logo
PBGH Publishes Purchaser Policy Priorities for the New Congress and Administration

PBGH Publishes Purchaser Policy Priorities for the New Congress and Administration

Oakland, California, Jan. 31, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- As the newly-elected 119th Congress readies to tackle a list of legislative priorities, Purchaser Business Group on Health (PBGH), a nonprofit coalition representing 40 private employers and public entities across the U.S., shares a new Brief detailing its health care policy priorities. PBGH members share bi-partisan goals to reduce health care costs while improving quality and access of health care services. PBGH members lead innovative purchasing strategies but need policy change to enable a functional health care market.
'We welcome the new Congress and Administration's willingness to disrupt an industry that has become increasingly consolidated, unresponsive and dysfunctional,' said Elizabeth Mitchell, President and CEO of PBGH. 'The current system does not work for employers, families or most health care providers and the industry has demonstrated it will not reform itself to deliver high quality care at lower costs. Legislative action is needed to curb anticompetitive practices and enable accountability.'
To improve affordability, the Brief identifies specific policy actions for Congress and the Administration, including:
Lower Health Care Costs by addressing hospital and drug pricing, limiting consolidation, and prohibiting anti-competitive practices.
Improve Data Access and Transparency by enforcing hospital price transparency and transparency in coverage regulations and enhancing penalties for non-compliance.
Enact Service Provider Reforms by ensuring PBM and TPA transparency, including reporting drug pricing data and prohibiting gag clauses, and extending fiduciary obligations to service providers.
Support Direct Contracting and Joint Purchasing by clarifying antitrust guidance allowing multiple employers to join together, and ensuring direct contracts are covered by ERISA's preemption law.
Many of these policy recommendations are important to enable employers' ability to meet their fiduciary responsibilities on behalf of employees and families.
In addition to affordability, the Brief offers recommendations on improving access to needed high-quality care. PBGH supports efforts to:
Improve Maternal and Child Health ensuring access to safe and high quality maternal and post-partum care – especially in rural areas – through a whole person approach and expanding access to care teams including midwives and doulas.
Improve Primary Care and Mental Health by removing barriers to advanced primary care, investing in the primary care workforce, and integrating mental health care into primary care.
'The health care market is broken. These common-sense reforms will go a long way toward establishing fair competition and greater transparency will allow the marketplace to work to better control costs and improve access to high quality care,' Mitchell said.
About Purchaser Business Group on Health
PBGH is a nonprofit coalition representing nearly 40 private employers and public entities across the U.S. that collectively spend $350 billion annually purchasing healthcare services for more than 21 million Americans and their families. In partnership with its members, PBGH initiatives are designed to test innovative operational programs and scale successful approaches that lower healthcare costs and increase quality across the U.S.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Big Beautiful Bill Looks To Reverse Affordable Care Act Coverage Gains
Big Beautiful Bill Looks To Reverse Affordable Care Act Coverage Gains

