logo
Medicare Update: Lawmakers Sound Alarm About Major Change to Program

Medicare Update: Lawmakers Sound Alarm About Major Change to Program

Newsweek2 days ago
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
More than a dozen House Democrats pressed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Mehmet Oz in a letter last week over CMS's announced plans to expand prior authorization requirements to traditional Medicare through a pilot program.
The new model incorporates artificial intelligence to help make decisions and is being tested in six states beginning in January.
"Let's call it what it is: profit-driven healthcare," a financial expert told Newsweek, "And profit motive and patient care mix about as well as oil and water. Lawmakers are sounding the alarm, because this directly affects many of their constituents."
Why It Matters
The pushback highlights a growing partisan debate over how to reduce Medicare spending without restricting beneficiaries' access to care. It also underscores tensions between the Biden-era expansion of oversight and the Trump administration's stated aim to cut waste while modernizing CMS operations.
House Democrats argued the new prior authorization pilot would create administrative burdens for providers and patients, while some Senate Republicans believe the Medicare reforms are necessary for rooting out fraud and overpayments.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) speaks at a news conference after a meeting with the House Democratic Caucus at the U.S. Capitol Building on September 19, 2023 in Washington, DC.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) speaks at a news conference after a meeting with the House Democratic Caucus at the U.S. Capitol Building on September 19, 2023 in Washington, DC.What To Know
More than a dozen House Democrats, led by Democratic Representatives Suzan DelBene of Washington and Ami Bera of California, sent a letter to CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz on Thursday, requesting information and urging cancellation of a planned prior authorization pilot for traditional Medicare.
The lawmakers wrote that "traditional Medicare has rarely required prior authorization," and said that, while prior authorization is "often described as a cost-containment strategy, in practice it increases provider burden, takes time away from patients, limits patients' access to life-saving care, and creates unnecessary administrative burden."
The letter asked CMS for details on the pilot's scope, implementation plan and safeguards for beneficiaries.
"Prior authorization is often seen as a roadblock to timely, even life-saving care—replacing the doctor's judgment with an algorithm," Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek.
"Let's call it what it is: profit-driven healthcare. And profit motive and patient care mix about as well as oil and water. Lawmakers are sounding the alarm, because this directly affects many of their constituents."
CMS has planned to roll out the prior authorization program in six states starting in January. The Trump administration previously announced a voluntary pledge from major insurers to simplify prior authorization in Medicare Advantage.
Lawmakers said that prior voluntary pledges showed public recognition of the harms of prior authorization, and they urged CMS to reconsider extending similar rules to traditional Medicare.
Separately, Senate Republicans discussed broader Medicare changes as part of proposals to reduce waste, fraud and abuse and to modernize CMS operations.
Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said lawmakers were examining CMS contracting practices, duplicate payments and upcoding as potential savings sources, according to The Hill.
The Hill also reported that legislation from Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy and Democratic Senator of Oregon Jeff Merkley to reduce Medicare Advantage overpayments had bipartisan interest and might be folded into larger budget measures considered by Senate Republicans.
Idaho Republican Senator Mike Crapo said his committee was "evaluating" Cassidy's proposal.
Newsweek reached out to CMS for comment via email.
What People Are Saying
Lawmakers wrote in their letter to CMS administrator, Dr. Mehmet Oz: "Prior authorization has long been abused, and it is bad for patients and providers. The American Medical Association notes, 'Among America's physicians, more than nine in 10 surveyed say that prior authorization has a negative impact on patient clinical outcomes." We urge you to put patients and providers first by cancelling the WISeR model and exploring other ways to limit fraud, waste, and abuse in the Medicare program."
Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "Will the letter change things? I doubt it. They'll probably get an answer, but expect the same vague, carefully worded response. The current administration is clear on its intent: privatize more of Medicare and crack down on what they label "waste, fraud, and abuse."
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "Few Americans would be in disagreement that services like Medicare and Medicaid should have strong oversight to ensure funding is being properly used, but the concern with the WISeR model being employed is the use of prior authorization for some Medicare services. Medicare Advantage has a history of requiring prior authorization, and while not all uses have been a source of criticism, it is viewed by some beneficiaries as one of several reasons why Advantage has garnered more negative reactions in recent years."
What Happens Next
CMS faced requests from House Democrats to provide documentation and to cancel the planned prior authorization pilot.
Lawmakers in the Senate continue to debate broader Medicare reforms, and committee deliberations could determine whether proposals addressing Medicare Advantage payments or CMS operational changes move into larger legislative packages.
"For the time being, the model isn't nationwide and will be piloted in select states," Beene said. "It's difficult to say if this will eventually be implemented nationwide and will largely depend on how this pilot program goes."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ex-Gov. David Paterson backing Eric Adams for NYC mayor— after endorsing Andrew Cuomo in Dem primary
Ex-Gov. David Paterson backing Eric Adams for NYC mayor— after endorsing Andrew Cuomo in Dem primary

