New Jersey is loosing Physicians because of costs, crime, pay....Who knew?

Any Physician seeking to leave New Jersey please email me at dhadley@dbhadley.com

I can find and present you the practice you have always sought! Physicians that leave NJ are happy beyond belief. These physicians make more money, keep what they make, live in lower crime neighborhoods, find better schools for their kids, and save for retirement!

New Jersey’s Disappearing Doctors

 Posted: Sep 26, 2013 10:17 AM EDT

Updated: Sep 26, 2013 11:25 AM EDT

By Tamara Laine, @ChasingTamara

 

Neptune, New Jersey (My9NJ) -

New Jersey is experiencing a shortage of doctors. In fact, it’s projected that by 2020 the state will be about 3,000 primary care physicians short of what is needed to give optimal health care.

So why are doctors fleeing the Garden State?

According to Deborah Briggs, the President and CEO of the Council of Teaching Hospitals, New Jersey loses nearly 70% of the doctors it educates to other states. This is well below the national average of a 48% retention rate.

In other words, in 2013 New Jersey only kept about 34% of the doctors who were educated and trained in the state.

The Council of Teaching Hospitals and a nationwide study done by Merritt Hawkins, says New Jersey is just not competitive when it comes to keeping doctors in state.

The top five reasons for physicians leaving are:

·        Better salary offered outside of New Jersey

·        Cost of living in New Jersey

·        Better job/practice opportunities in desired locations outside of New Jersey

·        Taxes in New Jersey

·        Affordable Housing

Assemblywoman Amy Handlin and Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande gathered doctors, residents, hospital managers, and specialist at Jersey Shore Medical Center to discuss New Jersey’s doctor drain.

The room was filled with 40 or so doctors who also added malpractice insurance issues to the list, explaining that it’s just too expensive to start a practice here.

Obamacare will not work! Trail runs in Hawaii and Massachusetts have failed miserably!

Did Not Work in Hawaii, Does not work in Massachusetts, and it will not work as a nation in whole! So…why is Obamacare even being attempted?

 

AP/ March 12, 2009, 3:30 PM

Hawaii Ending Universal Child Health Care

Hawaii is dropping the only state universal child health care program in the United States just seven months after it launched.

Gov. Linda Lingle's administration cited budget shortfalls and other available health care options for eliminating funding for the program.

A state official said families were dropping private coverage so their children would be eligible for the subsidized plan.

"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."

State officials said Thursday they will stop giving health coverage to the 2,000 children enrolled by Nov. 1, but private partner Hawaii Medical Service Association will pay to extend their coverage through the end of the year without government support.

"We're very disappointed in the state's decision, and it came as a complete surprise to us," said Jennifer Diesman, a spokeswoman for HMSA, the state's largest health care provider. "We believe the program is working, and given Hawaii's economic uncertainty, we don't think now is the time to cut all funding for this kind of program."

Hawaii lawmakers approved the health plan in 2007 as a way to ensure every child can get basic medical help. The Keiki (child) Care program aimed to cover every child from birth to 18 years old who didn't already have health insurance - mostly immigrants and members of lower-income families.

State health officials argued that most of the children enrolled in the universal child care program previously had private health insurance, indicating that it was helping those who didn't need it.

The U.S. is one of the few western countries that does not have universal health care, although many states have government programs to help parents cover their children.

Obamacare seeks to drown Physicians in bureaucracy! Physicians seek to quit Medicine (retire, walk-away, leave…)!

Obamacare seeks to drown Physicians in bureaucracy! Physicians seek to quit Medicine (retire, walk-away, leave…)! Will Americans have coverage….Maybe….will Americans get care…NOPE!

 Critical Condition

NRO’s health-care blog.

Good Luck Finding a Doctor under Obamacare

By  Grace-Marie Turner

July 30, 2012 6:49 PM  

“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period.”

President Barack Obama,

Speech to the American Medical Association

Chicago, June 15, 2009

In truth, prospects are bleak that you will be able to keep your doctor and even bleaker that there will be enough doctors to meet demand under Obamacare.

The health overhaul law expands health insurance to millions more people without significantly increasing the number of physicians or other providers. And Obamacare has exacerbated the physician shortage because many are considering leavingthe practice of medicine altogether rather than practice under the dictates of Washington bureaucracies.

