Showing posts with label limit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label limit. Show all posts

Friday, June 21, 2013

Insurers Limit Doctors, Hospitals In State-Run Exchange Plans

California's health insurance rates for a new state-run marketplace came in lower than expected this week, but one downside for many consumers will be far fewer doctors and hospitals to choose from.

People who want UCLA Medical Center and its doctors in their health plan network next year, for instance, may have only one choice in California's exchange: Anthem Blue Cross. Another major insurer in the state-run market, Blue Shield of California, said its exchange customers will be restricted to 36% of its regular physician network statewide.

And Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, one of Southern California's most prestigious and expensive hospitals, said it's not included in any exchange plans at the moment.

Those types of exclusive arrangements, increasingly tight networks and outright exclusions are becoming more common as insurers and government officials search for ways to hold down rising medical costs.

The vast majority of Californians get their health coverage through their employers and won't be immediately affected by these limitations in the state-run market. But private companies are pursuing similar changes to shave costs. More employers have been adopting these narrower networks and the government's overhaul of the individual insurance market is accelerating the trend.

Some consumer advocates express concern that insurers will go too far and deprive patients of meaningful choices. State officials sought to blunt that criticism this week, pointing out that the 13 health insurers selected will offer access to about 80% of California's practicing physicians and hospitals.

"If we want to keep costs down, something has to give," said Betsy Imholz, special projects director for Consumers Union. "At first blush, it seems like Covered California has negotiated some good deals, but in any given community we will see how this network issue plays out."

Covered California, the state agency implementing the federal healthcare law, said these trade-offs are necessary in many cases to keep premiums reasonable for California's families. Officials said they took steps to ensure that health plans offer an adequate number of quality medical providers and have measures in place for expanding their networks in the event that more people than expected sign up.

More than 5 million Californians are expected to be eligible for coverage in the exchange, and about half of them could qualify for federal premium subsidies.

Details on these insurance networks aren't known yet as insurers and providers wrap up their contracts and await regulators' review in the coming weeks. It's possible some medical groups and hospitals could be added.

Health Net Inc., another exchange option in Southern California, said it expects to seek state approval to use its existing network, which includes both UCLA and Cedars-Sinai, for one of its exchange plans.

Once all those decisions are finalized by early July, Covered California said it will help consumers find out online whether particular doctors and hospitals are in a health plan's network. Enrollment in the exchange opens Oct. 1 for policies that take effect in January, when most Americans must have health insurance or pay a penalty.

"When people come to choose their plan, we will have a directory so they can make sure Dr. Ramirez is in these three plans, for instance," said Peter Lee, executive director of Covered California. "Consumers care about that information."

Meanwhile, some insurance agents said it's hard to judge these proposed prices in the state exchange without knowing what's on the menu in terms of available providers.

"Trying to determine whether these rates are low or high without knowing the provider networks is like trying to tell the value of a car when you can only see the tires — you don't know if you are looking at a Ferrari or a Yugo," said Bruce Jugan, an insurance agent in Montebello and president of Benefitscafe.com, which sells health insurance to individuals and businesses.

Paul Markovich, chief executive of Blue Shield, said renegotiating with hospitals and physician groups for lower reimbursements was a key factor for insurers in holding down rates. Medical providers are sometimes willing to accept lower payments in return for higher patient volume from these narrow networks.

Markovich said premiums for Blue Shield's existing individual policyholders will rise 13% next year on average for coverage under exchange plans.

That marked an improvement from earlier predictions of even bigger rate hikes. The state issued a report in March that estimated premiums for many consumers could go up 30%, on average.

Premiums are generally rising to reflect the federal law's requirements for richer benefits and guaranteed coverage regardless of people's medical history.

"The physicians and hospitals that signed up for our network have agreed to accept lower reimbursement specifically to make the exchange more affordable," Markovich said.

