Hawaii leads in national attack against people with disabilities

Share |

The first argument the Supreme Court will hear when it begins its new term on October 3 could determine if this country’s entire disability population will be denied the protections of federal law.

We have until then to let our government know we do not support selling off "the 'social contract' that provides a decent, functioning society" to Wall Street so shareholders can make bigger profits.

Families like mine stand to lose the right to stay together, even when a child’s disabilities are so extensive the only alternative is a cage crib in a hospital somewhere. It was the Bush Administration that supported extending the social contract to children with disabilities by granting them legal rights to medical care in 1989.

Giving Wall Street corporations already caught embezzling hundreds of millions of federal dollars the ability to embezzle hundreds of billions more is insanity. But removing federal oversight now gives states the ability to restrict rights granted under federal law. The state can then legislate away the ability to appeal these corporation’s decisions, for instance, saving the companies money on legal fees while supporting increasing corporate earnings.

That is what has been happening in Hawaii, where Unitedhealth and Wellcare control two-thirds of the state’s Medicaid budget.

Last month Governor Neil Abercrombie admitted the purpose of Act 230 (formerly SB 1274) was to save Hawaii's private Medicaid contractors money on legal fees.

Act 230 goes into effect on January 1, 2012. At that time everyone enrolled in Medicaid loses the right to legal help in fighting life-threatening denials of medical services.

Last month he admitted the purpose of Act 230 (formerly SB 1274) was to save Hawaii's private Medicaid contractors money on legal fees.

Act 230 goes into effect on January 1, 2012. At that time everyone enrolled in Medicaid loses the right to legal help in fighting life-threatening denials of medical services.

With legal decisions coming down against the state only two days after the governor's "I am failing" speech, Unitedhealth continues until then to wrack up significant legal bills.

Now Abercrombie has found a way to save Unitedhealth money before January 1: by denying reimbursement for expert witnesses that testified on that child's behalf. The state has abruptly reversed a ten year old policy upheld by two previous administrations.

Honolulu attorney Rafael del Castillo represents my daughter Hannah, and five other families of my personal acquaintance. We are all fighting Unitedhealth's on-going denials of medically necessary services on behalf of our children with disabilities, services the state is paying them to provide.

The company is refusing to provide these services because they would cost too much money and that would have a negative impact on shareholder earnings. The services in all cases have been prescribed by our children's doctors.

Del Castillo asks for no money from his clients, even to pay advance costs for expert witnesses. H.R.S. 432E-6 is the state law that makes health insurance companies in Hawaii responsible for the fees incurred by the patient in appealing medical care denials, regardless of who wins the case. Del Castillo takes the chance he he will win in order to get paid. He is up to over 90% wins the last I heard.

Act 230 repeals H.R.S. 432E-6. Del Castillo says last week's move to prohibit reimbursement for expert witnesses goes "as far as the Administration could possibly go to repeal the law before the repeal takes effect on January 1."

When sister legislation to SB 1274 was introduced earlier this year, it turned out to have been drafted by attorneys for Wellcare, the other contractor for the state's disability services program. Interestingly, it would have made enrollees responsible for the legal fees of the insurance company, even when the insurance company lost.

Later the state legislature tried to make SB 1274 retroactive to January 1. Since there were twelve appeals cases pending, it was estimated at the time the measure would save Unitedhealth alone about $500,000.

Del Castillo is representing the person with disabilities in all twelve of these cases.

According to Del Castillo, "the Abercrombie Administration knows that it is making pending patient rights cases ... virtually impossible to win unless one of two things happens: The patient pays for any experts who cannot afford to work for free, or I pay for them. The Abercrombie Administration knows ... that I will have to pay for the experts out of my own pocket or lose the cases. "

It is more than beginning to look a lot like retaliation and harassment, both of which are prohibited by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

One of the questions that has to be asked now is whether Abercrombie's anti-Medicaid actions have become sufficiently blatant that our major Honolulu media will break their years-old black-out on news concerning Rafael.

Years ago he was told the insurance companies threatened to pull their media advertising if any story involving Rafael was run. When Rafael ran for Congress in 2010, neither major newspaper nor any of the TV stations mentioned it when he came in third.

The Honolulu media ran a single story in seven months concerning SB 1274. It was a television piece that aired late at night, and was a major embarrassment for Unitedhealth (their attorney told the reporter Unitedhealth was spending too much money on legal fees).

As a result, more than a quarter million people are unaware they are losing major civil rights on January 1.

What is happening now in Hawaii is symptomatic of the political power wielded by these publicly traded Medicaid contractors. The state first "disables itself", in del Castillo's words, by decimating the employment infrastructure that supported the previous fee-for-service Medicaid program. The contractors are being paid public funds to provide "managed care", so state employees become redundant.

The Medicaid contractors eventually become "too big" to fail; or more accurately, "too big to take down for criminal activity." That can be the only explanation for why companies caught stealing children's Medicaid money not only get new contracts, but get premium raises in the states from which they have embezzled funds.

State contracts to provide Medicaid services to the local disability community are extremely lucrative. They are calculated on a monthly per person basis, depending on the "risk" of the company incurring significant charges for that individual. Unitedhealth is likely receiving somewhere between $12,000 and $27,000 per month for each of Rafael's clients.

These so called "abd" contracts ("aged, blind and disabled") have an enormous impact on shareholder profits. In just under three years, Unitedhealth's Medicaid membership increased about 50%, while Medicaid revenues were up 135%, and net quarterly earnings up 318% (that is not a typo).

At least six Federal civil rights investigations have been opened in Hawaii since February 2010. The four children represented were all facing cuts in home nursing services. Between the ages of four and ten, all are medically fragile, to varying degrees technology dependent, none can eat by mouth, one is completely immobile, none of the others can walk by themselves, and three are too medically fragile to attend school with other children.

You see, our nation has a most enlightened policy towards children with disabilities. Medicaid law gives children (under 21) a legal right to services prescribed as "medically necessary" by their doctor or other provider. These become civil rights when those services involve ensuring that children can live at home with their families.

These legal and civil rights are a mandated part of any state's Medicaid program. They are expensive and they are comprehensive. The disability population may only represent twenty-eight percent of all Medicaid beneficiaries, but are allocated two-thirds of the national budget. Less than fourteen percent of the budget is spent on healthy, working age adults.

It is called the Early Periodic Screening, Detection & Treatment program, or EPSDT. While federal Medicaid regulations also mandate family education about EPSDT, the unfortunate truth is that most states are violating those regulations. Few families know what is available to them.

It is relatively easy to embezzle public money intended to provide services for children with disabilities. The kids themselves are frequently not in a position to speak up on their own behalf, and parents are often in a state of "shell shock" from caring for a child in danger of dying 24/7.

Unitedhealth, Wellcare and the state of Hawaii Department of Human Services Medicaid division have been under some sort of federal scrutiny for violating the rights of people with disabilities almost continuously since September 2009. That is less than six months after they started their $100 million per month contract with the state. In March 2010, legislative leaders were caught on tape reacting to sworn testimony that the death rate among enrollees jumped 36% in the first twelve months.

The public in Hawaii has heard nothing of any investigation into that horrendous assertion. Far more interesting, the relatively unknown governor of Hawaii is accomplishing "a de facto move toward the block-granting of Medicaid", exactly as predicted by Simon Lazarus of the National Senior Citizen Law enter three months ago.

Block-granting Medicaid, according to the Kaiser Foundation, means "that the federal government
gives states a fixed amount of money and each state decides who to cover and what services to pay for."
Sixty percent of respondents to a Kaiser poll rejected block-granting in favor of leaving the current system unchanged, whereby it is the "federal government guaranteeing coverage and setting minimum standards for benefits and eligibility."

Reagan tried to block-grant Medicaid in 1981 and failed. Clinton vetoed similar legislation that Congress had passed in 1995. Nobody has had to vote on anything to accomplish block-granting of Medicaid in Hawaii.

Even now, Hawaii is accepting bids for new state Medicaid contracts, and Wellcare and Unitedhealth are expected to be bidding. The Governor acknowledged last month knowing of the mounting list of complaints filed with federal regulators (CMS, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) against the State as well as Unitedhealth. He blamed the contract, which he inherited (true), while turning the entire Medicaid appeals process over to the same state bureaucrats already caught lying to federal regulators.

