits, raise the eligibility age or privatize the program,” says in the NCPSSM statement.

Finally, the aging advocate warns that the GOP majority on the House Ways and Means Health Subcommittee majority is moving to replace the nation’s traditional Medicare program in favor of a fully privatized system, and the GOP controlled House is in the process of producing a budget that would do just that.

A Democratic or Republican President? Which political party controls the House and Senate? When the dust settles these answered questions may result in a restructuring of the Medicare program, that may either be strengthened and expanded or put on the budgetary chopping block by the new incoming President or Congress. It’s a no brainer…Sitting on the political sideline will ultimately be detrimental to your pocketbook and coverage you receive for your health care.