Forbes

timean hour ago

  • Forbes

Big Beautiful Bill Looks To Reverse Affordable Care Act Coverage Gains

The House budget reconciliation bill, dubbed the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' includes large cuts in Medicaid spending that could lead to millions of newly uninsured individuals if the legislation passes in the Senate. The proposed law also contains provisions that alter the Affordable Care Act exchange landscape, potentially leading to millions more uninsured. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that at least five million current marketplace enrollees would lose coverage by 2034. The nonpartisan and policy research firm KFF says the number of people with marketplace plans could shrink even more, by around eight million. Changes in the ACA marketplace would make coverage more expensive, as enhanced tax credits expire, and harder to obtain as open enrollment windows shorten, the paperwork burden for beneficiaries increases and automatic re-enrollment ends. Americans who purchase health coverage through the ACA marketplace exchanges could also soon face higher out-of-pocket maximums in their coverage plans, which means higher cost-sharing. The United States Treasury Department announced in Sept. 2024 that almost 50 million people have obtained healthcare coverage through marketplace exchanges created by the ACA since its enactment more than a decade ago. The Department data show that one in seven Americans have been or are covered by the law. And between President Biden's inauguration in Jan. 2021 and Sept. 2024, 18.2 million Americans got ACA coverage for the first time. Rising enrollment since 2021 has been driven by an expansion under the Biden Administration of premium tax credits to include individuals and families with household incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty level, which equates to $58,000 for a single person and $120,000 for a family of four. Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate, in concert with the Trump administration, are now looking to reverse some of those gains. The ACA has gone through a tumultuous history since it was signed in 2010. The law has faced repeated calls for repeal by Republicans. For several years following its passage it wasn't a particularly well-liked piece of legislation, Yet the ACA is now more popular than ever, with over 60% of the public having a favorable view of the law, according to KFF. The ACA is a comprehensive reform bill, passed by Congress in 2010, that increases health insurance coverage for the uninsured and implements a wide range of reforms to the health insurance market as well as an expansion of Medicaid, the public insurance program that provides health coverage to low-income families and individuals. Importantly, under the ACA, individuals who may have been uninsured due to preexisting conditions or limited finances can secure affordable health plans through the health insurance marketplaces established by the law. The demographics of people on Medicaid are fairly similar to those enrolled in ACA plans. The legislation has its critics. They point to certain flaws in design and implementation, Indeed, in the early years under the Obama Administration, insurers exited in droves and premiums rates increased substantially. Under the first Trump administration, ACA enrollment fell overall while numbers of uninsured rose by more than two million. Following unsuccessful efforts to scuttle the ACA, the president issued executive orders to 'improve ACA market dynamics.' ACA exchanges did stabilize in the latter half of Trump's first term as insurers returned and the rate of premium growth decreased. When Biden assumed office, his administration sought to enlarge the ACA program and counter several of the changes implemented by the first Trump administration that had shrunk its size. The Biden administration was largely successful in terms of increasing the number of people who signed up in the ACA exchanges and reducing the percentage of Americans without health insurance. Troubled times for folks enrolled in the ACA exchanges aren't solely because of possible passage of the budget reconciliation bill. CVS Health announced last month it will pull Aetna out of the ACA marketplace in 2026, leaving about one million people across 17 states searching for new healthcare coverage. Aetna's withdrawal from the marketplace will mark the second time the carrier stepped away from the ACA exchanges. The company left the ACA marketplace in 2018 and came back in 2022. Other carriers left the individual health insurance marketplace in 2017 and 2018 amid uncertainty over whether the ACA would be repealed or replaced. While there isn't the same kind of uncertainty now regarding the ACA's survival, disruption is occurring in the space. This could soon lead to more carriers exiting the market.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's Net Worth Jumped $21 Million Since Joining Congress — Top 6 Stocks She Was Buying Amid Tariff Chaos
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's Net Worth Jumped $21 Million Since Joining Congress — Top 6 Stocks She Was Buying Amid Tariff Chaos

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's Net Worth Jumped $21 Million Since Joining Congress — Top 6 Stocks She Was Buying Amid Tariff Chaos