This is not over-dramatizing. CMS has caught DHS lying to them about my daughter at least twice. Rumors have it that Unitedhealth even lied to the state about losing a circuit court appeal that was actually won by one of the medically fragile children.

At the beginning of the year, CMS investigated DHS and Unitedhealth for Medicare fraud in Hawaii. The company was targeting what are called "dual eligibles", adults with disabilities who qualify for both Medicaid and Medicare. Every time the company signs up a new individual for Medicare, they are paid a bonus. A company employee made an appointment to see a severely disabled young man on Kauai, as a representative of Unitedhealth Medicaid. He was actually from Unitedhealth Medicare, and never explained to the family the purpose of the paperwork he had them sign. They only discovered it when prescriptions and services began to be denied, leading to such a severe deterioration in his condition he now requires dialysis three times a week.

It is not just Hawaii. Florida has passed legislation mandating the state's entire Medicaid population enroll into the same publicly traded companies already found embezzling from the state. Texas is also on the verge of mandating everyone on Medicaid join a managed care organization, among which will be the top publicly traded corporations.

Parents of children with disabilities in New Jersey recently received letters requiring them to sign up for Medicaid from one of four companies. Two of them were Unitedhealth (they also do business as Health Net of New Jersey), and a third was Amerigroup, another publicly traded company caught stealing from children.

The companies themselves make it difficult to track membership and revenues. Several companies do business under different names, with Unitedhealth needing thirteen pages in their year end SEC filing to list all the company aliases. I found the same publicly traded companies reporting themselves to CMS under two different categories (commercial or non-commercial), making official Medicaid statistics somewhat unreliable.

In last week's $150 million Medicaid fraud settlement, Tony West, assistant attorney general of the civil division of the U.S. Department of Justice, stated “This type of fraud uses patients as pawns in a game of corporate greed that puts cash over care, running up the bills on the very people our public health care programs are supposed to benefit."

Wellcare's $137 million Medicaid fraud settlement announced in May has not yet warranted a DOJ press release, let alone such passionate rhetoric.

In June, 29 Republican governors signed a letter to Congress asking for increased control over Medicaid budgets, supposedly to help balance local state spending.

An August letter from CMS to State Medicaid Directors contained the White House response. The governors had demanded a way to get out from under Medicaid access and participation ("maintenance of effort") requirements established first under the Recovery Act and then under the Affordable Care Act. The CMS response provided detailed instructions in how states could ignore these inconvenient regulations, removing one of the last obstacles to block-granting Medicaid out to publicly traded corporations.

Should these companies be considered "too big to fail"? How do you weigh shareholder profits against how I felt after waiting ten years for Hannah to give me my first hug?

Please sign our petition, take our poll, send a letter to your newspaper and congressional representatives. This enslaving of our country's most medically vulnerable people to corporate profits needs to end.

When Medicaid is big business, people suffer

Share |

Hawaii’s governor, the first Democrat elected in eight years, has publicly defended his decision to segregate the state’s Medicaid population as second class citizens.

Like Obama, Neil Abercrombie rode to victory last November on a great tide of hope for the future. And like Obama, he has apparently decided to side with Big Business against the civil rights of his voters.

There is something called “Federal Supremacy.” Federal law is the “supreme law of the land”, and states cannot limit legal rights defined by federal law.

One practical result is that children as well as adults with disabilities have the ability to appeal life-threatening denials of medically necessary services by their Medicaid plan. The majority of cases that reach this level involve children of all ages with disabilities, fighting for the right to live at home rather than in institutions. These home medical services are expensive, although less than what the state would pay for institutionalization.

In May, the White House unexpectedly pushed through an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief with the Supreme Court, taking the position that the protections of Federal law do not extend to Medicaid beneficiaries.

Disability law experts like Sara Rosenbaum and Simon Lazarus immediately warned of the potential “spill-over effect” if beneficiaries of the country’s “safety net programs” like Medicaid were suddenly denied the protections of the court.

Governor Abercrombie’s comments were made during an August 22 meeting called to explain why he signed a piece of legislation eerily similar to that amicus brief.

Hawaii’s S.B. 1274, signed by the Governor in July, accomplishes exactly what Lazarus warned of: it carves out the state’s entire Medicaid population (270,000) and denies them access to the protections of federal law.

The Governor openly admitted the purpose of SB 1274 was saving the state’s Medicaid contractors money on legal fees. Patterns of Medicaid providers violating federal regulations (and civil rights) he dismissed as mere “glitches”. (More information about SB 1274 as well as a link to a recording of the Governor's comments can be found here.)

The crux of SB 1274 was to repeal a state law enabling patients to challenge health insurers’ denials of care, and to be represented by an attorney in the process. The law required health insurers to pay the legal costs of the patient’s appeal when the company refused to approve medical treatments ordered by a doctor.

Seventy percent of Hawaii’s Medicaid budget is paid out to two publicly traded contractors, Unitedhealth and Wellcare. The two share a lucrative $1.2 billion a year contract to provide services to 40,000 children and adults with disabilities. Premiums are calculated individually, and because these contracts are specifically to cover home services for people with disabilities, monthly premiums can range as high as $27,000 for, say, a medically fragile child.

Publicly traded Medicaid (and Medicare) HMOs make shareholder profits by not spending premium money on medical expenses. Since the size of the Medicaid pie is the same it was before they bought the contract, services have to be cut twenty to fifty percent to support corporate profits.

State contracts with Medicaid providers like Unitedhealth and Wellcare must be approved federally (through CMS, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, part of DHHS). They mandate compliance with all state laws. Unitedhealth and Wellcare knew about Hawaii’s healthcare laws when they signed the contract, but apparently did not realize what they would cost them.

Only one thing is accomplished by deleting a state law requiring insurance companies to reimburse patients’ legal bills in disputes over medical care. It allows the company to slash services in order to increase profits, without worrying that patients have the ability to challenge them effectively.

In Hawaii, it got the publicly traded companies out from under the mounting legal bills incurred defending against life-threatening cuts in services, most of them victimizing children and seniors.

In April, Unitedhealth’s Hawaii attorney openly told a TV reporter that SB 1274 needed to be passed because the state’s "existing process is expensive, time-consuming and burdensome... just adds to the cost of healthcare when we [Unitedhealth] can ill-afford it."

What she failed to add was that her client, Unitedhealth had over a dozen cases pending against it at the time. As of this writing, she and Unitedhealth have lost every case ever filed against it under the same patient rights law she said needed to be repealed.

What is happening here in Hawaii is only the tip of the iceburg.

By the end of this year, publicly traded companies will own about 30% of Medicaid, up from 19.6% two years earlier.

Remember when Congress had to approve TARP giving the banks $700 billion back in 2008? In the end the price tag was $245 billion, almost all of which has been paid back by now.

The privatization of Medicaid and Medicare has gone from $105.3 billion in 2009, to $113.7 billion in 2010, and already stands at $65 billion for the first half of 2011. Not a penny of that $284 billion needs to be repaid.

The political hot potato neither Republicans nor Democrats are talking about is who determines how much of that money actually needs to be spent. Or even if any of this nice federal and state funding has actually been spent on real medical care for people who need it.

The amicus brief and state laws like SB 1274 clear the way for these publicly traded companies to increase profits without worrying about federal regulatory interference. Unitedhealth and Wellcare are only two of about ten publicly traded health companies together splitting about $11 billion every month in federal and state revenues for Medicaid and Medicare.

The morning after last November’s elections, Public Citizen published a study of the link between “party-shifting contests” and “unregulated third-party spending.” Twenty-two of fifty-eight new Republicans were in seven of the eight states that just settled with Wellcare for criminal Medicaid fraud claims. Unregulated third party spending in those seven states came to $11 million, of the $54 million tracked.

Eighty-five percent of the total was spent in states where six publicly traded corporations (Unitedhealth, Wellcare, Wellpoint, Centene, Amerigroup and Molina) own Medicaid contracts. Unitedhealth alone operated either Medicaid or Medicare HMOs in 28 of the 33 states where Republicans beat Democrats, and was bidding on new contracts with a 29th state at the time.