Blue Shield's exchange network in the Los Angeles area doesn't include UCLA or Cedars-Sinai. Instead, it features hospitals such as Keck Hospital of USC, Long Beach Memorial and St. John's Health Center. Blue Shield said its statewide network for exchange policies will include about 24,000 physicians, compared with 66,000 doctors in its full preferred provider organization roster.

In Los Angeles County, state officials expect 1.6 million people to be eligible for coverage in the exchange. Premiums will vary based on a person's age, location and level of coverage.

For instance, in the north Los Angeles County region, the rates for a 40-year-old purchasing a Silver plan range from $222 a month for Health Net to $294 a month for Kaiser Permanente. There will still be other individual policies for sale outside those offered through Covered California, but federal subsidies can be used only inside the exchange.

Health Net sees growing acceptance of these narrower networks. The Woodland Hills insurer said enrollment among employers in California, Arizona and Oregon in those smaller networks has grown 37% in the last year.

chad.terhune@latimes.com


View the original article here

Sunday, April 7, 2013

Kentucky Basketball Star’s Injury Spotlights Absurdity Of The NBA’s Age Limit

With just more than eight minutes remaining on the clock, the University of Kentucky’s Nerlens Noel chased down Florida guard Mike Rosario and swatted away a fast-break layup attempt. It was Noel’s 106th block of his freshman season at Kentucky. It was also his last. As he returned to the floor, Noel bumped into the basket support, twisted his knee, and collapsed to the floor. His left anterior cruciate ligament was torn, his season — and likely his Kentucky career — ended on a block he never should have made in a game he never should have played.

Noel is only at Kentucky, and only in college, because the National Basketball Association instituted a rule in 2005 requiring all American-born players to be one year removed from high school before they can enter the league’s draft. Nevermind that Noel, the top-ranked player in the high school class of 2012, would have surely been a first-round pick were he eligible last year. Noel wanted to play in the NBA and an NBA team would have gladly accepted his services. He is in college not because he wanted to be, not because of some sense of amateurism or for an education. He is in college because he had to be.

Proponents of the NBA age limit (as well as those who think it should be stronger) argue that it is a good policy because it allows players to mature and improve their games before they jump to the pros. This is nonsense. The age limit exists because NBA teams, some burned by straight-from-high-school prospects that didn’t work out in the past, saw an opportunity to protect themselves against the possibility that the people they pay to scout and draft players aren’t very good at their jobs. Rather than risk millions of dollars on players who entered the draft right out of high school, the NBA now forces those players to perform a one-year trial run in the cost-free minor league that is college basketball.

It is entirely possible that Noel could have suffered the same injury at the professional level, but if he did, he would have already signed a contract and would have a guaranteed paycheck from his NBA team. Instead, he received a scholarship worth comparably little, and though he will still get drafted, the injury could cost him an untold amount of money if his draft stock drops. Even then, he is probably lucky, since an injury that was more likely to threaten his career entirely would have cost him even more.

But while Noel’s injury highlights problems with the limit, what makes it a bad rule is that it is another unnecessary form of restriction on young athletes that doesn’t exist for other workers. Replace Noel with a person with a different skill-set and basketball with a different industry, and no such policy would stand. An 18-year-old computer whizkid with an offer to join Apple is free to take the job. Someone of the same age with a talent for writing who had a job offer from the New York Times has the same opportunity. But because the NBA wants to protect itself from itself, no such chance exists for talented basketball players like Noel, who, even if an NBA team would be willing to pay them to play, are forced to spend one year as indentured servants in a system where everyone — the NCAA, the NBA, and their schools — makes money except them.


View the original article here

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Democratic Rep. Pushes Regulators To Limit High-Frequency Trading

High-frequency trading — using computer algorithims to trade stocks by the millisecond — has exploded in recent years. One Democratic Rep. is urging the Securities and Exchange Commission to do something about it, using a law that he authored more than two decades ago:

Rep. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who has waged a decades-long struggle against computerized trading sent the SEC a hint: The power to curb high-frequency trading has been within its grasp all along.