An Investor’s Business Daily/TIPP survey conducted in September of 2009 found that 45 percent of doctors said they “would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement” if the health law stands.

More than 800,000 doctors were practicing in 2006, according to government data. Projecting the poll’s finding onto that population means that 360,000 doctors would consider quitting!

And even without a mass exodus, the Association of American Medical Colleges envisions a shortageof about 160,000 doctors by 2025.

The greatest tragedy of Obamacare may be losing prematurely a generation of the most highly-trained, skilled physicians in history to a health overhaul law that the American people did everything they could to stop.

Physicians say they simply won’t practice under Obamacare rules that strip away much of their autonomy, drown them in bureaucracy, and leave them even more exposed to lawsuits.

Health care already is one of the most highly-regulated industries in the country, and doctors and nurses are forced to devote a significant amount of their day to detailed paperwork, adding to their frustration and taking away from time with patients. Reporting requirements will increase significantly under the health overhaul law, and the penalties for those who run afoul of the avalanche of new rules also will increase.

The supply of doctors will dwindle as demand for services reaches an all-time high. Fewer of those in private practice are taking patients on Medicare, and even fewer can afford to see the millions of new patients likely to be enrolled in Medicaid. 

By increasing demand for care without a comparable increase in the supply of doctors to treat the additional infusion of patients, the law will exacerbate the current physician shortage, as the New York Times reportedon Sunday.   

“In the Inland Empire, an economically depressed region in Southern California, President Obama’s health care law is expected to extend insurance coverage to more than 300,000 people by 2014,” the Times reports.

“But coverage will not necessarily translate into care: Local health experts doubt there will be enough doctors to meet the area’s needs. There are not enough now. Other places around the country, including the Mississippi Delta, Detroit and suburban Phoenix, face similar problems,” according to the article.

Shortly after the law was passed, an April 2010 survey of physicians, conducted by Athena Health and Sermo, foundthat 79 percent of physicians were less optimistic about the future of medicine; 66 percent said they would consider dropping out of government health programs; and 53 percent would consider opting out of insurance altogether.

In August of 2010, The Physicians Foundation completed another major survey of doctors and found that:

•  67% of doctors had a “somewhat” or “very” negative initial reaction to the new law
• 74% said they would take steps to change their medical practice over the next one to three years
• 60% of these doctors said that the new law will force them to close or restrict certain categories of patients: 93% will stop seeing or restrict the number of Medicaid patients they see, and 87% will close or restrict their Medicare practice.
• Ominously, 89% of physicians said that they believed that the survival of the traditional model of independent private medical practice is threatened. In fact, hospitals already ownmore than half of medical practices, and that unwelcome trend will be accelerated under the new health law.

Seniors are most at risk because they have the greatest need for medical care. The health law takes more than $700 billion out of Medicare to finance new health-insurance spending, primarily by cutting payments to physicians and Medicare Advantage health plans.

If these cuts were to stand, experts at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services say the number of hospitals, nursing homes, and hospice centers facing financial losses under the new law would jump to “roughly” 25 percent in 2030 and 40 percent by 2050. Many Medicare providers will be forced to either stop seeing Medicare patients or go bankrupt entirely.

Doctors are quietly making their plans now to restructure their practices, retire early, get another job, or otherwise protect themselves from the coming regulatory avalanche and payment cuts. 

Ultimately, the consequences of the health overhaul law will be passed along to patients through restricted access, long waits for appointments, and rationed care. It’s up to the voters in November to pull the emergency brake, that last chance to stop the Obamacare freight train.

Obamacare causes companies to drop family coverage (no more wife, husband, kids to be insured)

NO INSURANCE…..NO DOCTOR VISITS…..NO PATIENTS…..FALLING PRACTICE REVENUES! How will that allow physicians and health systems to pay the bills (staff, rent, electric, mortgage, medical school loans, etc…)

 

Bottom of Form

Aug 21, 2013, 5:13am EDT Updated: Aug 21, 2013, 7:13am EDT

UPS to drop 15,000 spouses from insurance, cites Obamacare

Carla Caldwell, Morning Edition Editor

United Parcel Service Inc. plans to remove thousands of spouses from its medical plan because they are eligible for coverage elsewhere. The Atlanta-based logistics company points to the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, as a big reason for the decision, reports Kaiser Health News.