On August 5, the White House took another swipe at federal protections for people on Medicaid, and particularly those with disabilities. CMS sent a letter out telling states how to auction off their Medicaid contracts without worrying about inconvenient federal safeguards. The legal work-arounds that CMS proposes specifically target what is called “maintenance of effort.” New Medicaid contracts/programs cannot restrict existing access to program benefits.

Now they can.

The politics of Medicaid/Medicare corruption override party membership. Greed trumps ideology, apparently.

You see it as far back as 2002. That’s the year a group of Wall Street financiers bought Florida’s biggest Medicaid HMO, a little known company named Wellcare. George Soros, head of the group, was known for donating to Democrats. The financiers’ hand-picked CEO was a Bush fundraiser.
Between taking the company public in 2004 and selling out before the very public FBI raid in October 2007 (the last shares were sold only weeks earlier), the original investors turned $70 million into almost $900 million.

The whistleblower complaint that led to a dawn raid by 200 FBI agents was not unsealed until last summer, almost three years later. Reading it, however, makes it very clear that the criminally fraudulent practices that generated such excessive profits traced back to the change of ownership in 2002.

Wellcare almost appears to have been structured from the get-go as a financial experiment in how to get rich from Medicaid and Medicare.

One of the last Board Members whose involvement could be traced back to 2002 only stepped down in early 2010. It took until the fall for the company to finish getting around to suing former executives whom, it claimed, had hid their criminal actions from the Board.

In October, it was learned the company had become one of Florida’s largest political contributors between 2004 and 2007, reporting a total of $2.6 million to the state Republican Party as well as individual Republican candidates. According to a report in Health News Florida, “Tampa attorney Barry Cohen …said today the contributions were pennies on the dollar compared to the money the HMO saved in Medicaid fines -- and the profits it made.”

In November, industry analysts were predicting that “WellCare’s strong Medicaid HMO position in multiple states will enable it to grow the upcoming Medicaid expansion that is part of the new health law.”

In late April, the White House apparently backed a federal settlement with Wellcare letting the company off the hook forever. The final settlement was for about $137 million, of up to $600 million estimated embezzled from federal and state funds.

Since January, Wellcare has been outperforming the S&P 500 by up to 35%. Quarterly net earnings reported in June are 7.64% of gross premium revenue, up from 1.62% in June 2008. Quarterly gross premiums are down $160 million (from $1.64 billion to $1.49 billion) while net earnings have grown from $26.6 to $113.5 million.

There’s an old saying that you can’t know where you’re going unless you know where you’ve been. Wellcare’s first financial success was defeated because they got caught stealing. The emerging federal “hands-off” policy towards Medicaid means they, and all the other publicly traded companies feeding off the backs of our most vulnerable citizens, will no longer have to worry about getting caught. Nobody will be looking.

Families to Hawaii's governor: Yes, you have failed

Share |

Families of children with disabilities have reacted strongly to the August 22 meeting with Governor Abercrombie. The letter below was written the day following the meeting.

Dear Governor Abercrombie:

We are families whose lives have benefited from Hawaii’s Insurance Commission external review system.
The format of yesterday’s conference did not enable all of us to speak. Many of us made the extraordinary effort to meet you in June, but you did not attend.

You said yesterday that:

“I think it’s fair to say that people felt that the review panel process in place kept the insurance companies in check, and on the whole they were able to get services that they wanted to have.

The two avenues available, the Department of Human Services hearing process or the 3-person panel, and I think most people went for the 3-person panel, and felt that was satisfactory. Nobody was arguing with that, least of all Suzie or Roz or myself or for that matter the professionals at DHS, that is to say those that were left after the ranks had been decimated over the last years.”

Please explain to us: if this is so, why did you sign a bill that deprives everyone on Medicaid of this process? The U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services did not disapprove our existing process for Medicaid members, which is not an issue with the ACA. In fact, it expressly approved the inclusion of the 3-member panel option in the RFPs for QUEST and QExA (and we have not seen anything showing that DHHS approved revoking this option).

You said the denials of services that threaten the lives of our families are just “glitches.” You said the on-going regulatory violations we are experiencing are to do with the contractor. You said that if we needed a lawyer to dispute a denial, that means you are failing.

I regret to inform you that you are failing. Based on Insurance Division statistics, the number of cases filed since you took office nearly equals the number filed in the last 10 years. In fact, since you took office, over 20 cases have been filed in the external review and won by QUEST or QExA members against Evercare and HMSA QUEST. Some of those cases were previously denied by the Administrative Appeal and even had Legal Aid assistance. Apologies for failing, promises to do better, and an uncertain plan of assistance, will not help those more than twenty families as certainly as the external review did. The health plans are the only winners under SB1274.

Most of us are, right this minute, depending on a lawyer for our lives, and the lives of our children. We are in the midst of “glitches” that have spanned months, if not years. We have all experienced the failure of the DHS review system, including their failure to monitor the contractors for federal compliance.

We appreciate your intentions, but your proposals on Monday did not meet our concerns. In fact, they left us terrified for our futures and angry that you could belittle our life-and-death battles with the insurance plans as mere “glitches.” We will not rest our efforts until we have a system we can count on to prevent health plans from running over us and our children.

Son-of-a-glitch: Abercrombie defends turning state’s disabled population into second class citizens

Share |

On August 22, Governor Neil Abercrombie admitted that the purpose of SB 1274 was to save the state’s Medicaid contractors money on legal fees. He never explained how that would benefit patients.

SB 1274 deleted part of the state’s Patients Bill of Rights, depriving Hawaii’s entire Medicaid population (270,000) of access to the protections of federal law.

The Governor suggested numerous creative alternatives to legal counsel: “civilian public defenders,” “ombudspeople”, a new commission, even getting federal money to hire a patient advocate. It was clear that no work has been done on any of the ideas to replace the lawyers who have the expertise to interpret coverage contracts and to apply the law to a patient’s individual circumstances.

Just no lawyers. Unless of course the family has the money to spend on hiring one themselves.

The meeting was ostensibly to “reassure” families and advocates for the state’s disability population, in the aftermath of his signing of SB 1274. Abercrombie stated “I am failing” if anybody in Hawaii needs a lawyer to enforce their civil and legal healthcare rights.

On August 24, a Circuit Court decision was handed down against Evercare (Unitedhealth), proving even children in Hawaii need a lawyer in order to enforce civil rights under the ADA.

This is the second time since June the Circuit Court has ruled against Evercare. Both cases revolved around Unitedhealth’s cuts in benefits to medically fragile children, where percentage savings translate into thousands of dollars per month each.

Both children were fighting for the right to live at home with their families and not be put in institutions. But for their right to have a lawyer, neither child would have won.

But all this, according to Abercrombie, is just a “glitch.” No need for lawyers.

Also on August 22, Dr. Kenneth Fink, Hawaii state Medicaid Director, acknowledged in writing to the parent of one of these children that Evercare had violated federal confidentiality laws. This is the fourth such letter parents have received from Dr. Fink in less than a year.

Meanwhile the state has been unable to produce proof of Abercrombie’s statement that it was made “explicitly clear to [him] by the United States Department of Health and Human Services that the external review process we had in place did not meet the Affordable Care Act requirements.” This was a crucial ground for signing the Bill instead of vetoing it.

Supporters of the bill had tried to argue it was necessary in order to comply with an Affordable Care Act deadline of July 1. On June 21, the Governor’s office admitting to having had no contact with federal authorities on the issue, and later that week the deadline was extended to the end of the year. Nonetheless, now the Governor says there is a letter from DHHS.

Rafael del Castillo, healthcare rights attorney, asked the governor’s office following the meeting for a “copy of the DHHS correspondence explicitly stating that our existing external review is unacceptable.”

The meeting was two weeks ago, and he has received nothing to date. A recording of the meeting can be found here.

The impact of SB 1274 has been eerily similar to that of the White House-backed amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court in May.

There is something called “Federal Sovereignty.” This means that federal law is the “supreme law of the land”, and states cannot limit legal rights allowed under federal law.

In his analysis of the amicus brief, Simon Lazarus of the National Senior Citizens Law Center explained that “the rule endorsed by the DOJ brief, [carves]… safety net laws and beneficiaries out from the protection of [the] Supremacy Clause."

That is pretty much what SB 1274 has accomplished: carving out Hawaii’s Medicaid population from the protections of federal law.

