Excellus calls on Congress to protect seniors in Upstate New York
(WIVT/WBGH) – Several non-profit health plans across Upstate New York are calling on Congress to protect older adults.
Excellus BlueCross BlueShield, CDPHP, and MVP Health Care have partnered together to urge elected officials to pass bipartisan legislation that will protect Medicare Advantage benefits and access to care for hundreds of thousands of members.
According to Excellus, nearly 450,000 Medicare Advantage members in Upstate New York may face increased premiums, higher out-of-pocket costs, and fewer choices due to the financial effects of unprecedented changes to the Medicare wage index.
'We remain grateful for the support and leadership of those in Congress who continue to fight for older adults in our communities,' said Jim Reed, President and CEO of Excellus BCBS. 'We have faith that New York's congressional delegation will find a solution to avoid catastrophic consequences for nearly 450,000 Medicare Advantage members with not-for-profit health plans in upstate New York.'
In 2023, a change in how the federal government sets hospital reimbursement rates for Medicare resulted in financial losses for non-profit health plans upstate. Excellus says non-profit plans absorbed hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. The plans cannot sustain these growing losses along with the escalating costs of health care.
'Our local, not-for-profit plans will continue to battle the effects of the wage index, which has left the future of our great health plan – and the 75,000 older adults who entrust us with their care – in jeopardy,' said Brian O'Grady, President and CEO of CDPHP.
In May 2024, Congresswoman Claudia Tenney introduced bipartisan legislation to strengthen Medicare Advantage plans in Upstate New York. However, Congress did not act on this legislation before the end of the previous Congress term in December 2024. Tenney, along with other members of Congress, have since reintroduced the legislation.
The legislation would adjust the amounts reimbursed to health plans to ensure regional, non-profit Medicare Advantage plans remain viable and members maintain access to benefits and access to care.
'We thank Congresswoman Tenney and our bipartisan Congressional delegation for supporting this imperative legislation,' said Chris Del Vecchio, CEO of MVP Health Care. 'This bill will authorize CMS to make a region-specific Medicare adjustment to level the playing field for local, not-for-profit, community-based plans. It will ensure that MVP can continue to innovate with our community provider partners and provide critical benefits to our Medicare members.'
Excellus calls on Congress to protect seniors in Upstate New York
City of Binghamton hosting paint recycling event
Teen shot in Binghamton while driving, in stable condition
BCSO searching for missing Endicott man
Crews respond to Sunday morning house fire in Binghamton
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
After outcry, 4-year-old girl can stay in U.S. for lifesaving care
Deysi Vargas's 4-year-old daughter was fussy on Wednesday as she carried her into their Bakersfield, California, home after a dental procedure. In a few hours, Vargas would have to prepare the girl's next feeding — washing her hands thoroughly, measuring formula and flushing her daughter's gastric tube. It was a routine Vargas had perfected through fear. Missing even one step could mean disaster, she said. But for the first time in months, she felt like she could finally breathe. Vargas and her family, who hail from Mexico, could stay in the United States, the only country where her daughter can receive the complex and specialized treatment that keeps her alive. The girl has short bowel syndrome, a condition where the body cannot absorb enough nutrients from food. The relief that washed over Vargas had come after nearly two excruciating months, she said. In April, the government had abruptly revoked the family's humanitarian parole without giving them a reason. The move triggered swift international outrage and prompted 38 Democratic members of Congress to send a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem urging her to reverse the decision. Then on Tuesday, Vargas received a notice from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: The family had been granted another year of parole. 'I felt more than tranquility — peace,' Vargas, 28, told The Washington Post. 'These moments of not knowing whether we'd be deported or allowed to stay were beyond overwhelming. It was horrible knowing that my daughter's ability to stay alive depended on this humanitarian parole.' In a statement Friday, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed the family was approved to stay in the United States. The agency did not respond to questions about why their parole had been revoked after initially being granted until July. Vargas's attorney, Gina Amato Lough, said the family fit into two categories of people who have seen their status canceled amid the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration: people with parole and those who entered the country through the Biden administration's CBP One app. The Trump administration has also rolled back humanitarian protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants. The girl, whom the family's lawyers identify by the pseudonym Sofia, was born in Playa del Carmen, Mexico, in fragile health. She had her first surgery at four days old for a malformation in her intestine. Four more surgeries followed, Vargas said, and left the girl with short bowel syndrome. Soon, the girl was transferred to a hospital nearly 800 miles away in Mexico City. Vargas and her husband uprooted their lives to move close to the facility, which their daughter did not leave for two years. After two more surgeries and a near-death experience, doctors told Vargas they were running out of options. The only thing left to try was an intestine transplant, which had never been done in that hospital before, Vargas recalled being told. 'They told me my child was most likely going to die,' she said. Vargas refused to give up hope. She started researching transplants and alternative treatments in Spain and the United States, and contacting hospitals. At the same time, she prepared an application for humanitarian parole, which allows people to temporarily live in the United States for urgent humanitarian reasons. In 2023, the family boarded a flight to Tijuana from Mexico City. They carried the girl — still connected to nutrition bags — to the border and legally entered the United States through an appointment secured through the CBP One app, Vargas said. They were granted humanitarian parole until July 2025. The girl arrived in California as an emaciated toddler and was transported to a children's hospital in San Diego. She soon began to thrive under specialized care, Vargas said, including hours tethered to an intravenous feeding system — a machine that pumps nutrients into her through a tube. Little by little, the child reached milestones — like sitting up and taking her first steps — that to Vargas had once seemed impossibly out of reach. She was transferred to Children's Hospital Los Angeles after a year. In September, the girl was discharged and allowed to live something close to a normal life: playing in the park, painting with her father and attending day care while Vargas works in a buffet-style restaurant. She loves dancing, especially to 'Mambo No. 5' by Lou Bega. 