New York Post

time2 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Ex-Gov. David Paterson backing Eric Adams for NYC mayor— after endorsing Andrew Cuomo in Dem primary

Former Gov. David Paterson is backing a new horse in the crowded field for New York City mayor — putting his support behind Eric Adams' bid to hang onto City Hall. The 55th governor of New York became the highest-profile Democrat to back the incumbent's re-election bid, after previously endorsing his successor in Albany, Andrew Cuomo, in the June Democratic primary for mayor. 'I'm here to stand for someone who has already run this city for nearly four years and has made huge changes over the past administrations,' Paterson said outside City Hall Wednesday, surrounded by more than two dozen Adams supporters. Paterson made his latest endorsement on Wednesday. Matthew McDermott Eric Adams has been polling in the single digits with his long-shot independent bid for mayor. stefano Giovannini 'At this particular time, in this moment where so many issues are occurring, so many difficulties are coming to this state … the person we need to protect us is Mayor Eric Adams,' he said. The endorsement comes just weeks after Paterson called for the candidates — GOP nominee Curtis Sliwa and independents Adams, Cuomo and lawyer Jim Walden — to unite behind one person as the best way to beat the frontrunner, socialist Zohran Mamdani, in the November election. Under the proposal, the contender who continues to campaign would be determined by an independent poll closer to the election or by leaders across Big Apple institutions. But Paterson said Wednesday he was dropping the idea, which Cuomo had publicly endorsed. 'It was an idea to generate conversation. None of the candidates seemed particularly interested, so I considered the issue to be mute,' he said. Cuomo has maintained his runner-up status behind Mamdani in a handful of polls over the last month, while Adams has been struggling to muster double-digit support, putting him in fourth place. Paterson has repeatedly spoken out against Mamdani, who shocked the political world when he won the Democratic nomination and gave Cuomo an electoral shellacking in the primary. 'It would kind of be like comparing a lit match to a forest fire,' Paterson said Wednesday, when asked why he was supporting Adams over the party's nominee. 'Mr. Mamdani has proposed some very interesting concepts and idea. The problem is that he can't really solve them unless he has the resources. And he never really discusses where he's going to get the resources from,' Paterson said. He compared the Queens assemblyman to lefty Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, whose popularity has dipped as the Windy City's budget woes worsen. 'We don't want to go through that. We don't want to have these situations where the government is falling apart and there's no leadership and nobody know what to do,' Paterson said. The endorsement is the latest shift for Paterson, who also worked Walden early on in the lawyer's independent campaign for mayor. Veteran political operative Bill Cunningham predicted that having the backing of Paterson — the state's first black governor who served from 2008 to 2010 — will help Adams and take a bite out of Cuomo's chances of winning the race. 'It will make a difference for Cuomo. His strategy rests on being the choice of moderate to liberal elderly voters of color,' Cunningham told The Post. 'David's endorsement of Adams is like the iceberg cutting a slit at the Titanic's waterline,' he said, 'and it may help Mamdani for the same reason. 'The questions for Adams' team is how can they use it to best advantage given his money problems.' Meanwhile Sliwa, who has a longtime personal and professional relationship with Paterson, thanked the ex-gov for not backing him — calling an endorsement from him the political 'kiss of death.' 'I have political vertigo from my husband-in-law David Paterson,' Sliwa told Politico. 'You went from Adams to Jim Walden to Cuomo, now you are back to Adams. Stay away from me. Say bad things about me! But please don't endorse me.' When asked about Sliwa's comments, Paterson fired back. 'Curtis Sliwa is a kiss of death.'