Abercrombie painted the concept of turning everyone on Medicaid into second class citizens in rosey terms. He had to sign SB 1274, he said, in order to prevent federal regulators from reducing the state’s “flexibility” and “opportunity to experiment” with people’s lives.

Why the state suddenly needs to experiment with a healthcare appeals system that has functioned appropriately for more than a decade, was not explained.

The crux of SB 1274 was to repeal a state law enabling patients to challenge health insurers’ denials of care, and to be represented by an attorney in the process. The law required health insurers to pay the legal costs of the patient’s appeal when the company refuses to approve medical treatments ordered by a doctor. Back in April, Unitedhealth’s attorney openly told a TV reporter that SB 1274 needed to be passed because this "existing process is expensive, time-consuming and burdensome... just adds to the cost of healthcare when we [Unitedhealth] can ill-afford it."

What she failed to add was that her client, Unitedhealth had over a dozen cases pending against it. As of this writing, she and Unitedhealth have lost every case ever filed against it under the patient rights law she said needed to be repealed.

By April, information surfaced that the bill was actually a way to change the federally approved contract between Hawaii and two specific Medicaid contractors, Unitedhealth and Wellcare. The current contract mandates the two companies follow state law, something they knew when the signed the contracts.

The problem with privatizing Medicaid is that, once these companies get control of the system, they can start demanding modifications in their contracts. The State is in a weak position to resist because it has gutted its social service infrastructure, essentially disabling itself. Unitedhealth and Wellcare decided they do not like being told what to do by successful patients and their attorneys, so they insist on the state finding a way to get rid of the law. That way, their Medicaid premium profits are safe from needy patients who have the power to enforce their rights because their legal fees are paid.

My daughter Hannah is another medically fragile child who has needed a lawyer to protect her from the harm caused by Unitedhealth. During the meeting on August 22, the Governor promised someone would call me about the “glitches” and “logistical problems” plaguing Hannah’s medical care.

There have been no calls. Just another glitch?

Medicare already 45% privatized, Medicaid could reach 30% by year's end

Share |

The privatization of Medicaid could hit 30% by the end of 2011. Medicare's privatization has already reached 45%.

The so-called Republican war on Medicare and Medicaid was already won a couple of years ago, and the battles waged so publicly now are, in large part, a public relations diversion.

What the Republicans, and apparently the President, don't want us to see is is the amount of government health care funds - between $2 billion and $5 billion every month - that this privatization has diverted to shareholder profits.

That money could be used instead to fund anywhere between 400,000 and 1 million full time jobs in local communities across the country. Every time one of these publicly-traded companies cuts the benefits it pays out, it means jobs have been lost as nurses, home attendants, adult day care, and a host of other local companies that provide equipment and services to the disability community. Meanwhile states have been able to cut their accounting, social work, quality control, regulation monitoring and other positions when the HMO takes over these jobs as part of its contract.

Figures published by the Commonwealth Fund, combined with Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) filings, show the percentage of people receiving Medicaid who are signed up through publicly traded HMOs has gone from 19.6% in 2009 to 27.1% as of June 30, 2011.

New contracts coming into play this year will add at least 1.7 million new people, bringing privatization to 29.8%. The Affordable Care Act is expected to raise Medicaid enrollment by 16 million by 2019, and the Commonwealth Fund concluded that "given recent patterns in state contract awards to managed care plans, it is reasonable to anticipate that plans operated by publicly traded companies will enroll the majority of the expanded Medicaid population."

Of the 47 million signed up for Medicare, 21 million are enrolled in publicly traded HMOs. When compared against the total population of just Medicare's managed care and stand-alone drug benefit, that 21 million becomes 71% of the total number of enrollees in those programs.

We obviously cannot count on our elected officials to stop this insidious process by themselves. They aren't even telling us about it. Please sign our petition demanding legislation to take private profits out of Medicaid and Medicare.

Stopping the privatization of Medicaid and Medicare: Create jobs not profits

Share |

This country is in desperate need of legislation to halt the privatization of Medicaid and Medicare.

It is already costing taxpayers $11 billion a month in a subsidy or bailout or whatever you want to call it, that no one has voted on, and is the driving force behind a civil rights war going on right beneath our noses.

Throughout American history, every minority has won its equality through speaking up on is own behalf. The reason nobody knows about this particular civil rights war, is this time the minority cannot speak for itself.

They are our medically vulnerable of any age, those who because of time or disability would be living in institutions if not for Medicaid. Eighty-six percent of the national Medicaid budget is allocated for their care, to pay for the treatments and services to keep our loved ones at home with their families, or in the communities of their choice.

It may be budgeted for their care, but if it's paid to one of ten major for-profit HMOs, anywhere between twenty and fifty (or more) percent is taken out as a sort of middleman fee.

For our families, these cuts translate into reductions of sterile medical equipment, denials of anything from diapers to wheelchairs to communications devices, and reductions in those very services we need in order to keep our loved ones out of institutions. We sacrifice sleep, jobs, friends and the ability to multitask to try to compensate for cuts that were made to raise company profits.

Legislation imposing a 95% health benefits ratio (the percentage of the per person per month premium the HMO receives that is spent on actual health benefits) will do no good. The Administration effectively acknowledged the power of the criminal culture grown up around these HMOs when they gave Wellcare a "get out of jail free" card in April. No expenses they report themselves could ever be trusted.

The best legislation may be to outlaw capitation payments. Go back to a simple fee-for-service program; after all, it worked fine for forty years. All the county and state workers who lost their jobs when the HMO took over can be hired back. These are the people who are best capable of managing the care of someone who is medically vulnerable anyway, not employees of a for-profit HMO.

If the state goes back to writing the checks (more jobs), we eliminate the profit motive, while pumping $11 billion a month into local communities. That could translate into between 400,000 and 1 million jobs across the country. Every time a nurse is hired, a child or grandparent with disabilities is given forty hours a week of home nursing services, something that literally can mean the difference between life and death.

That could also be seen as a million jobs across the country that have been sacrificed in the past three years to keep profits up.

On my other website, I started a survey in January looking for information on how well states were adhering to federal Medicaid regulations. Not adhering means violating, right? While the sample remains small, every state represented so far is violating one federal regulation or another.

Yet the Supreme Court will soon be considering whether anyone signing up for Medicaid should forfeit the right to "federal Supremacy", turning about 50 million people immediately into second class citizens. The White House has also backed a series of proposed Medicaid regulations that implement this anti-regulation of the human and civil rights of our elderly, our adults and our children with disabilities.

Why isn't it child abuse to steal money intended to be spent on keeping children home with their families? Since when can the government abdicate regulatory control over the recipients of federal funds?

Millions like my daughter who have no ability to speak out in support of their own civil rights, are watching control over their life-and-death decisions being sold off to for-profit HMOs.

The first step to stop this insidious destruction of the human rights of the weakest members of our society is to let Congress and the President know that we know what they have been doing without the voters' permission. It is not over-dramatizing to say people have already died, and will continue to do so, until legislation takes the profit out of Medicaid and Medicare.

Please sign our petition here. With the pending Supreme Court decision, and final versions of those proposed new regulations coming up this fall, we need your voice now to help speak up for our children, those who will always be our children and those to whom we were children.

New Administration policy tells states how to auction off local Medicaid programs to for-profit HMOs without violating regulations

Share |

ADAPT, a national grassroots disability advocacy group, announced today its outrage over the Administration's latest attack against the human rights of America's medically vulnerable children, adults and senior citizens.

The policy was outlined in a letter sent to State Medicaid Directors by CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal regulatory agency for both Medicaid and Medicare) on Friday, August 5.

Reading between the lines, one purpose of the letter is to outline how states can sell off their Medicaid contracts to for-profit HMOs without violating any pesky federal regulations. Specifically, the letter addresses Medicaid issues only as they relate to the infamous "maintenance of effort" (MOE) regulation imposed under the Affordable Care Act.

At one point, the policy instructions are very explicit:

As detailed in our May 20, 2010 State Medicaid Director Letter, there are a variety of mechanisms available to States to rebalance their long-term support systems for persons with disabilities to achieve compliance with the ADA.

One of the points in the May 20 letter was to laud the "service delivery model" of managed care. These are the managed care contracts auctioned off to the growing for-profit HMO industry. The link to CMS' technical manual for running an honest managed care program does not appear to work any longer.