'She feels the rhythm and starts moving her body,' Vargas said, laughing. For a while, it felt like the family was moving forward. Then came the April 11 letter from DHS, giving them just seven days before their legal status would be revoked. 'Do not attempt to remain in the United States — the federal government will find you. Please depart the United States immediately,' read the email, which was reviewed by The Post. The family received two more such notices. The last one, from May 13, warned Vargas that her work authorization had also been canceled. 'I can't explain the fear,' she said. 'Feeling like any time we were out on the streets someone was going to take us away and deport us.' Adding to her anxiety, Vargas said, was the fact that her daughter's medical team had said the equipment that keeps the girl alive can't leave the country — and patients on this treatment aren't allowed to travel. DHS denied in its statement that the family was 'actively being deported.' Though the family hadn't been placed in removal proceedings or received a final deportation order, Amato Lough said the revocation of their status effectively left them undocumented. The letter the family received from DHS warned: 'If you do not depart the United States immediately you will be subject to potential law enforcement actions that will result in your removal.' On May 14, Vargas and her family filed another application for humanitarian parole. Weeks went by without an answer. Then, after the Los Angeles Times reported on the family's situation, USCIS contacted the family to begin scheduling biometrics appointments — a standard, early step in many immigration benefit applications. Days later, the family was told they would have status for a year. 'While we celebrate this victory, we cannot ignore the systemic challenges that brought [the girl] to the brink,' Amato Lough and her co-counsel, Rebecca Brown, said in a statement. 'Her parole was terminated without warning, and for weeks there was no functional avenue to alert USCIS that a child's life was in danger. It took an international outcry and pressure from elected officials to get a response — something that used to take a single phone call.' In Bakersfield, Vargas rocked her daughter gently this week and whispered reassurances. 'She's so groggy,' she said, as the girl whined. 'But she's going to be okay.' This time, she believed it.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
'Right down the line': Medicaid reform in 'big, beautiful bill' divides lawmakers by party
Medicaid reform in President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" has drawn a partisan line through Congress. Democrats have railed against potential Medicaid cuts since Trump was elected, while Republicans have celebrated Medicaid reform through the reconciliation process as an efficient way to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in the welfare program. Fox News Digital asked lawmakers from both ends of the political spectrum to react to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act's Medicaid reform. The results were as expectedly divided. "This is all B.S., what the Democrats are doing," Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., told Fox News Digital. "They're pushing the agenda that we're cutting 10 million people off Medicaid. It's people that actually shouldn't be on it, illegals that shouldn't be on it. We're reforming it." The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a nonpartisan federal agency that has been ridiculed by Republicans, estimated this week that Trump's "big, beautiful bill" would leave 10.9 million people without health insurance, including 1.4 million who are in the country without legal status in state-funded programs. But Republicans are holding firm in their defense of Medicaid reform, which Republicans say only cuts benefits to illegal immigrants, those ineligible to receive benefits who are currently receiving benefits, duplicate enrollees in one or more states and those who are able but choosing not to work. "The people who would not continue to get Medicaid benefits under this bill were not qualified to get them in the first place," Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told Fox News Digital. Democrats continue to sound off on the healthcare threat of eliminating 10 million people from Medicaid. Not a single House Democrat voted to pass Trump's championed legislation, which includes fulfilling key campaign promises like cutting taxes, immigration reform and American energy production. "These burdensome regulatory requirements for proving that somebody has obtained or sought work are going to mean millions of people will go without healthcare, and the restrictions on food assistance are equally an obstacle to people meeting their everyday needs," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said. Blumenthal added he is "very, very concerned about these seemingly cruel and unproductive ways of raising money simply to finance tax cuts" for "wealthy billionaires." New Jersey Democratic Sen. Andy Kim said he is happy to have an "honest conversation" about government efficiency and saving taxpayer dollars, but that's not the reality of this bill. "People are struggling, and I feel like, in the richest, most powerful country in the world, we should be able to make sure that people can have the basic needs they need to be able to survive," Kim said of Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., told Fox News Digital there is "nothing beautiful" about Trump's "big, beautiful bill." "This is horrific, and it adds massive amounts to our debt, compromising our ability to [fund] the fundamentals in the future, foundations for families to thrive — health care, housing, education, good-paying jobs. That's what we should be doing here, not doing massive tax cuts for billionaires and paying for them by tearing down programs for ordinary families," Merkley said. The national debt stands at more than $36.2 trillion as of June 5, according to the Fox Business, based on data from the Treasury Department. The CBO's report this week also estimated Trump's bill will cut taxes by $3.7 trillion while raising deficits by $2.4 trillion over a decade.
