Beyond ‘Repeal And Replace,’ Ideas Emerge To Improve, Simplify Health Law

“Repeal and replace” has been the rallying cry for Republicans since the Affordable Care Act was signed into law in 2010. But now that most of the law’s provisions have taken effect, some health experts are pitching ways to improve it, rather than eliminate it.

An ideologically diverse panel at the National Health Policy Conference Monday presented somewhat different lists of ideas to make the law work better. But they all agreed on one thing: The Affordable Care Act is too complicated.

“We took the most complex health care system on God’s green earth, and made it 10 times more complex,” said Jon Kingsdale, the first head of the Massachusetts health exchange created under that state’s forerunner to the ACA.

Kingsdale, now a health policy consultant, said many of the problems with implementation of the law over the past year and a half were not due to incompetence on the part of those doing the work, but rather that “implementing the ACA has been an impossible job.”

Several panelists pointed out that the way financial aid for those with moderate incomes is determined is bound to fail because it is based on looking at tax returns that are more than a year old.

“People have to estimate their income in advance,” said Judith Solomon of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “And they have to know who will be in their household,” she said. That means people are expected to be able to predict marriages and divorces, and whether grown children will getting jobs and moving out of their parents’ basements. “We shouldn’t rely on two-year-old tax data as the back-end check” to determine who is eligible for tax credits and how large they should be, Solomon said.

Solomon said one of the changes she would make is to create a hardship exemption for people expected to pay back tax credits that were too big because they underestimated their incomes. Currently those earning more than four times the poverty line (just over $95,000 for a family of four) are required to pay back all tax credits for which they were ineligible, which can be thousands of dollars. Solomon would make the sliding scale more generous, allowing more leeway for middle income taxpayers.

Joseph Antos of the conservative American Enterprise Institute suggested simply repealing the individual mandate requirement once and for all. “Ninety percent of the uninsured won’t pay any penalty anyway because they’re exempt,” he said, referring to the many situations in which taxpayers can avoid the sanction.

Rather, Antos said, the individual mandate could be replaced with a requirement that people who do not maintain continuous insurance coverage could be screened out or made to pay more by insurers if they have pre-existing health conditions.

Sabrina Corlette of Georgetown University said she would eliminate the provision of the law that allows insurers to charge higher premiums to tobacco users. Several states have done that on their own. “It prices out of coverage low- and moderate-income people who could most benefit,” she said. “And there’s no evidence that it encourages people to quit.”

Corlette also said she would urge lawmakers to get rid of the requirement that some insurers offer multi-state plans. Such plans have not worked to boost competition as intended, she said. At the same time, they have “confused consumers – who think the plans offer multi-state networks, which many of them don’t.”

The panelists acknowledged that none of the changes is likely as long as Republicans control Congress and continue to pursue a strategy of repeal and replace.

Kingsdale warned that the coming tax filing season could deepen political opposition, as people who remained uninsured are assessed their first penalties and those who got too much in tax credits are expected to pay the government back.

“It’s going to be a bonanza for H&R Block, and a disaster for people who were supposed to be helped the most by the ACA,” he said.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Nurses Stand in Solidarity with Steelworkers Amid Safety Concerns

National Nurses United fully supports the United Steelworkers Union (USW) struggle for improved health and safety and a fair contract for workers at oil refineries across the U.S.

NNU is especially alarmed at the serious threat for workers and residents of local communities near the refineries posed by unsafe staffing levels, excessive worker overtime demands, and the reports of daily occurrences of fires, emissions, leaks and explosions that put tens of thousands of people in danger. 

Nurses are well aware of the rise of asthma and other respiratory, cardio, and other serious health problems, as well as the consequences of refinery accidents caused by unsafe oil company and refinery practices. That is why it is so vital for workers to have a strong voice on the job through their union to protect public safety as well as the health of their own members.

NNU also supports the USW fight against sub-contracting of union jobs and other contract standards that are a part of this dispute.