Government revenue for Medicaid and Medicare is already boosting some of these companies 23% higher for the year than the S&P 500. Unitedhealth, for instance, has successfully mislead both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times into writing that their specular profits are related to performance in their commercial (employer) division.

Over the past three years, Unitedhealth's monthly income from commercial accounts increased by $300,000,000 while their monthly revenue from the government for Medicaid and Medicare increased by $1 billion. Which sector seems more likely to have produced a 313% increase in net earnings?

Last week's Medicaid policy statement is only the latest in a series of events evident of the Obama Administration's extreme pandering to big business HMOs.

Please help us stop this terrible mis-use of public funds.

Poll: Should Medicaid and Medicare be auctioned off to for-profit HMOs?

Share |

The disability rights, civil rights, womens rights, family rights, senior rights and healthcare rights advocates need to unite to stop Medicaid and Medicare being sold off to for-profit HMOs. Please take our poll: should Medicaid and Medicare be sold to for-profit HMOs?

Unfortunately, the process has already been underway since the Bush days, reaching almost $11 billion a month in government revenues paid to for-profit HMOS. That amount is growing, for some companies as fast as twenty percent within six months.

I'm the mother of a beautiful and loving soon-to-be 12 year old who is at 24/7 risk of death from epilepsy. Hannah's life was auctioned off to one of these companies (Unitedhealth) in February 2009 so I see every day the impact of its spectacular earnings growth on her daily life. There is a huge disability community on the internet, and I see the impacts there as well. They are intensifying as more and more states are requiring Medicaid recipients with disabilities to join these for-profit HMOs.

They have taken away from us the right of choice.

The companies aren't cutting services to our children because "the budget" has been cut. In fact, if you live in Hawaii, New York, Florida, Georgia and a few other states, your for-profit Medicaid HMO got a premium raise from your state. That's an increase to the budget, not a decrease.

What's getting cut is how much of the premium your Medicaid HMO is being paid for your child that is actually being spent on medical care. The health insurance industry calls it the "Medical loss ratio," I think of it as the "Patient loss ratio", some companies are reasonably straightforward and call it the "health benefits ratio."

If you google "medical loss ratio", you will see that this little number is playing a large role in Washington politicking. I've uploaded a number of articles about it here. The point is, it represents the amount of the premium spent on actual medical costs as a percentage of the premium. If a company reports an 80% MLR to federal regulators, it means they spent only eighty percent of the money allocated for the care of our children (for example), and saved the rest by denying medically necessary services and treatments.

A twenty percent "patient loss ratio" is what these companies brazenly report to the SEC. Federal investigations have revealed companies fraudulently inflating costs by up to 299%, and so a 50% PLR estimate could be conservative.

These companies are stealing from our children, our grandparents, and our communities' most vulnerable populations.

We can't change something we don't know about, so please help us spread the word.

Romney says corporations are people, so why aren't HMO hoodlums who steal from taxpayers in jail?

Share |

If corporations are people, as Mitt Romney told a group today, then why aren't the companies caught defrauding Medicaid and Medicare in jail?

Romney's full statement, quoted in today's Huffington Post, is:

"Corporations are people, my friend... of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to the people. Where do you think it goes? Whose pockets? Whose pockets? People's pockets. Human beings my friend."

"Everything ultimately goes to the people." That sure isn't the case with the big HMOs caught defrauding the taxpayers of billions of dollars intended to provide medical services to children.

I've asked before: if you were an employer and caught an employee stealing from you, would you hire that person again? And if you did and they did it again, would you hire them back a second time...a third time....?

Why is this any different from the Administration continuing to award federal subsidies to corporations already caught stealing from the government?

PR for the health insurance industry has done a great job fogging the mirror on Medicaid and Medicare. They have framed the entire debate in terms of the skyrocketing cost of medical care, the undeserving nature of recipients, and how the public budgets for these programs should be cut.

The problem is reality conflicts rather substantially with this PR "spin."

First, let's get the idea that Medicaid is for the poor or unemployed out of the way. Two-thirds of the national budget goes to keeping children and adults with disabilities, along with the elderly, out of institutions. Our country actually has a wonderful set of laws and regulations designed to keep families together, by providing medically necessary services in the individual's home. When the Medicaid budget starts getting cut, it's this two-thirds that is affected the most, and carries the highest human toll in misery and death.

Second, we need to remember that just because expenses are reported by insurance companies to federal authorities, doesn't mean those figures are accurate. The whistleblower case against Wellcare unsealed last summer reported expenses inflated by up to 299%. In Florida, investigators discovered Unitedhealth had billed the state for more than $2 million of speech therapy for children with disabilities that never took place.

Ironically, the insurance companies use these same inflated costs to justify premium increases in their state Medicaid contracts. In fact, the companies have to show they are losing money on the state contracts to get the rate increase. But if they were losing money in all the states that have awarded increases, how are they continuing to report record profits?

In its first quarter 2011 filing with the SEC, Wellcare said that "Hawaii program rate increases ... we believe have improved the stability of the program." With the company's operating profit jumping from 13.1% to 19.3% just in the past nine months, how much of the raise is being applied towards costs is in serious question.

Meanwhile, when PR flacks and industry reps talk about cutting provider rates, they forget to mention that doing so just increases the corporate HMO's profit margin. The HMO is not a "provider" in this lingo; it has replaced the state accounting and quality control bureaucracies with its own employees. The providers are the nursing agencies, pharmacies, hospitals, medical supply companies, day care centers for people with disabilities and other small businesses that provide direct services to the people needing them.

The biggest myth of all is that the issue that needs to be addressed is how to cut budgets. In essence, we are being asked to make decisions about cutting budgets without knowing how those budgets are spent. It might seem logical to equate Medicaid budgets with how much is spent on medical care, but that leaves out the twenty-to-fifty percent profit the HMO is scooping off the top of every payment they get from the government. Right now that totals somewhere between $2 billion and $5 billion a month, depending on how much fraud is going on.

As quietly as the government has been auctioning off Medicaid and Medicare to for-profit HMOs, the White House has taken steps to let these corporations know that federal regulators won't be watching too closely how these funds are actually spent.

On April 26, the Administration backed an agreement between Wellcare, nine states and the federal government, settling all the Medicaid fraud cases against them for $137 million. In return, the government agreed not to consider Wellcare a criminal and not to hold this non-criminal past against them in any future contract negotiations.

On May 6, the Administration published proposed new Medicaid access regulations that dropped jaws across Washington and the health reform movement. According to Sara Rosenbaum, Chair of the health policy department at George Washington University, "rather than being a forceful implementation of the law, the proposed rule is a model of inaction." She went on to call it "the first sign of the administration’s refusal to intervene" in state Medicaid practices, including those concerned with how government money is being spent. She calls the rule "a model of inaction," the sole remaining purpose of which is "to establish what might charitably be characterized as an information-gathering exercise."

Even this extremely watered down proposed law goes further by exempting everyone enrolled in Medicaid HMOs from inclusion in the five year information study.

Just from the year of statistics I took in college, I know any study that excludes seventy percent of the affected population has dubious accuracy.

Then on May 26, the White House took an action that could end up turning everyone receiving Medicaid into second class citizens. Defying HHS Secretary Sebellius as well as a number of health advocacy groups, Obama backed a "friend of the court" document submitted to the Supreme Court that advocates denying anyone on Medicaid the protection of federal law.

Simon Lazarus of the National Senior Center Law Center wrote:

The brief charts a path for the Supreme Court to permit federal courts to continue routinely to apply federal supremacy to strike down state laws protecting consumers, workers, retirees, bank depositors and others, alleged by business litigants to conflict with federal laws, while arbitrarily withholding identical protection from the vulnerable populations served by Medicaid and other safety net laws.

Rosenbaum warned in Politico that "there’s “no stopping point … in terms of its spillover effects” if the Supreme Court broadly restricts individuals’ access to the courts over state implementation of such a federal program."

If Romney thinks corporations are people, then Obama's actions tell us he values these corporations over the rights of the individual.

The country's most medically vulnerable population has been auctioned off to a bunch of criminal hoodlums with no regulatory strings attached.

Please sign our petition to stop this enslavement.

