Diberdayakan oleh Blogger.

Popular Posts Today

On 5th anniversary of health care law, no end to debate

Written By Unknown on Minggu, 22 Maret 2015 | 23.40

WASHINGTON — When President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act five years ago, he visualized a time when the political hyperbole would be silenced and ordinary people would see that the health care law improved their lives.

The White House ceremony on March 23, 2010, was an applause-filled celebration. "When I sign this bill," Obama said, "all of the overheated rhetoric over reform will finally confront the reality of reform."

But the polemic around "Obamacare" hasn't cooled much, and the permanence of the president's achievement remains in question as the nation awaits the outcome of a Supreme Court case that could jeopardize insurance for nearly 8 million people.

Here's a look at the health care law, then and now:

___

Then: 49.9 million people were uninsured in 2010, according to the Census Bureau.

Now: That's down significantly, to somewhere between 30 million and 40 million people.

The administration recently estimated that 16.4 million adults have gained insurance since the law's coverage provisions took effect.

Measuring differently, data from a large daily survey called the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index suggests a more modest impact: The uninsured rate dropped from 16.3 percent in early 2010 to 12.3 percent this year among adults 18-64, which translates to about 9.7 million fewer uninsured.

But the law's precise impact may not be clear for a few years, partly because census surveys take time.

___

Then: Insurers could deny coverage to people with health conditions or charge them higher premiums.

Now: Insurers can't ask about someone's medical history. But they can charge smokers more.

___

Then: Health insurance was available to most people, but the government didn't require them to have it.

Now: The law requires nearly all Americans to have coverage, either through an employer, a government program or by buying their own policies. The uninsured risk IRS fines.

___

Then: In April 2010, 46 percent had a favorable view of the law, while 40 percent had an unfavorable opinion, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll.

Now: Naysayers have an edge. Forty-three percent have an unfavorable opinion, while 41 percent have a favorable view, according to Kaiser's latest poll.

About 3 in 5 said the law has had no impact on their family. The rest are divided almost equally between the 19 percent who said they were helped and the 22 percent who said they have been hurt.

___

Then: Democrats ran both chambers of Congress. Nancy Pelosi was speaker of the House and Harry Reid was Senate majority leader.

Now: Republicans are back in charge after Democratic losses in the 2010 and 2014 midterm elections. Opposition to "Obamacare" was a motivator for conservative voters. Pelosi and Reid are minority leaders in their respective chambers.

___

Then: Losing health insurance was a rite of passage for young adults; insurers routinely dropped them from parental coverage.

Now: Young adults can remain on a parent's plan until they turn 26, whether or not they are students.

___

Then: People who bought their own health insurance had to pay the full cost — making it unaffordable for many.

Now: Insurance exchanges like HealthCare.gov offer subsidized coverage.

___

Then: The final legislation cut a provision that would have authorized Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about what kind of care they would want in the last stages of a serious illness.

Former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin asserted that would lead to "death panels." Palin's accusation was widely debunked, but not before it created a furor.

Now: Medicare is considering a regulation to allow payment for end-of-life counseling and has asked for public comment. Such counseling would be voluntary, and the idea has wide support in the medical community.

___

Then: At a rally near Cleveland days before the bill passed in 2010, Obama claimed employers would see premiums plummet, "which means they could give you a raise."

That year, annual premiums for employer-sponsored insurance averaged $5,049 for employee-only coverage and $13,770 for a family plan, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's employer survey.

Now: Premiums for job-based insurance have gone up.

They averaged $6,025 for employee-only coverage in 2014, the most recent year available from Kaiser. Family coverage averaged $16,834. The employee share also went up.

Supporters of the law say premiums have risen more slowly than would have otherwise been the case.

But employers have kept shifting costs to workers. The average annual deductible for single coverage was $1,217 in 2014, up from $917 in 2010.

___

Then: The 2010 Medicare trustees report estimated that spending cuts and tax increases in the health care law would extend the life of the program's giant hospital trust fund to 2029. Before, it was expected to run out in 2017.