The decision comes as many analysts are downplaying the Affordable Care Act's effect on companies such as UPS, noting that the move reflects a long-term trend of shrinking corporate medical benefits, Kaiser Health News reports. But UPS repeatedly cites Obamacare to explain the decision, adding fuel to the debate over whether it erodes traditional employer coverage, Kaiser says.

Rising medical costs, “combined with the costs associated with the Affordable Care Act, have made it increasingly difficult to continue providing the same level of health care benefits to our employees at an affordable cost,” UPS said in a memo to employees.

According to Kaiser, UPS told white-collar workers two months ago that 15,000 working spouses eligible for coverage by their own employers would be excluded from the UPS plan in 2014.

UPS expects the move, which applies to non-union U.S. workers only, to save about $60 million a year, company spokesman Andy McGowan said.

The health law requires large employers to cover employees and dependent children, but not spouses or domestic partners, Kaiser adds.

Kaiser said the Obama administration would not respond directly to UPS' statements, but said that employer coverage increased when Massachusetts implemented its own version of the health overhaul.

"The health care law will make health insurance more affordable, strengthen small businesses and make it easier for employers to provide coverage to their workers," said Joanne Peters, spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

 

Fines, taxes, threats of losing a Non-Profit status….Obamacare seeks to close Hospitals that deliver charity!

Fines, taxes, threats of losing a Non-Profit status….Obamacare seeks to close Hospitals that deliver charity!

Obamacare installs new scrutiny, fines for charitable hospitals that treat uninsured people

9:03 PM 08/08/2013

Patrick Howley

Reporter

Charitable hospitals that treat uninsured Americans will be subjected to new levels of scrutiny of their nonprofit status and could face sizable new fines under Obamacare.

A new provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, which takes effect under Obamacare, sets new standards of review and installs new financial penalties for tax-exempt charitable hospitals, which devote a minimum amount of their expenses to treat uninsured poor people. Approximately 60 percent of American hospitals are currently nonprofit.

Charity for the uninsured is one of the factors that could discourage enrollment in Obamacare, which requires all Americans to purchase heath insurance or else face new taxes themselves from the IRS.

“It requires tax-exempt hospitals to do a community needs survey and file additional paperwork with the IRS every three years. This is to prove that the charitable hospital is still needed in their geographical area — ‘needed’ as defined by Obamacare and overseen by IRS bureaucrats,” said John Kartch, spokesman for Americans for Tax Reform.

“Failure to comply, or to prove this continuing need, could result in the loss of the hospital’s tax-exempt status. The hospital would then become a for-profit venture, paying income tax — hence the positive revenue score” for the federal government, Kartch said. “Obamacare advocates turned over every rock to find as much tax money as possible.”

Additionally, the rise in the number of insured Americans under Obamacare will make it more difficult for tax-exempt hospitals to continue meeting required thresholds for treating the uninsured, driving more hospitals into the for-profit category and yielding more taxable money for the federal government.

“The requirements generally apply to any section 501(c)(3) organization that operates at least one hospital facility,” according to a “Technical Explanation” report of new Obamacare provisions prepared by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) on March 21, 2010, the day Obamacare passed.

Obamacare’s new requirements could slam hospitals with massive $50,000 fines if they fail to meet bureaucrats’ standards.

 “The hospital must disclose in its annual information report to the IRS (i.e., Form 990 and related schedules) how it is addressing the needs identified in the assessment and, if all identified needs are not addressed, the reasons why (e.g., lack of financial or human resources). Each hospital facility is required to make the assessment widely available. Failure to complete a community health needs assessment in any applicable three-year period results in a penalty on the organization of up to $50,000,” according to the JCT report.

The government is particularly interested in how and why hospitals will be providing discounted or free care to poor patients, requiring each of them to “adopt, implement, and widely publicize a written financial assistance policy” and explain the methods they use to screen applicants for assistance and how they calculate patients’ bills.

A delegate working under the Department of Health and Human Services must review the innumerable reports charitable hospitals file every three years, along with copies of their audited financial statements.

After sifting through this massive amount of information, the delegate and HHS secretary must attempt to identify trends in the hospitals’ spending and send in a comprehensive report of their findings to Congress by 2015, according to the JCT report.

