HR 6331 passed the House

sman · 06-25-2008, 04:28 PM

HR 6331 overwhelmingly passed the House, now on to the Senate. Has anybody had a chance to get the details yet and see how it's going to affect PFFS plans? I went to govtrack and they don't have the text of the bill yet. I'm sure it's out there somewhere. If anybody has the details, please share them with us.

I'm already getting emails from carriers urging us to call our Senator's to express our opposition. Some are stating it would effectively kill PFFS plans. Not sure that I'm overly concerned with that. I'd like to see the details of the bill.

Winter · 06-25-2008, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by sman

HR 6331 overwhelmingly passed the House, now on to the Senate. Has anybody had a chance to get the details yet and see how it's going to affect PFFS plans? I went to govtrack and they don't have the text of the bill yet. I'm sure it's out there somewhere. If anybody has the details, please share them with us.

I'm already getting emails from carriers urging us to call our Senator's to express our opposition. Some are stating it would effectively kill PFFS plans. Not sure that I'm overly concerned with that. I'd like to see the details of the bill.

I haven't seen it but as I have stated ad nauseum I believe that Congress will cut the "excessive" subsidy to PFFS plans and use the funds to prevent the planned cuts to medicare reimbursement rates to docs. If it is not in this bill, it will be in the next. Count on it. Also as previously discussed this will have the effect of causing MA carriers to raise premiums or eliminate all the zero premium plans, thus narrowing the gap as to why one would want an MA versus a full supp.

My view anyway.

Winter

GreenSky · 06-25-2008, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by Winter

Also as previously discussed this will have the effect of causing MA carriers to raise premiums or eliminate all the zero premium plans, thus narrowing the gap as to why one would want an MA versus a full supp.

That is certainly one strong possibility. The other side is that in urban areas, HMO plans have traditionally been zero premium. This is when they received 95% of Medicare and included drugs without additional dough for Part D. (And many were unlimited $$ of drugs).

I'm guessing that the real effect will be to shift the MA plans into more and more managed care. For PFFS to survive, there has to at least be a one year contract with doctors and they will likely have to accept a lower reimbursement rate - more like PPO plans which (at least in Los Angeles) tend to pay less than Medicare.

However, PFFS was designed to help people in rural areas with the cost of medical care. If the reimbursement is cut (and I think all plans should be under 100% of medicare) how will those beneficiaries be helped?

Let's get rid of everything and start from scratch!

Rick

MedSuppPro · 06-25-2008, 08:06 PM

Copy & Paste:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=aBI26L6PHrRo&refer=home

Winter · 06-25-2008, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by MedSuppPro

Copy & Paste:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...rRo&refer=home

Indeed. They still need to get it through the Senate but the wagons are circling and the handwriting is on the wall. If by chance they cant get it through the Senate, then it will just come up again after the elections when and if the Dems gain even more power and if Obama wins because he wont veto it. There are already enough votes in the House to override a veto.

Winter

policy doctor · 06-26-2008, 08:49 AM

That is why i have posted various articles of intent by these beaurecrats. No matter what the decision, someone's base of customers and their living are affected.

Another hot one passed yesterday by the SEC was regulation of FIA's. By a vote of 3-0. Big consensus here of 3 people.

insurance0707 · 06-26-2008, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by policy doctor

That is why i have posted various articles of intent by these beaurecrats. No matter what the decision, someone's base of customers and their living are affected.

Another hot one passed yesterday by the SEC was regulation of FIA's. By a vote of 3-0. Big consensus here of 3 people.

What was passed on FIA? I didn't hear about that one

InsuranceJosh · 06-26-2008, 10:10 AM

0707,

SEC says FIA's are securities!!

mcday · 06-26-2008, 12:48 PM

Washington Advocate Alert June 26, 2008

Please Contact Your Member of Congress Today (June 26th) Regarding Changes Affecting Medicare Advantage &
Private Fee-for-Service

</IMG>Last week, the U.S House of Representatives voted to approve HR 6331. The bill would significantly alter many aspects of the Medicare program and dramatically change the Medicare Private Fee-for-Service (PFFS) programs as they exist today.

As an agent who serves Medicare beneficiaries of subsidiaries of Coventry Health Care you should be aware that this bill could have a significant impact on the services Coventry Health Care provides to their beneficiaries. We anticipate that this bill will be presented to the Senate for a vote as soon as today, Thursday June 26th. We urge you to call both of your Senators and let them know that you oppose changes to Medicare Advantage.

Ask them to vote AGAINST HR 6331/ S 3101. Please call 202.224.3121 for the U.S Congressional switchboard operator and ask to be connected to your Senators.

Leave a message stating: "As your constituent, I ask you to oppose changes to Medicare Advantage and vote against HR 6331/ S 3101."

If you have any further questions, please direct them to Melissa Schooley in Coventry's Washington DC office at 202.654.7411 or at mdschooley@cvty.com

Thank you for your support.

theinuranceguy · 06-26-2008, 01:00 PM

I dont get what all the hooplah is about. We all know that the PFFS plans suck. Not in benefits, but in the way Doctors are deamed. This law whould have passed last year.

PFFS have given me more hardship with complaints than any other thing I have done in Insurance. AND I ONCE WORKED FOR PRIMERICA!

insurance0707 · 06-26-2008, 02:25 PM

I know what you're saying Ramiz.....the government should have said to the doctors and hospitals that if you accept Medicare than you have to accept these plans as well. The government then should have told the insurance companies that they have to reimburse the doctors and hospitals at the same rates as Medicare.

MA plans have been helpful to a lot of people that just couldn't afford Med supps so I'd hate to see the plans end already.

arnguy · 06-26-2008, 04:14 PM

[quote=theinuranceguy;78186]I dont get what all the hooplah is about. We all know that the PFFS plans suck. Not in benefits, but in the way Doctors are deamed. This law whould have passed last year.

Ramiz, that's a new word to me. What does it mean?

MedSuppPro · 06-26-2008, 08:46 PM

Senate just voted down bill. Republican McConnell (sp?) offers 30 day extension of existing program and Dems killed that.

Nothing but gridlock!

Physician cuts are on...

theinuranceguy · 06-26-2008, 10:16 PM

[quote=arnguy;78268]

Originally Posted by theinuranceguy

I dont get what all the hooplah is about. We all know that the PFFS plans suck. Not in benefits, but in the way Doctors are deamed. This law whould have passed last year.

Ramiz, that's a new word to me. What does it mean?

Deamed, deemed... Whatever... Arabic is my first language anyway, lol!