In his letter, Markey described a law he co-sponsored in 1989 to increase the agency’s power to regulate computerized trading, a precursor to HFT that employed computer programs to make trading decisions without the participation of conscious humans. The law lets the SEC “limit practices which result in extraordinary levels of volatility,” according to Markey’s citation.

Markey, nudging further, added: “If the commission simply makes a finding that the markets are currently in a period of extraordinary market volatility and that HFT is reasonably certain to engender such levels of volatility, the Commission can immediately promulgate rules that restrict or eliminate the practice.”

This chart from the research firm Nanex illustrates how high-frequency trading has grown since 2007, spiking in the aftermath of the Great Recession:

High-speed trading now makes up more than half of the stock market’s volume. During one week in October, one trader alone made 4 percent of the stock market’s trades. As Reuters’ Felix Salmon noted, “The stock market is clearly more dangerous than it was in 2007, with much greater tail risk; meanwhile, in return for facing that danger, society as a whole has received precious little utility.”

In 2010, the Chicago Federal Reserve warned the SEC about the perils of high-speed trading. If Markey is right, the SEC has had the power to do something about it all along.


View the original article here

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Chaffetz: Obama trying 'to scare people' over debt limit

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) late Monday accused President Obama of trying to frighten Americans with ramped-up rhetoric about the costs of not raising the debt ceiling.

“The president does an exceptional job of scaring America,” Chaffetz said on Fox News Channel’s “On The Record With Greta van Susteren.” “He wants to use the military paychecks to try to scare people, ‘We’re going to hurt the elderly’ — you don’t have to do that.”

At a press conference on Monday, Obama warned that if Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling, Social Security checks might not go out and troops overseas might not be paid. He also said investors would lose confidence in the economy and markets could crash.

“Investors around the world will ask if the United States of America is, in fact, a safe bet,” he said. “Markets could go haywire; interest rates could spike.”

Obama’s warnings come as the White House and Republicans prepare for a new fight over raising the nation’s borrowing limit.

The president is pushing for a clean debt-limit hike, while the GOP sees an opportunity to use the threat of default to force Obama to agree to spending cuts and entitlement reform.

The U.S. suffered its first-ever credit downgrade after the last debt-ceiling showdown in 2011. Treasury Secretary Geithner warned congressional leaders Monday that the U.S. could default as early as mid-February.

But Chaffetz downplayed the importance of raising the debt ceiling, saying the Treasury could prioritize payments for Social Security and the military, while withholding payments on items that wouldn’t spook the markets.

“There are lots of things to do; the president has lots of discretion to curb back that spending to make sure that Social Security payments are paid, interest is paid, we don’t default on our debts,” Chaffetz said. “The president was terribly irresponsible today, to say he’s not even going to talk about it because he’s above it, blame Congress — look, in part Congress helped create this problem, but now we’re going to solve this problem.”

Many Senate Democrats have called on Obama to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, bypassing Congress.

Chaffetz said such a move would provoke a “constitutional crisis.”

“You can only do this as authorized by law, and law is only created by the United States Congress,” Chaffetz said. “He has no ground to stand on.”

On that count, Obama appears to agree; on Monday, he likewise dismissed the idea that the White House could do anything on its own.

“I understand the impulse to try to get around this in a simple way, but there’s one way to get around this,” he said. “And that is for Congress to authorize me to pay for those items of spending that they have already authorized.”