Now: The 2014 Medicare trustees report estimated that the trust fund will be exhausted in 2030. Slowing medical inflation has helped Medicare, even as baby boomers reaching age 65 are flocking to enroll.

The health care law's cuts haven't had the dire consequences that many seniors feared. Congress has passed even more spending reductions since 2010.

Medicare's long-term future remains uncertain.

___

Then: Even before Obama signed the law, conservatives were preparing a constitutional challenge to its requirement that individuals carry health insurance. A divided Supreme Court upheld the mandate in 2012, ruling that the penalty for not complying works like a tax. However, the court gave states the option to reject the law's Medicaid expansion.

Now: A decision in the latest case brought by opponents is expected in late June.


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Potent groups take sides on bipartisan House Medicare plan

WASHINGTON — A budding bipartisan deal to shelter physicians from Medicare cuts, championed by the House's two top leaders, is drawing powerful allies including the American Medical Association and a rainbow of conservative and liberal groups.

House aides released an outline of the emerging measure late Friday, and it confirmed what lawmakers, aides and lobbyists have described for days. The package is studded with provisions that draw many Democrats, including two more years of money for the Children's Health Insurance Program and community health centers, plus language boosting Medicare costs for some beneficiaries that appeals to Republicans eager to retool the costly program's finances.

The effort to resolve a problem that has exasperated Congress for years has been pressed by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Their rare alliance has given the proposed deal momentum among lawmakers of both parties eager to be rid of the issue.

The proposal is also attracting powerful foes and its fate is not guaranteed. A House vote seems likely late next week, shortly before Congress begins a two-week spring recess, but what will happen in the Senate is less clear.

On Saturday, all 12 Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee released a letter suggesting they might oppose the plan unless House leaders change it.

They said a package extending the children's health program "would go a long way to achieving bipartisan support," and listed other concerns like its increased costs for some beneficiaries.

Without those changes, "there is no guarantee" the measure will pass the Senate, they wrote.

Citing the plan's increased Medicare premiums for high earners and other increased costs for beneficiaries, AARP — the senior citizens' lobby — said the package "is not a balanced deal for older Americans." With most of the measure financed with deeper federal deficits, the conservative Club for Growth urged lawmakers to vote "no" because it "falls woefully short" of being paid for.

The measure got a boost Friday from the liberal Families USA, which cited the importance of financing the children's health program and providing for the 8 million children it serves. "Keeping the program's funding extension is essential so we don't move backwards," said Ron Pollack, the group's executive director.

Also voicing support was Robert Wah, president of the American Medical Association, who said it was time for Congress "to seize the moment and finally put in place reforms" that would end the constant threatened cuts and strengthen Medicare.

At its core, the plan would block a 21 percent cut in doctors' Medicare fees looming April 1. It would replace a 1997 law that has threatened similar reductions for years — which Congress has repeatedly blocked — with a new formula aimed at prodding doctors to charge Medicare patients for the quality, not quantity, of care.

In a first hint of some of the measure's fine print, Friday's summary said it would let the government withhold 100 percent of any delinquent taxes providers owe from their Medicare reimbursements.

As for winners, the agreement would prolong federal payments to Tennessee hospitals that treat low-income people through 2025.

It would also help major producers of durable medical goods and prosthetic devices by penalizing low-ball bidders for Medicare business. That provision comes from a House-passed bill sponsored by Rep. Pat Tiberi, R-Ohio, whose state is home to Invacare Corp., one of the country's largest makers of home medical devices like wheelchairs.

The one-page document provides no price tags and few specifics. But as lawmakers, congressional aides and lobbyists have said for days, it would cost roughly $210 billion over a decade, with around $140 billion financed by adding to federal deficits, aides said Friday. The remaining $70 billion would be split about evenly between Medicare providers and beneficiaries.

