The one thing that bothers me a bit here is the comment about "reduced benefits" for participants..to continue paying the doctors...the insurers pay based on the Medicare rates by a percentage...in other words they bill Medicare around 112% of the Medicare rates...so am I wrong in the fact that insurers are also getting a cut at the same time?? So one cut for the doctors means a cut all the way around? Again, I am trying to properly interpret this...and make sense...so why would the insurer's object to having some additional funds kept to pay the doctors? With the insurance folks collecting 112% of the Medicare rates, and doctors getting paid at 70-80% of that amount, that leaves a bunch of money on the table, correct? Administrative costs are on the average of 12%, so where does the rest go? Dividends? BD
WASHINGTON - Doctors who treat the elderly and disabled will face a 10 percent cut in their reimbursement rates from Medicare next year under a federal rule issued Thursday. The rate cut was widely expected. It's based on a formula that takes into account spending growth. If spending growth for physician services exceeds projections, the formula dictates lower reimbursement rates. Similar cuts have been proposed every year since 2002, but Congress has stepped in every year except one to avoid them
The American Medical Association has called on Congress to reduce payments to private insurance companies that cover beneficiaries through the Medicare Advantage program, but the insurers say such cuts would reduce benefits for millions of participants.
It's always so sad to see the problems that keep arising with healthcare...I wish it could just be free for everyone! Unfortunately, we know that's not the case. But there ARE people out there trying to help! AARP set up a site, http://www.thisissoridiculous.com with a petition to help make our voices heard! I'm working to support AARP because I believe that this IS ridiculous!
ReplyDelete