The hard line adopted by the wealthy oil corporations is symbolic of what nurses and other working people experience on a regular basis in an environment where workers’ rights and livelihood as well as public health and safety are too often jeopardized by voracious employers and the politicians who support them.  

NNU members have already stood with USW members on picket lines at various locations in this fight, and we will continue to offer our solidarity. We also call on our elected officials to demand the oil giants, who receive so much economic and political assistance from government, stop their attack on the oil workers and reach a fair settlement that respects the workers’ rights as well as public safety. 

Nurse’s Court Win Shows Workers Can Beat Koch Brothers-Style Attacks

Ann Wayt Defamed for Patient, Union Advocacy
Takes the Fight to the Hospital and Wins

A civil jury has ordered an Ohio hospital, part of one of the most notorious anti-union hospital chains in the U.S., to pay over $2 million in damages for its actions against Ann Wayt, an Ohio registered nurse it fired, illegally sought to have her nursing license revoked, and then defamed in retaliation for her outspoken patient advocacy and support for her union.

NNOC/NNU Co-President Malinda Markowitz, RN praised Wayt for “standing up for herself, her family, and her colleagues against the harassment and attacks by a multi-billion corporation on their right to form a union.”

“This verdict is a clear signal that working people can resist, fight back and win against even the most heavily funded attacks by those like the Koch Brothers and other far right groups and their agenda to eliminate unions, laws that protect workers, and public advocates for public safety and economic and workplace justice,” Markowitz said.

In a unanimous verdict, the Stark County, Ohio jury Friday ordered Affinity Medical Center of Massillon, Oh., operated by Tennessee-based Community Health Systems chain, to pay Wayt $800,000 for defamation of her character and another $750,000 in punitive damages. Affinity was also ordered to pay her attorney fees.

Wayt said she decided to take on the challenge “for Affinity nurses and nurses everywhere who are fighting for their right to stand up for patients. Now they see that nurses are strong and we stick together. We aren’t going to accept their bullying. I am so very thankful for all of the support of my colleagues through this very trying time. We stuck together and we prevailed!”

“CHS and all hospitals across the nation should be reminded that nurses will not be silent when you trample on their rights and try to silence their voice — and that our union will be with you,” Markowitz added.

The decision came over two years after Wayt was fired, and a year after a U.S. District Court Judge delivered a sweeping cease and desist injunction ordering Affinity to reinstate Wayt and end a broad array of lawless behavior in illegal discipline and harassment of its RNs as well as refusing to bargain with its RNs and their union, National Nurses Organizing Committee-Ohio. NNOC Ohio is the state affiliate of National Nurses United, the largest U.S. organization of RNs.

Affinity nurses reacted with joy to the jury decision. “Ann has shown that one nurse can hold a healthcare system accountable for its lies and deceptions,” said Affinity RN Debbie McKinney. “This should empower all nurses to stick together for what is best for our patients ourselves and our profession.”

“I am thrilled for Ann and that the Jury cleared her name and reputation. I am also thrilled that the verdict sends a message to Affinity Med. Center that they can not treat their nurses with such contempt,” said Wayt’s attorney Brian Zimmerman.

“It is inspiring to witness the solidarity and commitment of nurses who are always focused on winning the very best protections for their patients,” said NNOC-Ohio’s Michelle Mahon, RN, who testified for Wayt at the trial. “Through their unanimous verdict the jury has sent a message to CHS that this community will not tolerate their law breaking behavior.”

Nurses at Affinity voted in August 2012 to join NNOC-Ohio. Instead of respecting the democratic voice of the nurses and offering to work with them to improve patient care and nurse standards, CHS, which has gained infamy as one of the most anti-union and anti-worker chains in the hospital industry, immediately embarked on a campaign of harassment and retaliation.

Wayt, a prominent union supporter in the hospital’s orthopedics unit, where union support was “particularly strong,” as a National Labor Relations Board Judge Arthur Amchan later noted, was directly targeted, as symbolized by the decision of the hospital to begin an investigation against her on the very day of the election. NNOC-Ohio initiated the case by filing charges with the NLRB.