In a letter to House Democrats on Friday, Pelosi hailed the measure for "providing certainty to our seniors and stability to providers." On Thursday, Boehner said it was a chance to "solve this problem once and for all."

According to the summary and aides familiar with details:

—About 2 percent of the country's highest-earning Medicare recipients would face higher premiums for doctor and prescription drug coverage. The higher premiums would apply to individuals earning between $134,000 and $214,000 and couples earning between $267,000 and $428,000.

—Starting in 2020, some people buying Medigap plans — they insure expenses Medicare does not cover — would pay higher out-of-pocket costs up to the Medicare deductible for doctors' coverage, currently $147 annually.

—A 3.2 percent increase in Medicare payments to hospitals in 2018 would instead be phased in over six years.

—Nursing homes, hospices and home health providers would be held to a 1 percent Medicare increase in 2018.

—Scheduled cuts in payments to states for hospitals treating poor patients would be delayed a year to 2018 but also extended through 2025.

—Programs that help poor seniors pay Medicare deductibles and help some families keep Medicaid coverage as they move from welfare to jobs would become permanent.


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Events celebrate start of maple syrup season

BOSTON — It's yet another welcome sign of spring: The start of the local maple syrup season.

The Massachusetts Maple Producers Association is celebrating its annual Maple Weekend on Saturday and Sunday.

Sugarhouses around the state are holding open houses and many restaurants are highlighting menu items made from pure maple syrup tapped in the Bay State.

The tradition of sugaring, as it is known, occurs in late winter and early spring in New England and hasn't changed much over the years.

Farmers use tubes and buckets to collect sap from sugar maple trees and then boil it down to maple syrup in sugarhouses.

The association says Massachusetts has more than 300 maple producers turning out about 50,000 gallons or more than $3 million worth of maple syrup each year.


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Paris hit by air pollution spike, halves cars on roads

PARIS — Paris will cut the number of cars on the road in half beginning Monday and is making public transit free to combat a spike in pollution that has obscured even the Eiffel Tower under a smoggy haze.

The mayor's office announced Saturday that only cars with odd-numbered plates will be permitted to drive Monday, as well as any electric or hybrid vehicles and any vehicles with more than three people. Public transit will be free, as will the electric car-sharing and bike sharing-programs

Pollution has spiked in the Paris region since Wednesday, when the city briefly had the world's dirtiest air, according to a monitoring company called Plume Labs.

Other cities in northern France affected by air pollution are also imposing various restrictions.


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Lisa Colagrossi, WABC-TV reporter, dies of brain hemorrhage at 49

Lisa Colagrossi, a reporter for ABC's flagship New York station, died Friday following a brain hemorrhage suffered while she was returning to the station after covering a house fire in Queens. She was 49.

WABC-TV colleagues were stunned by her death. They remembered Colagrossi as a tenacious reporter with a warm spirit who was a dedicated wife and hockey mom to her two sons, ages 11 and 14.

"Lisa Colagrossi embodied the 'Eyewitness News' spirit -- a straightforward reporter who told the truth, empathetic to the everyday citizens of the New York area, and demanding of those in power," said Dave Davis, president and g.m. of WABC-TV. "All of us in the Channel 7 family are in shock over her sudden death. Our attention is now focused on helping her husband and two children though this difficult time."

Colagrossi collapsed Thursday morning while riding in an WABC-TV news van. She had just finished a report for "Eyewitness News This Morning" on the house fire. A photographer who was with her in the van managed to flag down an ambulance. She was taken to New York Presbyterian Hospital but never regained consciousness. She was pronounced dead on Friday.

"Lisa will be terribly missed," said WABC-TV news director Camille Edwards. "Her bright smile and big blue eyes lit up our newsroom. She was a reporter with two wonderful qualities: grace and grit. Her 'Eyewitness News' family is overwhelmed with grief right now. Our hearts are truly broken."

Colagrossi joined WABC-TV in 2001, shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. She covered a wide range of breaking news in the tri-state area during her time at the station, notably the crash of Flight 587 over New York City in November 2001 and the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy in 2012. She had also served as a substitute anchor on various newscasts.