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) is taking flak for buying several stocks just before President Donald Trump's April 9 announcement of a 90-day tariff pause for non-retaliating countries, which sparked a market rally. According to required public disclosures, Greene bought stocks worth roughly $21,000 and $315,000 on April 8 and April 9. She also sold between $50,000 and $100,0000 in Treasury bills at the time. Don't Miss: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: . Greene's net worth has reportedly increased from $700,000 before she joined Congress to approximately $22 million today, according to multiple media outlets. This rise is notable considering the salary of a congressional member is $174,000. According to stock trading data platform Quiver Quantitative, Greene has executed 450 stock trades since 2021, the year she joined the House. Let's take a look at some of the notable stocks she was buying before Trump's announcement of a 90-day pause on tariffs last month. Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) was among the important companies Greene was piling into before Trump announced a 90-day pause on his reciprocal tariffs last month. She bought Tesla shares worth between $1,000 to $15,000 on April 8, according to public disclosures. The stock has gained about 24% over the past month. Trending: Invest where it hurts — and help millions heal:. Greene bought Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) shares worth up to $15,000 on April 9, according to her public disclosures. The stock has gained about 23% since then. Bank of America recently raised its price target for the chipmaker to $160 from $150, calling the company a "top beneficiary" of AI deals recently signed between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. Palantir (NASDAQ:PLTR) shares are up 44% since April 9, when Greene bought the company's shares worth between $1,000 to $15,000. Last month, Bank of America raised its price target for Palantir to $150 from $125, citing the company's "bespoke" AI products. Greene bought Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) shares on April 8, according to her public disclosures. The next day, the stock jumped 12% amid a broader market rally following Trump's announcement of a 90-day pause on tariffs. Amazon shares are up 11% over the past 30 bought up to $15,000 worth of Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) shares on April 9, her public filings show. The stock is up 2.2% since then. The company has been at the forefront of the US-China tariff war since most of its iPhones are manufactured in the Asian country. Nike (NYSE:NKE) was among the major companies most affected by Trump's announcement of reciprocal tariffs on April 2. However, the stock rose on April 9 after Trump announced a 90-day pause on duties against non-retalating countries, including Vietnam, which accounts for about 50% of the company's footwear manufacturing. Greene bought Nike shares worth up to $15,000 on April 8, according to her disclosures. Read Next: Image: Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's Net Worth Jumped $21 Million Since Joining Congress — Top 6 Stocks She Was Buying Amid Tariff Chaos originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Sign in to access your portfolio

Republicans and Economists at Odds Over Whether Megabill Will Spur Growth Boom
Republicans and Economists at Odds Over Whether Megabill Will Spur Growth Boom

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Republicans and Economists at Odds Over Whether Megabill Will Spur Growth Boom