View Comments

View the original article here

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Debt Limit

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Debt Limit | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama The White House Emblem Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

2012: A Year in Photos

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

President Obama greets White House visitors

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class A Plan for Refinancing Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Rural Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Women Americans Spoke Out

To prevent a $2K tax hike on middle-class families

My2k

7 Things You Need to Know

About the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

Explore the President's Plan

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

We the People

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet 2010 Video Reports White House Staff Chief of Staff Jack Lew Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

Download our mobile apps

2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

2012: A Year in Photos

Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources E-Gov Strategies and Guides E-Gov Circulars E-Gov Memoranda /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh HomeBriefing Room • Statements & Releases   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 12, 2013 Statement by the Press Secretary on the Debt Limit

“There are only two options to deal with the debt limit: Congress can pay its bills or it can fail to act and put the nation into default. When Congressional Republicans played politics with this issue last time, putting us at the edge of default, it was a blow to our economic recovery, causing our nation’s credit rating to be downgraded. The President and the American people won’t tolerate Congressional Republicans holding the American economy hostage again simply so they can force disastrous cuts to Medicare and other programs the middle class depend on while protecting the wealthy. Congress needs to do its job.”

Blog posts on this issue January 14, 2013 3:30 PM ESTPresident Obama Holds the Final Press Conference of His First TermPresident Obama Holds the Final Press Conference of His First Term

Before taking questions from the assembled journalists, the President took a moment to reflect on the past four years, and look ahead to his agenda for the next term, which includes new jobs, new opportunity, and new security for the middle class

January 12, 2013 5:30 AM ESTWeekly Address: Ending the War in Afghanistan and Rebuilding America

President Obama talks about the bipartisan agreement that Congress reached this week which prevented a middle-class tax hike, congratulates the newly sworn-in members of Congress, and looks forward to working with the new Congress in the new year to continue to grow our economy and shrink our deficits in a balanced way.

January 11, 2013 4:50 PM ESTPresident Obama Hosts President KarzaiPresident Obama Hosts President Karzai

We'll soon reach a milestone in Afghanistan -- when Afghan forces take full responsibility for their nation's security and the war draws to a close.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Rural Urban Policy Veterans Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Women The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources E-Gov Strategies and Guides E-Gov Circulars E-Gov Memoranda The White House Emblem En espaƱol Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Psaki: Obama won’t ‘play chicken’ over debt limit

Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki on Wednesday said the president was pleased to have a bipartisan tax deal pass Congress, but warned the White House wanted to quickly resolve the debate over raising the nation’s debt limit.

“Everyone in the White House, the president included, is happy to have this vote in the rearview mirror,” said Psaki, who served as Obama’s campaign spokeswoman, in an interview on CNN’s “Starting Point.”

Psaki said the White House hoped to avoid further protracted spending fights when negotiations begin on hiking the nation’s debt ceiling early in 2013 and the sequester kicks in in March. “Avoiding the fiscal cliff, making sure that the Congress votes to increase the debt limit, is not the White House’s and the president’s idea of a second-term agenda,” she said. 

“They’ve made no secret of the fact that they want to use that for spending cuts,” said Psaki of Republican lawmakers. “But there’s also the funding of the government, there’s the two-month extension of the sequester.”

President Obama on Tuesday night praised lawmakers for preventing a middle-class tax hike but cautioned Republicans not to use the debt ceiling to force another fight over spending. 

“While I will negotiate over many things, I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they’ve already racked up through the laws that they passed,” said Obama. 

“What the president was saying was, ‘I’m not going to play chicken with the debt limit. I’ve learned my lesson in 2011,’ ” Psaki said Wednesday. “This is something that impacts businesses, it impacts markets, it impacts the view of the world of the United States economy, and again, this isn’t something we should be fooling with.”

Psaki also rebuffed criticism from Democrats that the White House conceded too much in the tax deal to avoid the fiscal cliff. 

“Laws are not made by simply waving a wand and making it so. It involves compromise, it involves negotiation, and that’s what happened here,” she said.

Psaki said there was much that progressive Democrats “should be excited about in this package,” citing “extension of unemployment insurance, college tax credits, child tax credits, making the middle-class tax cut permanent.”

“Of course it wasn’t perfect, but Democrats have to be careful about not making the perfect the enemy of the good,” she added.

View Comments

View the original article here