Appeals court lets the White House suspend or end billions in foreign aid
Appeals court lets the White House suspend or end billions in foreign aid

Boston Globe

time2 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Appeals court lets the White House suspend or end billions in foreign aid

After groups of grant recipients sued to challenge that order, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ordered the administration to release the full amount of foreign assistance that Congress had appropriated for the 2024 budget year. Advertisement The appeal court's majority partially vacated Ali's order. Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Gregory Katsas concluded that the plaintiffs did not have a valid legal basis for the court to hear their claims. The ruling was not on the merits of whether the government unconstitutionally infringed on Congress' spending powers. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'The parties also dispute the scope of the district court's remedy but we need not resolve it ... because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,' Henderson wrote. Judge Florence Pan, who dissented, said the Supreme Court has held 'in no uncertain terms' that the president does not have the authority to disobey laws for policy reasons. 'Yet that is what the majority enables today,' Pan wrote. 'The majority opinion thus misconstrues the separation-of-powers claim brought by the grantees, misapplies precedent, and allows Executive Branch officials to evade judicial review of constitutionally impermissible actions.' Advertisement The money at issue includes nearly $4 billion for USAID to spend on global health programs and more than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs. Trump has portrayed the foreign aid as wasteful spending that does not align with his foreign policy goals. Henderson was nominated to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush. Katsas was nominated by Trump. Pan was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden.

The Democrats Are in Danger. So Are the Republicans.
The Democrats Are in Danger. So Are the Republicans.

New York Times

time3 minutes ago

  • New York Times

The Democrats Are in Danger. So Are the Republicans.

'Twenty years from now, will we be a country of Democrats and Republicans taking turns on who's in power?' Pete Buttigieg asked recently. 'I'm not so sure.' Speaking to Mosheh Oinounou, a podcaster and former CBS News producer, the conspicuous institutionalist casually blasted the country's institutions and proposed that, amid the wreckage, America's political future was not at all intuitive. 'We're past the point of just believing that there's some pendulum that comes back and forth,' Buttigieg went on. 'I think that both parties should examine the chances of their survival.' Americans love to decry the country's limited political menu, and talking up third-party challenges to the two-party system has been a cottage industry at least since Ross Perot. In a time of anti-establishment feeling, there's additional incentive to hype a crackup, even though structural forces make that chatter look perennially foolish. And I'm not predicting that America's two major parties are going to actually split up anytime soon. But peek across the Atlantic at the changing shape of our close-cousin democracy in Britain, and the possibilities seem, as Buttigieg suggests, open. It was just last summer that Keir Starmer and Labour won a smashing victory over Rishi Sunak and the Conservatives, bringing a striking end to more than a decade of Tory austerity rule and securing the second-largest parliamentary majority since World War II. But just over a year later, Starmer's net approval rating has fallen from plus 10 to minus 40. Labour as a whole has lost more support in its first 10 months in office than any other governing party in 40 years. Labour's Rachel Reeves, the chancellor of the Exchequer, broke into tears last month in Parliament, in a richly symbolic event for the British political media. Since resuming power, her party has struggled to deliver meaningful new policy or escape the widespread impression of nervous, triangulating centrism. To trust the polls, the strongest challenger is now not the Conservative Party, as tradition would suggest, but Reform — Nigel Farage's rebrand of the upstart Brexit party, a populist-nihilist meme factory very much in the MAGA mold. Reform won only five seats in Parliament last summer, but it has maintained a steady polling lead over Labour since April — and an even larger lead over the Tory coalition from which it mostly sprang. Through the summer, polls have suggested that in the event of a sudden election, Reform would win, indeed quite spectacularly: Estimates suggest a huge 200-seat margin, for a party that did not even exist at the time of the Brexit vote. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store