Wall Street HMOs use fraud, government handouts to pad profits, outgrowing S&P 500 by 25%

Share |

After the S&P tumbled yesterday to a year-to-date loss of 10.3%, for-profit HMOs like Unitedhealth, Wellcare, Aetna and Humana remained showing a 13.7 -19.9% gain since January 1. The economy-immune growth of these companies is entirely fueled by government handouts currently running about $11 billion per month.

We have a tendency to talk about Medicaid and Medicare as if budgets and people are the same. We talk about the people who will be affected by Medicaid or Medicare cuts, under the apparent assumption that the budgets are actually paid out to the people. That is what happens in every other country that runs a government health system. It is not, however, what is happening here in the US where our government public health programs - Medicaid and Medicare - are increasingly owned by big business HMOs.

Ten for-profit HMOs control the private Medicaid/Medicare market. Revenues from commercial (employer) accounts over the past three years have been stagnant at best, but Medicaid and Medicare revenues are accounting for 85% of the $2.7 billion per month increase in total premiums received.

The problem is, as the private HMO industry has grown, so has, apparently, criminal Medicaid fraud.

Unitedhealth Group, Wellcare, Amerigroup, and a fourth HMO now merged into Centene (Vista) were all found to be stealing taxpayer money in Florida that was destined for children's health care. According to the Associated Press, the companies also participated in the state's pilot privatized Medicaid HMO plan which, in spite of numerous consumer complaints, has now been expanded statewide.

It was possible to catch this criminal fraud because this specific contract between Florida and the HMOs required 85% of the taxpayer funds received to be spent on healthcare. (Few state contracts require minimum spending amounts from Medicaid contracts).

New bills were signed into Florida law earlier this year by Governor Rick Scott requiring everyone in Medicaid to join a for-profit HMO. The bills do not stipulate any minimum spending requirement, although they do require the HMOs to refund the state anything they make in profit over 5%.

Our experiences in Hawaii with Unitedhealth and Wellcare indicate the likelihood of Florida receiving any rebated profits is laughable. This type of fraud seems to require some sort of collusion between state Medicaid bureaucrats and the corporations, for the former to turn a blind eye to the latter's illegal actions. The potential for fraud is enhanced because there are no viable sanctions for violating federal Medicaid law. (The only sanction is for the feds to withhold all Medicaid payments to a state; CMS tried that in Alaska a couple of years ago and it was considered a debacle).

Unitedhealth testified in Hawaii federal court last year they were losing money on their Medicaid contract with the state. Rumors on the street are that the company is still crying crocodile tears over its purported losses, presumably laughing all the way to bank with (pre-tax) net earnings reaching 8.1% of premium revenue.

Personally, I find it ironic that Florida has accused Unitedhealth of stealing more than $2 million from children by forging speech therapy records, when the company has steadfastly refused to provide my daughter with such therapy since September 2009.

United and Wellcare also seem to have found a way, at least in Hawaii, to ensure audits are nearly impossible. Most of their payments from the state of Hawaii were made outside of the state's auditable medical IT software system.

Recent moves by the White House are increasing the power these HMOs have over people's lives. A "friend of the court" brief submitted by the Department of Justice to the Supreme Court recommends exempting Medicaid recipients from the sovereignty of the "law of the land." A new Medicaid access rule published in the Federal Register essentially guarantees a federal "hands off" policy towards state Medicaid programs and the corporate HMOs with whom they contract.

The end result of all this? Our government is currently paying about $11 billion every month to for-profit HMOs to handle Medicaid and Medicare, with a promise not to let nasty federal regulations interfere with corporate performance. If the HMOs want to skim twenty-to-fifty percent off the top towards corporate profits, no problem. If children and adults with disabilities, who account for more than two-thirds of national Medicaid expenditures, get sicker, have to be institutionalized or even die, no problem.

It's hard to imagine the Navy paying for a battleship and being satisfied with only half of one.

The latest round of SEC filings indicate another 1.7 million people will be herded into for-profit Medicaid HMOs in the next few months. Hawaii is getting ready to put its entire Medicaid program (220,000) up for bid, with both Wellcare and United expected to be bidding. Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie is continuing his abject pandering to both corporations, regardless of the number of federal regulatory and civil rights investigations brought upon the state by the two within the past eighteen months.

This is a federal subsidy that must be stopped. Please sign our petition to put an end to President Obama's pandering to big business HMOs.

HMO spends $627 million in public funds defending against Federal criminal fraud charges

Share |

A company whose income derives entirely from taxpayer funds has spent $627.4 million of our money defending itself against federal criminal fraud charges. The figures are reported in Wellcare's SEC filings between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2011.

Yet, while the S&P 500 is down 10.34% year to date, Wellcare's stock remains up 16.74% even after today's spectacular plummit.

Wellcare is not the only for-profit managed care company continuing to show significant year to date growth. Unitedhealth Group is up 16.44%, Humana up 19.93%, while Aetna, Coventry, Wellpoint, and Centene are all higher year to date.

Ironically, growth in all these companies has been fueled by federal and state tax-payer money. Total Medicare and Medicaid payouts to for-profit HMOs are running almost $11 billion per month. Life and death decisions for more than 33 million Americans, most of them medically vulnerable, have been sold off to these publicly funded HMOs, whose decision making is based more on shareholder profit than medical need.

The Affordable Care Act has tried to put in place minimum spending requirements of 80 to 85% for commercial and Medicare HMOs. Few states require any minimum spending on Medicaid contracts. Limited regulation and an absence of any effective enforcement of how taxpayer money is spent has led to fraudulent reporting of actual medical costs by up to 299%.

Somewhere between $2 billion and $6 billion a month is saved from government-paid premiums for Medicaid and Medicare by the HMOs simply refusing to authorize needed services.

Which brings us back to Wellcare's $627 million in taxpayer money spent defending itself against charges it has been stealing from us taxpayers.

Am I the only person who has a problem with this?

Administration pandering to big business insurers is like hiring a pedophile as a babysitter

Share |

A proposed Medicaid regulation published in the Federal Register on May 6 takes on new ominous overtones in light of the recent Administration-backed policy brief submitted to the Supreme Court.

Sara Rosenbaum, head of the Health Policy Department at George Washington University, calls the rule "a model of inaction," a purpose of which is "to establish what might charitably be characterized as an information-gathering exercise." Writing in the New England Journal of Medicine, Rosenbaum continues

Even this information-gathering exercise is wanting. The proposed rule exempts Medicaid managed care from review, despite the fact that the access statute protects all beneficiaries, including the 70% who receive their care through managed care plans. Moreover, the proposed rule gives states an inordinately long 5 years to measure access within their residual fee-for-service programs, which overwhelmingly serve the beneficiaries with the most severe physical and mental health conditions.

Why would federal policy exclude seventy percent of Medicaid beneficiaries from any evaluation of how well a state's Medicaid program is conforming to federal law? That would be like taking a census and excluding seventy percent of the population. The proposed rule explains that managed care organizations are already covered under a different section of federal law, and that is sufficient to ensure their compliance.

Managed care contracts are being farmed out across the country to provide services to children, families, the elderly and people with disabilities. These are the people who would be unrepresented in these state evaluations, allowing for-profit corporations to continue to abuse children and steal their federal funding with impunity.

Six federal civil rights investigations, a state-issued "corrective action plan", and extensive reporting to CMS of violations of federal regulations have shown, at least in Hawaii, that managed care Medicaid insurers ignore federal laws with impunity.

Of the six federal civil rights actions, at least four have targeted one company, Unitedhealthcare, which operates in Hawaii as "Evercare." The company reported a 20% increase in quarterly Medicaid/Medicare revenues between September 20, 2010 and March 31, 2011, during which Medicaid/medicare membership only increased 5%. One quarter of the company's policyholders generate 55% of the company's premium revenues.

New Jersey has recently announced they are turning all their Medicaid families over to mandatory "managed care organizations." Two of the four providers are Unitedhealthcare and Amerigroup, both with documented histories of criminal Medicaid fraud investigations.

Wellcare reached a settlement over criminal Medicaid fraud accusations in every state in which they operated in May. They apparently have retained all these contracts, and even got rate increases of up to 3% from four of the states.

