Senate Health Committee Hearing on Health Care Costs
The Purpose Of The Meeting, Key Participants, Key Agenda Items, And Meeting Logistics
The purpose of the meeting was to deliberate on the legislation advanced to help reduce the costs of healthcare. The meeting’s key participants included a team of 12 republicans led by Lamar Alexander from Tennessee and 11 democrats led by Patty Murray from Washington, who formed the committee membership. Other participants comprised witnesses Sean Cavanaugh, Aledade’s chief administrative officer, Benedic Ippolito, a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and Tom Nickels, the American Hospital Association’s executive vice president. Other witnesses included Elizabeth Mitchell, the Pacific Business Group on Health’s president and CEO, Frederick Isasi, Families USA executive director, and Marilyn Bartlett, the Commissioner of Securities and Insurance’s special projects coordinator.
The agendas included deliberating on bipartisan legislation to lower healthcare costs, lowering drug costs, improving transparency and access to care, and avoiding surprising patients with medical bills. The committee also focused on lessening healthcare costs for the American public, lowering the costs of prescription drugs, and improving the use of electronic health records to improve patient and doctor outcomes. Further, the committee sought to augment the 340B program to optimize the use of federal resources to improve patient eligibility and foster the provision of more comprehensive healthcare services. Besides, the committee focused on improving information technology in delivering health services while upholding patient privacy.
Ways of resolving payment disputes and increasing the usage of state-of-the-art telemedicine technology in the country’s rural regions were also discussed. Regarding the meeting logistics, the meeting was held by high profile senators and witnesses in a room equipped with adequate space and augmented by technological facilities. The facility was adequately comfortable to allow members to conduct their deliberations efficiently. Ultimately, these provisions fostered fruitful debates that engendered regarding improving healthcare costs for American citizens.
Background Information And A Description About The Committee
The United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, currently referred to as the HELP committee, was initially established as the Committee on Education in1869. Over the years, the committee gained more jurisdiction over a variety of issues, eventually being titled the HELP committee. Today, the committee’s jurisdiction covers he federal employment and labor laws, comprising those regulating employment hours and salaries, enforcing workplace and mining safety and health, combating vocational-based discrimination, and regulating management/union interactions. Further, the committee has jurisdiction over numerous Department of Health and Human Services’ programs, institutes, and agencies. These include the Food and Drug Administration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Administration on Aging, among others (U.S. Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, 2020).
A Specific Topic That Was Discussed At The Meeting And An Explanation Of The Committee Process
A specific topic in the committee meeting was protecting patients from the surprise medical bills that arise when an out-of-network care provider gives care to an insured person without their knowledge (Pollitz, 2016). The bill sought to offer such protection by cushioning patients from paying for such services, including the costs incurred from using air ambulances. It was suggested for insurers to compensate a provider after a beneficiary gets healthcare services from an in-network health facility. This provision aimed to enforce hospitals and doctors to accede to a determined service rate especially in situations of disputed billing.
The committee process entailed holding initial discussions on the intended bill and then writing comments from pertinent executive agencies. The committee received the comments and suggestions and then held hearings to gather supplementary information and opinions from non-committee specialists. The committee then untied the information to determine the best way to amend the bill. After making the relevant suggestions for amendments, the bill was then sent to the full senate. However, deliberations on implementing some of the suggested measures, such as protecting patients from surprise bills, continue even today.
Analysis Of The Key Stakeholder Positions
The bipartisan legislation was supported by the Senate leadership, including the minority and majority senate leaders. Matt Eyles, America’s Health Insurance Plans’ CEO, and president advanced that there were concerns of the government overreaching into the private health market (AHIP, 2019). By making new requirements and engaging in negotiations that solely touched on the market and neglected public programs would potentially cost taxpayers, consumers, and patients more money. Further, the legislation would obstruct beneficial, competitive negotiations by denying health insurance providers coupled with their pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) associates leverage for deliberating on lesser drug costs while ignoring how to institute regulations for the drug manufacturers protected by the patent system. The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) also decried the “benchmarking” strategy that would be used by care providers as it would foster inequality among care providers.
Key Interactions That Occurred At The Meeting
The interactions entailed discussions about cutting costs by eliminating surprise medical billing. The committee chairman Lamar, and Patty, the ranking member, released the Act for further deliberations. The committee got over 400 remarks on the draft law, and a hearing was held to collect additional feedback. The Act was then introduced formally to lessen the out-of-pocket payments the Americans would give. Afterward, the legislation was sanctioned.
Outcomes of the meeting including the specific topic focus
The Act articulates the payments Americans would give out of their pockets. Additional legislation accompanying the endorsed Act was also passed. One legislation sought to increase the legal age for buying tobacco products, while the second, named the CREATES Act, aimed at lowering the costs of generic drugs by abolishing anti-competitive activities by patented brand drug manufacturers. A conclusive decision was not reached regarding minimizing costs for patients receiving care from providers without their knowledge. To date, deliberations continue on how to effect the legislation without oppressing the industry’s major players such as insurers in the course of fostering better patient outcomes.
References
AHIP. (2019). AHIP comments on lower health care costs act. https://www.ahip.org/ahip-comments-on-lower-health-care-costs-act/
Pollitz, K. (2016). Surprise medical bills. https://www.kff.org/private-insurance/issue-brief/surprise-medical-bills/
U.S. Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. (2020). Health.help.senate.gov/about/issues/health