Affinity management then trumped up charges of patient care misconduct that Amchan termed in July 2013, “a pretext to retaliate against her for her union activity” despite a long “spotless” record as an RN. Affinity not only fired Wayt, it then went to the Ohio Board of Nursing attempting to pressure it to revoke Wayt’s nursing license.

Noting the clear violation of federal labor law rights, Amchan concluded “it is hard to imagine a more effective coercive message to the union supporters… than the termination of a long-term employee with no (or no known) prior disciplinary record.” Wayt has worked at Affinity for 24 years and in 2008 Affinity provided clear recognition of her achievements by presenting her the Nurse Excellence Award.

On the basis of that finding, U.S. District Court Judge John Adams in January, 2014, issued a stinging injunction against Affinity for illegal behavior, including the order to reinstate Wayt. Judge Adams found Affinity’s actions to be “inconsistent with disciplinary actions taken against other persons with similar alleged violations and disproportionate to the offense level.”

Though Affinity was forced to offer Wayt a return to the hospital bedside, it has failed to refrain from defamatory activity against her. Wayt responded with the civil suit that led to the verdict today. Affinity is also stalling in court-ordered bargaining with the nurses’ union.

Valentine’s Day ECG Cookie Recipe

Valentine’s Day is right around the corner and what better to celebrate then with some sweet treats. We dug up this delicious ECG cookie recipe from Erica’s Sweet Tooth.  The recipe consists of chocolate roll-out cookies with some royal icing with some ECG patterns. Chocolate Roll-Out Cookies 3 cups all purpose flour 3/4 tsp salt 1/2 tsp Continue Reading

Valentine’s Day ECG Cookie Recipe

Valentine’s Day is right around the corner and what better to celebrate then with some sweet treats. We dug up this delicious ECG cookie recipe from Erica’s Sweet Tooth.  The recipe consists of chocolate roll-out cookies with some royal icing with some ECG patterns. Chocolate Roll-Out Cookies 3 cups all purpose flour 3/4 tsp salt 1/2 tsp Continue Reading

Despite Efforts, Latino ACA Enrollment Lags

Norma and Rodolfo Santaolalla have always worked but have never had health insurance.  When the Arlington, Va., couple tried to apply online for coverage under the health care law, it was just too confusing.

“I didn’t understand about the deductibles and how to choose a plan. It’s difficult. It’s the first time we’ve done that,” said Norma, 46, who cleans houses for a living.  Rodolfo, 47, is a handyman. “That’s why we came here, to ask them to help us.”

“Here” was the Arlington Mill Community Center, where help was available on a recent Saturday as part of a national effort to increase Affordable Care Act enrollment, especially among Latinos.

Hispanics represent about a third of the nation’s uninsured, and for a number of reasons, signing them up has been harder. According to the latest government statistics, as of Jan. 16, two months into the current open enrollment period, just 10 percent of those who had enrolled in the 37 states served by healthcare.gov are Latino. Despite a concerted effort by officials and health law advocates to reach Latinos, that’s up only slightly from 7 percent during the first few months of last year’s enrollment.

Experts caution that those numbers are reported by applicants and there’s no requirement that anyone signing up for coverage on healthcare.gov state their race or ethnicity. Nonetheless, the Department of Health and Human Services and pro-health-law groups have stepped up their efforts through media campaigns and with a greater emphasis on the kind of in-person assistance the Santaolallas and many other Latinos are seeking.

In fact, nearly a third of the ACA’s media budget this year is focused on Hispanic media, tripling the 10 percent spent on reaching Latinos last year, according to HHS Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell.

Providing in-person assistance, however, takes time.  A session can easily run 90 minutes to two hours, and several meetings are often needed to explain how insurance works and what the various options are. Even though applicants may qualify for the law’s tax credits, many will have to still pay a premium each month. And people who have been doing without health insurance might not feel the need to pay for it.