WASHINGTON—Republicans see a golden age of prosperity ahead, driven by the tax-and-spending megabill they are trying to push through Congress by July 4. Nonpartisan experts project far more modest effects, forecasting a slight near-term economic expansion and larger federal budget deficits. The growth debate is at the core of this summer's fiscal fight. Republicans are trying to focus public attention on growth—from tax cuts, deregulation and fossil-fuel production—and play down the Congressional Budget Office estimate that the bill would increase budget deficits by $2.4 trillion through 2034. The White House highlights growth to bolster congressional support, countering claims from Elon Musk and others that the package irresponsibly darkens America's fiscal picture. 'Sextortion' Scams Involving Apple Messages Ended in Tragedy for These Boys The U.S. Economy Is Headed Toward an Uncomfortable Summer I Got Burned by the 401(k) 'Hierarchy Trap' Test Yourself Against These Teen Personal-Finance Whizzes, Round 2 Republicans and outside economists agree on the basic direction: tax cuts increase consumer spending and business investment, accelerating short-term growth. But they differ vastly on how large and meaningful that jump would be. The bill, according to public- and private-sector economists, would fall far short of Republicans' hoped-for boom. 'We would expect some dynamic revenue, some revenue feedback in that larger economy,' said Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation, which favors lower tax rates and a simpler system. 'But it wouldn't come close to paying for itself.' President Trump said in a social-media post last month that the U.S. annual growth rate would triple or even quintuple the 1.8% in CBO's January forecast, which doesn't incorporate the effects of any GOP policies. Since 2005, real U.S. gross domestic product growth hit or exceeded 3% twice: in 2018 after the 2017 tax cuts, and in 2021 during the recovery from the pandemic. House Republicans assume a 2.6% growth rate, yielding enough revenue to cover the megabill's deficits. 'The economy is going to explode in capital formation. Jobs will increase. Wages will increase,' Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R., Idaho) said after meeting with Trump last week. 'We're going to see the kind of growth and strength that this country wants.' Broadly, economists across the political spectrum discount elected officials' predictions. Tax Foundation: The conservative-leaning group estimates that the bill would boost long-term GDP by 0.8%, generating enough revenue to cover about one-third of its costs. That is compared with doing nothing and letting tax cuts expire Dec. 31. The gain is like adding an average of 0.1 percentage point to the annual growth rate; reaching 3% would require much larger changes, Watson said. Penn Wharton: Its budget model projects a 0.4% increase in GDP over the first decade. That is equivalent to raising the annual growth rate to 1.85% from 1.8%. 'Basically, I would call this flat,' said Kent Smetters, who runs the Penn model. 'We all know this is all going to get swamped by all the randomness.' Joint Committee on Taxation: The nonpartisan congressional scorekeeper projected that the bill's tax components would produce short-run growth through increased labor supply and capital stock. That would be counteracted by rising budget deficits, with a net effect of taking 1.83% annual growth to 1.86%. JCT estimates that the bill's tax provisions would cover less than 3% of their costs with revenue from economic growth. Yale Budget Lab: The think tank says the bill would bump the growth rate roughly to 2% from 1.8% through 2027, before the drag of federal debt weakens and reverses that effect. Those all contrast with the view of the White House's Council of Economic Advisers, which has a far rosier scenario. It projects a 4.2% to 5.2% increase in short-term GDP and a long-term gain of 2.9% to 3.5%. That gain would be three to four times the Tax Foundation estimate, which itself is larger than Penn Wharton, Yale or JCT. Economists caution that tax policy can't move the needle much in the U.S. economy, particularly given higher costs and uncertainty caused by tariffs. Still, putting money in taxpayers' pockets could increase demand for goods and services. Lower business taxes—especially faster write-offs for equipment and factories—encourage investment and have the biggest bang for the buck. Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Stephen Miran said growth after 2017 demonstrates that the Republican formula can work. The economy and incomes grew solidly in 2018 and 2019 before the Covid-19 pandemic scrambled everything. 'When Americans elected President Trump, they did so knowing that he was a pro-growth president,' Miran said. 'The bill is going to create a vibrant, dynamic economy.' Miran added that federal taxes as a share of GDP was barely unchanged from fiscal 2017 to fiscal 2024. According to CBO, revenue was 17.3% of GDP in 2017 and 17.1% in 2024. 'There was no long-term hole in revenues,' Miran said. But before the tax cuts passed, CBO forecast revenue increasing to 18.3% in 2024, and the law changed that trajectory. One of the most thorough academic studies found that the 2017 law increased domestic business investment but didn't come close to paying for itself. The Tax Foundation's Watson said policymakers should expect a more muted response from extending the 2017 tax cuts than from creating them. The bill includes new and revived business incentives but schedules them to expire. 'It's pro-growth,' Watson said. 'The more you add in some of these gimmicks and temporary changes, the more watered-down it gets.' Senators including James Lankford (R., Okla.) and Steve Daines (R., Mont.) are seeking changes to encourage growth. They are particularly focused on making permanent some business-tax provisions such as immediate deductions for equipment purchases. 'If you have an expiration, you just don't get predictability,' Lankford said. Capital-investment incentives would be muted because tariff uncertainty complicates business planning, said Seth Carpenter, global chief economist at Morgan Stanley, which estimates that the bill would boost growth in 2026 before turning neutral and then negative. Some projects might make sense with high tariffs but not lower ones. Even with the bill's new deduction for factory expenses, without tariff certainty, Carpenter said, 'I don't think you're going to be in any sort of hurry to start breaking ground.' Kimberly Clausing, a former Biden administration economist now at the University of California, Los Angeles, said she worries about the drag from budget deficits. 'If they failed,' she said, 'I actually think that would be the best possible macroeconomic outcome.' Write to Richard Rubin at How Hydrogen, the Fuel of the Future, Got Bogged Down in the Bayou Chinese-Owned Company Halts Work on Factory to Make Batteries in U.S. It's the Republicans, Not Musk, Who Are Serious About Cutting Spending Trump's New Steel Tariffs Look Vulnerable to a Courtroom Challenge Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store