A native of Cleveland, Colagrossi got her start in TV as a reporter for the city's WKYC-TV. She moved on to reporting jobs at stations in Alabama and West Virginia. Before joining WABC, she was a primary news anchor for CBS affiliate WKMG-TV in Orlando, Fla.

In addition to her sons, Colagrossi's survivors include her husband, Todd, of Stamford, Conn.

© 2015 Variety Media, LLC, a subsidiary of Penske Business Media; Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

March Madness and the limits of new TV channel packages

There's a set of rituals that accompanies my preparations to watch March Madness on TV each year: tuning in CBS's "Selection Show," filling in my brackets to predict who will win, and looking up my cable operator's channel listings to figure out where on earth TruTV is on the dial.

It's a sad commentary of the diminished status this Turner-owned network, which shares TV rights to the games with CBS, TBS and TNT, occupies in my channel-cluttered mind. But the truth of the matter is that TruTV never graces my living-room screen about 360 days out of the year (a state of affairs the network cleverly satirized in a new marketing campaign).

And yet for a handful of days, TruTV does become a prime destination. It's not alone in that regard either; there's other channels that don't register in my brain most of the year. But once in a blue moon, they become must-see TV due to some "event" programming that prompt them to pop on my radar.

Think about your own viewing behavior, and my hunch is you can relate. It's a reflection of an overlooked attribute of the traditional channel bundle that people in the industry refer to as "optionality"-pay-TV subscribers' ability to check out any channel whenever they desire.

The value of optionality is about be put to the test by the emerging trend of over-the-top TV options from a la carte choices like HBO Now to so-called "skinny bundles" like Sony's Playstation Vue.

It's not that OTT doesn't provide great value in its own right by allowing budget-conscious consumers to make more targeted channel choices. But what this first wave of early adopters is reckoning with right now is how OTT limits optionality by restricting choice to a subset of the traditional channel bundle.

The research that OTT devotees love to tout is what a low percentage of all the many channels that get delivered to an average pay-TV household are actually watched: 17.5 out of 189.1 in 2014, according to Nielsen. But pay attention to the fine print: that 17.5 is defined as "consistently watched." It would be interesting to see research on how many additional channels are inconsistently watched because there's value to that viewing, too.

The customer value proposition for skinny bundles capitalizes on two powerful consumer impulses: viewer devotion to their favorite channels and viewer disgust with having to pay for channels they never watch. But what subs to Sling TV or Playstation Vue may not account for is a middle ground between these two impulses subtle enough to risk being overshadowed by the aforementioned devotion and disgust: that favorite channels likely can't cover 100% of the average viewer's content choices.

Some consumers may have calculated the reduced price of skinny bundles is worth putting up with the occasional frustration, but others may not even conscious of their need to stray beyond a subset of go-to networks until after they've dumped their pay-TV provider.

The presumption underlying OTT also seems to be that a consumers' list of favorite channels doesn't change. Negating optionality cuts off subscribers' ability to even sample a new network that could conceivably become their favorite if they were given a chance.

Remember, watching TruTV for even just a few hours doesn't just fulfill a one-time need for me to watch basketball; it exposes me to promotion for other programming on the network and opens an opportunity to make TruTV a new favorite. Come for March Madness, stay for "Barmageddon." (That said, it's worth noting that both Sling TV and Playstation Vue offer TruTV).

If and when Apple cracks the OTT market, perhaps it would be shrewd to obtain enough rights to allow its users to sample any channel whenever they wanted, but the free viewing should be available for only one day beyond a certain core group of channels. Watching a channel beyond that core group would require paying an additional surcharge.

Such functionality would occupy a nice middle ground between the skinny bundle and traditional channel package that retains some optionality while turning it into an additional revenue opportunity.