Still, since October 2013, 2.6 million Latinos ages 18 to 64 gained insurance through the health law, according to HHS.  As of last June, the percentage of Latinos without health insurance dropped from 36 percent to 23 percent, with the highest gains in states that adopted the health law’s Medicaid expansion, according to a Commonwealth Fund analysis. That’s important to the success of the overall health law, because uninsured Latinos tend to be young and healthy. They are likely to use fewer medical services and thus will help offset the cost of sicker people in the insurance “risk pool.”

To enroll, though, some Latino applicants have to work through extra paperwork and overcome language barriers.

Joaquin Barahona, 41, is a construction worker. He’s never had health insurance, and when he did go to the doctor, he paid cash.

When he tried to enroll in the health law in late January, at the Legal Services of Northern Virginia in Arlington, he found that the health law’s website couldn’t verify his identify. Now the Centreville resident will have to mail in additional documents, including his employment authorization card.

That same evening, Lusmila Morales, 53, also hopes to obtain ACA coverage. She sent in a paper application last year but never heard back and wanted to try again this year. She brought along her 17-year-old nephew to translate.

The Falls Church resident is applying for health insurance “out of necessity,” said her nephew, Daniel Palacios. She has arthritis but can’t afford the medication. She needs a mammogram and a physical but can’t afford the tests. In addition, her mom has diabetes and she wants to find out how her parents — who are both in their 80s and here legally but without the work history that would qualify them for Medicare –can get coverage under the health law.

But Morales couldn’t complete her application because she forgot her green card, which proves she is a lawful permanent resident of the United States. She would have to come back.

One of the most stubborn obstacles is the widespread fear in the Latino community that those who are eligible for coverage might endanger others in their family who are undocumented. That concern persists even though President Barack Obama and other administration officials have said repeatedly that no information on a health law application will be used for deportation purposes.

“The federal government can proclaim every day, every hour on the hour how immigration information in the exchange is not going to be used for deportation proceedings, but it’s still really scary,” said Alicia Wilson, executive director of La Clinica del Pueblo, a Washington, D.C., health center that provides comprehensive services primarily to the Latino community.

“You don’t want to be the family member that because you signed up for coverage you’re getting your grandmother, your uncle or your parent deported,” said Anthony Wright, executive director of the group Health Access California, a health care consumer group.

Mixed immigration status families also face special challenges when it comes to enrolling in the health law, Wilson said.  Some may be here legally but are not eligible for coverage under federal programs. Some may have children who were born in the U.S. but other family members who are undocumented.  Some may qualify for health insurance through a job while family members qualify for Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

“Each one of those insurance vehicles has a different enrollment process and different eligibility criteria, a different set of documents that you have to demonstrate, a different level of proof of who you are and a different schedule for enrolling and reenrolling,” Wilson said. He added that the identification process can be even more difficult for those who do not have a credit history.

The patchwork of state-based and federally based exchanges can also cause confusion, with some state governments more welcoming than others when it comes to Latino outreach and enrollment efforts.

Just over half of states have expanded their Medicaid programs, with Indiana the latest to make the change. According to HHS, if all states participated in the health law’s Medicaid expansion, 95 percent of uninsured Latinos might qualify for Medicaid, CHIP  or tax credits to help lower the cost of health insurance on the federal and state marketplaces.

In states like Virginia, which has not expanded its Medicaid program, individuals must earn at least $11,670 a year to qualify for subsidies to buy coverage on the exchange. Those who earn less fall into the “coverage gap” because they don’t qualify for their state’s existing Medicaid program and don’t earn enough money to qualify for the health law’s financial assistance.

“It’s heartbreaking to tell them,” said Leni Gonzalez, outreach and education specialist with Enroll Virginia. .

The fact that this year’s enrollment period is  three months shorter than last year’s further complicates efforts to enroll the uninsured.  And those who work with the Latino community say because so many in it have been uninsured for so long, it’s not surprising that it will take longer to increase their enrollment.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.