Healthcare experts warn that the Obamacare’s new requirements make it almost impossible for charitable hospitals to navigate treacherous new waters.

“Nonprofit hospitals should be advised that the new PPACA requirements will play a significant role in how they operate and report, specifically when it comes to billing and collections for services provided to the uninsured. The new law leaves many gray areas and hospitals themselves will have to establish eligibility criteria for financial assistance. Following the new procedures as best they can will ensure the best chance of maintaining their tax exempt status,” wrote D. Douglas Metcalf, partner at the law firm Lewis and Roca, in a 2013 op-ed entitled “Will nonprofit hospitals disappear under Obamacare?”

The White House did not return a request for comment.

Cut in employees hours, decrease in the small business work force, and now family is removed from the employed’ s Health coverage leaving defendants on their own to be forced into OBAMACARE---Good luck with that!

Small business has several ways to survive under OBAMACARE

1)     Stay under the 50 employee mark

2)     Cut employees work hours to under 30 per week

3)     Only insure the employee, and not the employees family (since those policies are dictated to cover “kids” up to 26 years of age) EDITORS NOTE: When I was 26 years old I had already served seven years in the U.S. Army! I would rather jump off a bridge then live of my parents at 26!

AP: Small businesses look at axing family coverage when ObamaCare hits

Posted at 12:41 pm on August 8, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

As the ObamaCare mandates approach — even those purportedly postponed — employers are looking for ways to get around the ballooning costs of insurance for their employees.  Larger employers can spread the costs out better and negotiate lower rates, but smaller businesses have fewer options for retaining their benefits.  The Associated Press reports that many smaller business may abandon paid dependent coverage, forcing employees to bear the whole cost, especially for spouses:

One casualty of the new health care law may be paid coverage for families of people who work for small businesses.

Insurance companies have already warned small business customers that premiums could rise 20 percent or more in 2014 under the Affordable Care Act. That’s making some owners consider not paying for coverage for workers’ families, even though insurance is a benefit that helps companies attract and retain top talent. If more small business owners decide to stop paying for family coverage, it will accelerate a trend that started as the cost of health insurance soared in recent years. …

Premiums have been soaring for years because of the rising cost of medical care. But the ACA also has requirements that may drive premiums higher, including a tax on insurance companies that is expected to be passed along to employers. Shoop’s insurer has warned that the tax could send his premiums up more than 20 percent a year from now.

“It’s going to be very significant,” Shoop says. “We’re really going to have to do a juggling act, and so are our employees.”

The ACA requires businesses with 50 or more employees provide coverage to their workers — but family coverage is a different matter.  The mandate requires that employers offer insurance coverage for dependent children (now through age 26, which may be a driver of the increase as well), but does not require employers to cover the cost of that insurance.  Spouses don’t even get that much; the law does not require employers to include them at all, even at the full cost to the employee.  That will send them into the individual exchanges, if employers have to restrict their expenditures enough — and that means more federal outlays for subsidies, and a quicker pace to the barrels of red ink that ObamaCare will produce.

So far, the argument goes that market forces for labor will force employees of all sizes under the mandate to offer health insurance, but that’s a matter of faith rather than reason.  Smaller businesses already have trouble competing against larger businesses on benefits packages. They make up for it with better workplace environments, more satisfying work, upward mobility opportunities, or simply a way to pad the résumé for better jobs in the future.

The bottom line works in this regard, too — and if a few businesses gain an advantage on costs (which then gives them a competitive advantage on price for their products and services), their competition will soon follow, and unpaid dependent coverage will become the norm rather than the exception for all but the largest companies.  For that matter, the fines for non-coverage of employees will exceed the costs of coverage, so the entire exercise will become a waiting period to see how quickly the dam breaks rather than if. Dependent coverage may simply be the first major crack.

At least one group of employees won’t have to worry about this.  Why not?  Well, they work for the people who imposed this mess on the rest of us, so they get a pass:

The White House on Wednesday released the legal details behind its ObamaCare bailout for Members of Congress and their staffs, and if anything this rescue is worse than last week’s leaks suggested: Illegal dispensations for the ruling class, different rules for the hoi polloi.

Thanks to an amendment from Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley that Democrats enacted in 2010, the Affordable Care Act says that “the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available” to Congress are the ones offered on the ObamaCare insurance exchanges. But Members and many aides have been flipping out because they won’t qualify for ObamaCare subsidies and they’ll lose employer contributions they now receive under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, or FEHBP, which picks up about three-quarters of the average premium.