Here's another idea: Rather than presetting a group of channels into a skinny bundle, let users pick what channels they want from a broader menu of options. Call it the 20/20 package: A subscriber can pick which 20 channels they want from a a broad menu for $20, and can switch up their 20 every month. Want to make a mid-month substitution? Pay a surcharge.

As more market entrants follow in the footsteps of Sony and Dish, they would do well to evolve beyond OTT's heretofore rigid confines and restore some degree of optionality.

© 2015 Variety Media, LLC, a subsidiary of Penske Business Media; Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Techies snatching up more real estate in Southern California

LOS ANGELES — Internet moguls like Amazon's Jeff Bezos aren't the only techies snatching up real estate in Southern California.

While the mega rich from Silicon Valley have made headlines for their purchases of extravagant Los Angeles homes, the city has become increasingly appealing to a trove of angel investors and startup entrepreneurs as well.

The new buyers are drawn to the city for a mix of personal, financial and work-related reasons, the Los Angeles Times reports (http://lat.ms/1BYdMWD ). Los Angeles offers a growing tech scene, warmer weather and more space for less money.

"We've seen an uptick in buyers from the technology industry over the last several years — some moving to Los Angeles and some buying second homes here, as a kind of peaceful retreat," Charles Black, executive vice president of marketing and strategic development at Hilton & Hyland, told the Times.

The Los Angeles-Long Beach region broke into the top five metro areas by venture capital investment for the first time in 2014. There were 171 deals totaling $2.05 billion, according to National Venture Capital Association.

Some of the most high profile purchases in recent years include Bezos' $24.5 million Beverly Hills compound. Sean Parker, co-founder of Napster and an early leader at Facebook, purchased Ellen DeGeneres' Holmby Hills mansion for $55 million. Swedish tech billionaire Markus Persson, the creator of "Minecraft," topped them both when he spent $70 million for a Beverly Hills mansion fitted with a $200,000 candy room.

But the purchases of the uber rich only tell half the tale.

Entrepreneur and investor Justin Yoshimura, 25, is one example: While he primarily lives in San Francisco, he recently purchased a $2.04 million three-bedroom, three-bath home in Santa Monica that he now spends weekends in.

"Compared to San Francisco in particular, it's very cheap," he told the newspaper. "I have a yard with a pool and a beautiful home for less than what I would pay for an equivalent-sized condo in San Francisco."

Real estate agent Tami Pardee says tech buyers from Silicon Valley make up about 10 percent of her current clients. Their budget, even at a smaller scale, is high: anywhere from $2 million to $5 million for a home.

"They're buying second homes — or third or fourth homes," she said. "We're seeing it a lot."


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Icy return of boats not all its quacked up to be

The launch of the duck boats is a rite of spring, but this year even the amphibious vehicles have fallen victim to the unseasonably cold and snowy winter.

Boston Duck Tours will begin its 21st season today, but with some special measures to avoid frozen feathers. The duck boats will either not go in the water at all or make an abbreviated swim thanks to ice still clogging the Charles River.

"Any time you go in the water with ice, it's not a good idea. The Titanic is a good example," said Bob Schwartz, a spokesman for Boston Duck Tours. "It would just not be the safe thing."

The land-water tour company actually pushed back its opening date this year to try to avoid an iced-over Charles, but it wasn't enough of a delay, Schwartz said.

The average temperature in February was more than 12 degrees colder than normal, according to the National Weather Service, and March temperatures have been below normal too.

Duck Tours will be 50 percent off until the amphibious vehicles can make the full water run, which usually lasts around 20 minutes, Schwartz said. For now, if the duck boats take a dip at all, it will last around 10 minutes. If the water is not frozen where the duck boats splash in, the vehicles will make the trip around the mouth of the Charles, but not up the river.

Schwartz said not going in the water will be tough for riders.

"It's such a big draw, that's who we are," he said. "It's the thing that people really want to experience when they come."