The company told the SEC that in exchange for their settlement over Medicaid fraud, the federal government had agreed "to release and refrain from instituting, directing or maintaining any administrative action seeking to exclude the Company from Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs." Quite a "get out of jail free" card, but also in keeping with the pattern of Administration pandering to big business health insurers.

CMS, the division of HHS that administers Medicaid and Medicare, is a watchdog with no teeth: they can document violations of federal law but cannot enforce them. The only action CMS can take against a state is to withhold the federal payment share. That was tried in Alaska and backfired, creating more human misery than it alleviated.

Rosenbaum cautions at the end of her article that regardless of what form the potential regulation takes in the end,

it would not even remotely amount to the type of comprehensive federal enforcement scheme that would justify a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn generations of Constitutional precedent and foreclose access to the courts by millions of beneficiaries and the health care providers who serve them.

Would any parent in their right mind hire a pedophile as a babysitter? Why is President Obama pushing a federal policy "arguing that the courts are closed to private individuals where Medicaid-access litigation is concerned" while surreptitiously shoveling millions of medically vulnerable Americans into programs run by apparently criminal companies?

It is uncannily similar to what has happened here in Hawaii, where turning over the state's Medicaid waiver program to two for-profit corporations produced a 36% rise in the death rate within the first year. State legislation sitting on our governor's desk would deprive everyone on Medicaid of external appeals of medical denials from their health insurer. That legislation has been openly supported by Unitedhealthcare and Wellcare, the latter even admitting in court to having written a sister bill. A Unitedhealthcare attorney moaned on TV that these appeals (almost all of which are finding on behalf of the children) were costing the company too much money.

If all of this comes to pass as federal Medicaid policy, there will be no record of how badly and corruptly corporations are saving money by deciding services based on profit not need.

Please sign our petition. We have to stop this from happening.

Death by Medicaid: the Republican dream of unbridled profit-taking at work in Florida and Hawaii

Share |

It's all about the privatization of Medicaid and Medicare. Along with CHIP, together they churned more than $887 billion in state and federal funds directly into the American economy in 2009, and private insurance companies saw a gold mine waiting to be exploited.

In 2010, just nine private health insurers reported getting their hands on more than $111 billion of it, up 35% over 2009. The companies have put together a self-serving body of research demonstrating how converting state Medicaid enrollees into privatized Medicaid contract policyholders saves the state money while proving better service. All of these plans are managed care.

The state and the insurer agree on a table of "risk" values and apply it to each policyholder. That amount, which can vary between $200 and $29,000 a month (based on individual medical needs), is called the capitation payment. Every Medicaid policyholder has an personal, individual budget that the contractor is paid monthly by the state, using a combination of local and federal funds.

How much of the capitation payment is spent on actual medical costs is called the Medical Loss Ratio (or Health Benefits Ratio). Private insurance companies make their money by not spending the money that they are paid in premiums.

If you are paying your private health insurer $250 a month for your coverage, you likely are not keeping track of how much of it is spent. If you suddenly develop a serious or life-threatening condition, you know the insurer will keep paying the costs (at least up to a point) regardless of how much it exceeds your $250 per month payment. The company is taking all the $250 per month payments from tens of millions of members, and there is always plenty left over to take care of higher needs here or there.

The perspective should be a little different, however, when the insurance company is being paid $29,000 a month to keep a medically fragile child at home with their family, anywhere from two-thirds to three-quarters of which are federal dollars.

Even if there were stringent regulations in place (which there are not) as to how much of these federal and state funds have to be spent on actual medical costs, it would make no difference. An FBI sting operation against health insurer Wellcare "videotaped a meeting of top executives in January 2007. Florida Medicaid officials had demanded an accounting of WellCare's behavioral health spending, and the company knew it was only about half of what the state believed. The solution: simply double every charge." The former Wellcare employee who wore video cameras and microphones to work every day estimated that the fraud against Florida Medicaid ranged in the $400 to $600 million range.

What somehow remained unmentioned was the fact that this type of Medicaid fraud, which Hellein's tapes show is openly shared between companies such as Wellcare, Amerigroup and UnitedHealth Group, is ongoing. Fines and Deferred Prosecution Agreements do not really seem to put a dent into it, in fact. Wellcare was paid $890 million by Florida for the same Medicaid contracts in 2010, and got a 2.5% to 3% rate increase in September. They claimed to spend 87% of that on actual medical costs, but Hellein's audiovisual evidence makes it clear these figures easily have little relation to reality.

Besides, they made around $600 million from their Hawaii contract, before getting a raise last summer. The Hawaii contract does not stipulate any minimum Medical Loss Ratio. The individual policyholders are all elderly, blind and/or disabled adults and children, so are not likely to be keeping track.

Hawaii, in fact, is an excellent example of how Republicans envision Medicaid functioning. Hawaii created two Medicaid populations: a small one of about 40,000 "aged, blind and disabled" adults and children who had special medical needs; and a bigger one for the other 267,000 people signed up for regular Medicaid. The small one gets more than seventy percent of the state's total $1.7 billion annual Medicaid budget, which is divided between two contract holders: UnitedHealth Group and Wellcare.

Former Republican Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle was responsible for moving the state's "aged, blind and disabled" population overnight from a fee-for-service system to a privatized managed care plan operated by two out-of-state for-profit corporations. Sworn testimony was videotaped last year stating this group had experienced a 36% increase in deaths within the first year after UnitedHealth and Wellcare took over.

While Wellcare's SEC filings bemoan the company's high Medical Loss Ratio, UnitedHealth celebrated its lowest rate in five years in the fourth quarter of 2010. Company wide, they got it down below 80%.

Apply that to their 2010 Medicaid premium earnings from Hawaii, also about $600,000,000, and it means $120,000,000 in operating profit was generated for the company. Wellcare would have cleared at least another $75,000,000, and there is no good reason to assume their MLR here would be as low as it is on contracts like Florida's where it has been stipulated.

For Wall Street, this was very good news. For the forty thousand or so elderly and children, as well as adults with disabilities, it was very bad news. Their service budgets were cut by that amount. Life-saving medications they had been taking for years were suddenly denied. Home nursing services were abruptly slashed.

To look at this another way, the State of Hawaii could hand over those two Medicaid contracts to local, non-profit corporations, keep services at the current level, and cut out the middleman profit of about $195 million a year. Sure, a portion would have to be paid out to hire back 200 - 300 state workers who have lost their jobs directly or indirectly from the privatization, but that would be funds going right back into the state economy.

But even with a new Democratic Governor, Hawaii's privatized Medicaid system for the "aged, blind and disabled" population is remaining privatized. UnitedHealth and Wellcare both have numerable complaints pending against them with federal regulators, and as recently as yesterday continue brazenly to violate federal regulations. The state is looking to save $100 million from Medicaid over the next two years. Why isn't even our Democratic governor trying to cut big business profiteering out of Medicaid?

In part, that seems to be because the national winds supporting Medicaid's privatization are so subtle.

Florida's new Republican Governor was the CEO of a healthcare corporation found guilty of the biggest Medicare fraud in US history. He is a strong believer in the privatization of Medicaid. In February, Governor Rick Scott announced a plan "to transfer Florida's Medicaid recipients into privately run managed-care programs. Doing so would save the state nearly $4 billion over the next two years, he says."

As of June 2009, almost a million Floridians already received their Medicaid from "privately run managed-care programs." These programs had earned the state a reputation as the "Medicaid fraud capital of the world", and FierceHealthIT said last summer that "Medicare and Medicaid fraud might as well be the state sport of Florida." In July the Florida Attorney General's office announced it had received permission to mine Medicaid claims to find fraud. Two months ago, Florida's Medicaid and Public Assistance Fraud Strike Force "estimated Medicaid fraud costs taxpayers more than $2 billion a year. That's about 10 percent of the $20 billion Medicaid budget, which happens to be the fastest growing segment of Florida's $70 billion budget."

If Florida has a $20 billion annual Medicaid budget, and two-thirds of it goes to help children, the elderly and people with disabilities (which is an approximate national average), and 56% of the Medicaid population is enrolled in privatized managed care run by for-profit corporations, and they are averaging an 85% Medical Loss Ratio, then somewhere around $1.1 billion is being skimmed off the top of the contracts as operating profit.

