G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
The IPAB is just a more explicit -- and probably less onerous -- way to do something House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) proposes in his own Medicare overhaul.
The 2010 law includes a wide variety of initiatives and experiments aimed at reining in the cost of medical care.
The IPAB, whose 15 members are appointed by the president with the Senate's approval, is essentially a backstop in case those efforts don't pan out.
The board's job is to recommend cost-cutting measures each year that Medicare spending is projected to grow faster than the law's targets, starting in 2014.
Those recommendations go into effect automatically unless Congress approves an alternative way to achieve the same savings.
The law also takes fees for many in-patient and hospice services off the table until 2020, and shields reimbursements for clinical laboratories until 2016.
That leaves payments to physicians as the most obvious target, which is why the American Medical Assn. supports repealing the IPAB.
The intent of the measure, though, is to have experts look at the efforts going on across the country to make healthcare more efficient and effective, then apply those lessons to Medicare. That might include new ways to deter fraud, make better use of nurses and physicians' assistants or keep patients with chronic ailments out of emergency rooms and nursing homes.
Granted, there's some mystery about what the IPAB would do if it had to restrain Medicare spending.
But at least it's clear what the board couldn't do, and who would be making the decision. You can't say that for the Ryan plan.
http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionl...pab-the-ryan-plan-and-medicare-rationing.html
The 2010 law includes a wide variety of initiatives and experiments aimed at reining in the cost of medical care.
The IPAB, whose 15 members are appointed by the president with the Senate's approval, is essentially a backstop in case those efforts don't pan out.
The board's job is to recommend cost-cutting measures each year that Medicare spending is projected to grow faster than the law's targets, starting in 2014.
Those recommendations go into effect automatically unless Congress approves an alternative way to achieve the same savings.
The law also takes fees for many in-patient and hospice services off the table until 2020, and shields reimbursements for clinical laboratories until 2016.
That leaves payments to physicians as the most obvious target, which is why the American Medical Assn. supports repealing the IPAB.
The intent of the measure, though, is to have experts look at the efforts going on across the country to make healthcare more efficient and effective, then apply those lessons to Medicare. That might include new ways to deter fraud, make better use of nurses and physicians' assistants or keep patients with chronic ailments out of emergency rooms and nursing homes.
Granted, there's some mystery about what the IPAB would do if it had to restrain Medicare spending.
But at least it's clear what the board couldn't do, and who would be making the decision. You can't say that for the Ryan plan.
http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionl...pab-the-ryan-plan-and-medicare-rationing.html