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Some slow to embrace FASTR

A new Congressional bill that would improve public access to the roughly $60 billion in research the federal government funds each year is drawing praise from researchers who say it will accelerate innovation, and criticism from some publishers who fear it will undermine their financial model.

The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act would require each federally funded researcher to submit an electronic copy of the final text of their peer-
reviewed work and ensure that manuscript is available free online within six months.

"We are supportive of any initiative that increases transparency and collaboration, and creates widespread access to the amazing work of our biomedical researchers," said Dr. Paul J. Anderson, chief academic officer and senior vice president of research at Brigham and Women's Hospital. "The FASTR Act has the potential to speed the pace of innovation, a goal that we are all focused on, as we work to translate our research breakthroughs to clinical therapies for the ultimate benefit of our patients."

Harry Orf, senior vice president for research at Massachusetts General Hospital, said MGH also supports full disclosure of peer-reviewed research.

Currently, federally funded study results are reported to the National Institutes of Health and submitted within a year of publication to PubMed Central, a freely accessible government database.
Orf's one concern is that any additional requirements the FASTR Act entails be handled through that system to prevent "increased bureaucratic burden" on researchers.

"Researchers with a final manuscript like as many people as possible to see it," said Dr. Roger K. Pitman, a psychiatrist at MGH and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. "The issue here is more one of interaction between the federal government and journals."

Opponents to the FASTR Act include the Association of American Publishers, whose president and CEO said the bill "undermines our scientific publishing system, prioritizing simplicity over sustainability."
"The bills' short, inflexible 6- and 12-month embargoes will damage the financial viability of many scholarly journals and weaken the quality and integrity of the system, including the vital peer review process," said Tom Allen. "A goal of free public access to the world must not be allowed to eliminate the financial incentives for scholarly publishers to invest in bringing cutting-edge research to public attention."

But Heather Joseph, executive director of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, said, "Being able to provide access to this layer of information is at the core of our mission."


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More

Fed rate hike to have big impact

When the Federal Reserve finally raises interest rates, the ripple effect will hit everything from business investment to consumer borrowing, but that doesn't make it the wrong move, experts say.

"Short-term interest rates are going to go up, and that's going to affect a lot of things in the credit markets," said Paul Edelstein, director of financial economics for IHS Global Insight. "The Fed is going to make it more expensive to borrow."

Fed Chair Janet Yellen, has taken pains to be cautious, but the central bank last week gave signals that it will move slowly this year toward its first interest-rate increase since December 2008, when the economy was mired in the Great Recession and financial crisis.

One of the first and most notable ripple effects when the Fed raises rates will likely be on stock prices.

"When interest rates do go up, it is normal for that to have an effect on stock and bond markets," said Jeff Frankel, a professor at Harvard University and director of the Program in International Finance and Macroeconomics at the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The initial market reaction would likely be just a blip, but higher interest rates could lead to more volatile stock prices.

"Keeping interest rates so low for six years is part of what has sustained the rallies," he said.

Higher interest rates will spread to other loans, including mortgages, and eventually to credit cards as banks pass on higher borrowing costs to customers.

"If you want to borrow to buy a home, it's going to get more expensive," Edelstein said.

At the same time, it will become more lucrative to save, Edelstein said, as rising interest rates usually increase the yields on savings accounts.

For businesses, more expensive loans could take a bite out of investment plans.

"The more they have to spend to borrow money, the less they have to spend on other things," said David Wessel, director of the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at the Brookings Institution, "and the less they'll have to spend on big capital expenses like factories."

The effects of raising interest rates may seem largely negative, but it is important to return to normal levels, analysts say.

"It's really, really unusual for interest rates to be at zero for more than six years," Wessel said. "Interest rates were cut to zero when things were really screwed up."

The Fed has said it will only raise rates when the labor market improves and it is absolutely sure the economy can weather the storm.

"No one likes to spoil a party," Frankel said, "but you do it because you think it's necessary to keep the economy on the long term."


23.40 | 0 komentar | Read More
techieblogger.com Techie Blogger Techie Blogger