Governor Scott now says the state Disability Division is $174 million in the hole, and he's making it back by cutting home services to the state's disability population. Individuals are expected to see cuts ranging between fifteen percent and forty percent.

Profits to the big providers are not being touched, because that is not the "free enterprise" way. As Florida's recently elected Republican Congressman Allen West said, free enterprise is the solution to healthcare reform and what he calls "the bureaucratic nanny state."

Apparently taking money that is given away by the bureaucratic nanny state is OK, as long as it is not spent.

Please sign our petition to stop handing federal and state Medicaid dollars over to companies who won't spend it.

UnitedHealth, Wellcare and Hawaii Senate Bill 1274: a true Wall Street romance

Share |

Hawaii SB 1274 remains alive, along with its assault on the health care rights of almost everyone with employer-paid or Medicaid insurance. Raphael Del Castillo sent out this information at 4 am today:

I just came from the decision making by the House Comm on Finance, which passed SB1274 on with amendments. It was disappointing and frustrating. Health chair Ryan Yamane came to tell the committee that they were waiting for “language” to preserve the consumer protections in our existing law, but have not received any (my language recommendations don’t count – who knows, make up your own reasons). They are waiting on the Insurance Commissioner and the Abercrombie Administration. THERE ISN’T GOING TO BE ANY LANGUAGE FROM THE COMMISSIONER. IF HE DOES NOT SUBMIT ANY, THEY WILL PASS THE BILL AS IT STANDS, SO WHY WOULD HE SUBMIT ANY?

MORE ALARMING STILL IS THE FACT THAT NO LEGISLATOR HAS YET RESPONDED TO THE OBJECTIONS TO THE EXCLUSION OF MEDICAID MEMBERS FROM THE EXTERNAL REVIEW. THEY ARE NOT LISTENING TO ME. NEVERCARE IS A LOT RICHER.

MEDICAID MEMBERS, THIS MEANS THAT IF YOU DO NOT PROTEST, YOU WILL LOSE YOUR RIGHTS NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS (UNLESS THE BILL IS KILLED).

Del Castillo is asking for an immediate email campaign to President Obama.

sit down and send an email to the President, president@whitehouse.gov (with cc: to all of the addresses below) asking him the following two things: Why is the Obama Administration conspiring with health insurers

1. To DENY Hawaii consumers their long-established protections?
2. To DEPRIVE the poorest and most vulnerable of Hawaii’s people of the protections they now have against the richest health insurance company in the world?

Put this in the subject box: “NO ON SB 1274”

The petition distributed through change.org has also been updated to include President Obama, as well as the governor and Hawaii State Senate.

EPSDT and our kids' "best possible functional level"

If you're a parent like me who has been told (by either the schools or Medicaid) that your child doesn't need the best treatment, only enough to get by, then you are going to be very happy about new federal regulatory language.


Federal regulatory law makes it clear that the purpose of EPSDT is to restore out children to their "best possible functional level."

EPSDT stands for Early Periodic Screening Detection and Treatment.   It requires that children on Medicaid under the age of 21 receive all medically necessary screening, preventative, diagnostic, and rehabilitatve services" that are medically necessary.

Section 440.130 of Title 42 defines "preventative services" as "services provided by a physician or other licensed practitioner of the healting arts to...prolong life; and promote physican and mental health and efficiency."

It defines "rehabilitative services" as "any medical or remedial services recommended by a physician or other licensed practitioner of the healing arts...for maximum reduction of physical or mental disability and restoration of a recipient to his best possible functional level."

Wow.  That does not leave states a lot of wiggle room in denying services under EPSDT.

How easy it is for a state to violate a child's legal rights

Two decisions handed down recently by a Federal Judge in Georgia could have a major impact on how our children are evaluated for and receive services.  It's a positive impact, that actually gives parents and caregivers, together with their childs' treating doctors and therapists, control over the decision-making process.

EPSDT (Early Periodic Screening, Detection and Treatment) has been around for years, providing all children on Medicaid under the age of 21 with any treatment a doctor says is "medically necessary."

But it's been an equally long process of court cases to convince states, often one by one by means of class action suits, to meet this legal requirement.

The two decisions in Georgia make it clear that decisions over treatment made by treating practitioners take precedence over state agency and/or contractor decisions that have no grounding in medical necessity.

The decisions also make it clear that EPSDT provides our children with a legal right that is "individually enforceable."  What that means is that any of us whose children have suffered harmful service cuts due to bureaucratic decision-makers can hold the state as well as any private contractors providing Medicaid agency services responsible and accountable. 

Here in Hawaii, we have a perfect example of how insidiously the state, and the two for-profit insurance companies contracted to provide EPSDT and Medicaid waiver services can violate our kids' legal rights.

First, there is a federal law (42 USC 1396a(a)43) that requires the state and its Medicaid delivery companies to make sure everyone eligible for EPSDT is educated on all the services they can receive through EPSDT. 

Hawaii's two for-profit health insurance companies, which signed contracts with the state worth together about $2.5 billion are Evercare, owned by Unitedhealth, and Ohana, owned by Wellcare.

Here is what Evercare has to say about EPSDT in their membership manual that is available online:

What are EPSDT services?
Children under 21 years of age may receive EPSDT services.
EPSDT services include shots and screenings that children
need to stay healthy. Your Service Coordinator can talk to
you about the EPSDT services your child needs and help
you schedule appointments.

Here is what Ohana tells its clients about EPSDT in their online membership manual:

EPSDT (Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment) Well-Child Visits
Regular health exams for children. They are used to find and treat medical problems.

WELL-CHILD CARE AND EPSDT (EARLY and PERIODIC SCREENING,
DIAGNOSIS and TREATMENT) SERVICES

‘Ohana covers well-child checkups for all members from age 0 to 21. We want to make sure kids visit their PCPs at an early age. This is important for a child’s health later in life.

Neither manual meets federal legal requirements for EPSDT notification. 

Hopefully somebody will notice soon and do something about it.

CDREA calls for Hawaii state audit of DOE spending of Medicaid funds

Children's Disability Rights Education Association President Summer Harrison and Vice President Linda Nuland-Ames on Thursday called for a full state audit of Medicaid spending by the Hawaii Department of Education. Harrison and Nuland-Ames were at the annual Kauai DD Committee Legislative Forum, presenting the results of their past several months of research into Hawaii's Medicaid programs. The subject of the DOE furlough Fridays, the first of which was due to happen the next day, came up. Harrison pointed out that DOE services that were paid for by Medicaid could still take place on Fridays. Harrison had established that her daughter's paraprofessional service through Nursefinders was likely a Medicaid financed service since it was to continue on the furlough Fridays. Nuland-Ames asked how many parents at the meeting knew that DOE could bill Medicaid directly on behalf of their children. No one was. A few years ago, Medicaid told inquisitive parents that it wasn't any of their business, Nuland-Ames noted. Within the past week, Harrison had contacted her daughter's school to demand an accounting of all services and items billed to Medicaid by DOE on Hannah's behalf. She asked for the accounting by Friday, October 23. Her district office emailed to say she would be hearing from someone, but as of the writing of this post, still hasn't responded. Some but not all parents remembered the letter they had received from DOE in December 2008 stating that failure to return the letter would be permission for DOE to bill Medicaid on their children's behalf. According to research done by CDREA and published on their website, it would appear that the Hawaii DOE letter meets none of the federal requirements for parental notification of and permission for DOE billing of Medicaid on their child's behalf. Harrison reminded the state legislators in attendance of the Hawaii auditor's report on DOE's procurement office, published in February 2009. The auditor's office

revealed an organizational culture of disregard for procurement rules in the Office of School Facilities and Support Services (formerly known as the Office of Business Services and referred to herein as the “Office of School Facilities”). That culture has allowed office directors, managers, and staff to believe they have the discretion to unilaterally determine whether compliance with procurement laws and rules is in the best interest of the department.

She pointed out that while she didn't know if any Medicaid billing went through the procurement office, or if that was done someplace else in DOE, the fact that the schools couldn't give a parent an accounting within five days raised concerns. Given the current economy, the public furor over furlough Fridays which are intended to help the governor balance the state budget, and the issues raised about Hawaii's two for-profit Medicaid companies, CDREA's request for a state audit of DOE use of Medicaid funding was met favorably.