Forbes
12 hours ago
- Forbes
Republicans Like Health Savings Accounts
Should the government allow HSAs to cover gym memberships? Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are a popular and important way many people pay for medical expenses. They are also a great way to save—better, for example, than an IRA or a 401(k) plan. Because of various quirks in the law, HSAs are not available to a large number of people—including people on Medicaid or Medicare and most people who buy their own insurance in the (Obamacare) exchanges. Under the reconciliation bill just passed in the House of Representatives, more people will have access to these accounts and there will be new opportunities to use them. Currently, individuals and their employers can make tax-free deposits to HSAs, provided the individual is also covered by third-party health insurance with a high deductible. Money can accumulate and grow tax-free. After age 65, the money can be withdrawn for non-health expenses without penalty, but it is subject to normal income taxes. As of 2023, there were 37.4 million accounts with $46.4 billion in assets. Industry experts think the House bill will lead to an additional 20 million people with an HSA. Here is a summary of the hits and misses in the Republican bill, as it faces a vote by the Senate. The Good. By far the best feature of the bill is a provision making all bronze and catastrophic insurance plans offered through the (Obamacare) exchanges automatically eligible for an HSA account. This is likely the main reason why the number of HSA accounts is likely to soar. Another provision would allow the use of HSAs to pay monthly fees for direct primary care (DPC). This used to be called 'concierge care' and in the past it was available only to the rich. But the price has come way down. Atlas MD in Wichita, for example, charges $50 a month for a mother and $10 for a child. In return, the family has 24/7 access to a physician's practice that provides all primary care. Often, the family has the doctor's personal phone number. DPC has become increasingly popular, and employers often pay the monthly fee for their employees. Under current law, however, the employer cannot put funds in an HSA account, let the employee choose a DPC doctor and pay that doctor from the account. The House bill will create that opportunity. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the ten-year cost of all of the HSA changes combined is almost $44 billion. Yet the cost of the two best provisions is less than $6 billion. More on that below. The Questionable. The bill allows annual withdrawals of $500 (individuals) or $1,000 (couples) for gym memberships and other physical activities. (No sailing or golfing expenses, however.) The problem is that these are not medical expenses. If we are going to allow gym memberships, why not hundreds of other nonmedical expenses – including sailing and golfing? The CBO says the cost of this provision is $10 billion. The bill also doubles the annual HSA contribution that is allowable for individuals with incomes up to $75,000 and couples who earn up to $150,000. The problem here is that only about one in ten account holders are contributing the maximum allowable right now. At a cost of more than $8 billion this is an expensive change that will only affect a small part of the market. Instead of these questionable measures, the Senate should consider making all Obamacare silver plans (the most popular choice) automatically eligible for an HSA. Missed opportunities. While the House should be congratulated for making many desirable improvements in the HSA law, it unfortunately failed to correct a fundamental flaw: an inflexible across-the-board deductible. Common sense would suggest that different medical expenses need different deductibles. The biggest problem with chronic illness, for example, is noncompliance with a drug regimen. That is why some Medicare Advantage plans make maintenance drugs for chronic patients (such as insulin for diabetics) available for free or at very low cost. In the first Trump administration, an IRS ruling waived the deductible requirement for 14 specific services and medications that serve as treatments for such conditions as diabetes, asthma, heart disease, and depression. This was an executive branch decision to modify existing legislation, however. To make it permanent, Congress needs to codify it. Ideally, Congress should remove the deductible requirement altogether and let the role of deductibles be determined in the marketplace. One way to think about the combination of allowing gym memberships and failing to address the deductible issue is to see that the House risks being accused of creating benefits for the healthy while ignoring the sick. Another missed opportunity was the failure of House Republicans to give 80 million Medicaid enrollees access to what I will call a Roth HSA. Private companies managing Medicaid (or the state itself) should be able to make deposits to an account that would cover, say, all primary care. Enrollees could use the money for health care during an insurance year. Afterward, they could withdraw any unspent funds for any purpose. If there were no taxes or penalties on non-medical withdrawals, health care and non-health care would trade against each other on a level playing field under the tax law. People wouldn't spend a dollar on health care unless they got a dollar's worth of value. An early study by the RAND Corporation suggests that these accounts would reduce Medicaid spending by 30 percent. Aside from payments for the disabled and nursing home care, if Medicaid spending could be reduced by 30 percent, the savings would amount to almost $1 trillion over ten years. This saving would be shared by the beneficiaries and the taxpayers who fund Medicaid.