At President Obama’s personal request, the Office of Personnel Management decreed that the Members don’t have to get off the gravy train after all. The eat-your-own-cooking provision begins with the phrase “Notwithstanding any other provision of law.” The feds now interpret that clause as a loophole to mean that the Affordable Care Act did not change the 1959 law that created the FEHBP.

Since Members and staff still technically meet the definition of federal employees qualified for the FEHBP, the Administration says they’re still entitled to enroll in the FEHBP concurrently with the exchanges. The feds then “clarify”—their euphemism—that the regulatory meaning of health benefits in the FEHBP can be ObamaCare plans. Voila, taxpayers will continue to chip in $4,900 for individual and $10,000 for family coverage.

Normally, the WSJ explains, Congress includes the “Notwithstanding” language to declare a bill’s primacy over existing legislation.  This takes the curious, and self-serving, position that Congress meant to pass a bill that has no effect in relation to the FEHBP, even though Grassley’s amendment plainly meant the opposite.  It would be interesting to see how a federal court would rule on this interpretation, but I’m not sure who has standing to sue in this case.  Perhaps, oh, 300 million other taxpayers who just got relegated to second-class status by the White House?  Or maybe just the children?

 

 

Health insurance premiums are on the increase!!!! Physician’s reimbursements are decreasing! Obamacare will make it worse….you do the math!

Health Insurance premiums will increase 41% in Ohio….. a 35% increase in FL…..71% increase in Indiana! Didn’t Obama and Congress (Nancy Pelosi) our costs would “go down”? So what were they talking about? My premiums have skyrocketed, and my physician’s reimbursements have hit rock-bottom, and most likely will decrease further!

NEW YORK (CNNMoney)

Where Obamacare premiums will soar

By Tami Luhby August 6, 2013: 1:57 PM ET

 

Get ready to shell out more money for individual health insurance under Obamacare ... in some states, that is.

While many residents in New York and California may see sizable decreases in their premiums (just a note….The auther knows this statement is BULLSHIT…just saying!), Americans in many places could face significant increases if they buy insurance through state-based exchanges next year.

That's because these people live in states where insurers were allowed to sell bare-bones plans and exclude the sick, which has kept costs down. Under Obamacare, insurers must offer a package of essential benefits -- including maternity, mental health and medications -- and must cover all who apply. But more comprehensive coverage may lead to more expensive insurance plans.

Under Obamacare, all Americans must have insurance coverage starting in 2014 or face penalties of $95 or 1% of family income, whichever is greater. Enrollment in the exchanges begins October 1, with coverage kicking in in January. Plans will come in four tiers, ranging from bronze to platinum.

Some lightly regulated states ( just a note….All States should be lightly regulated, and let the market, physicians and patients take care of their own business!), including Indiana, Ohio, Florida and South Carolina, have recently released preliminary rate information highlighting steep price increases. Unlike the blue states of California and New York, these are Republican-led states that have strongly opposed the Affordable Care Act, as Obamacare is officially known.

Comparing this year's and next year's plans isn't easy because the structure of the plans is so different. Each state comes up with its own method.

Behind the numbers in 3 key states. In Florida, for instance, officials constructed a hypothetical silver-level plan based on the offerings available today. Then they looked at how the cost of that plan compares to the average silver plan that will be available on the exchange. Florida found premiums will rise between 7.6% and 58.8%, depending on the insurer. The average increase would be 35%.

The main driver of the premium increases is the Obamacare mandate that coverage be offered to everyone, said Kevin McCarty, Florida's insurance commissioner. There are just short of a million enrollees in the individual market in Florida, while 3.8 million are uninsured. The state does not allow new entrants into a "high-risk pool," which provides coverage to the sick.

"People who are in their 50s with high blood pressure have no coverage options," he said.

Ohio, meanwhile, said there would be an average increase of 41% by comparing a trade association's report of premiums for all plans available today with the average premium expected on the exchange.

Indiana officials said prices would rise an average of 72%. But they were looking at the cost of providing care, not actual premiums.

All of these rate hikes must still be reviewed by the federal government (just another note….”federal government review” yeah….that should wok! That’s sacasim folks!) and do not take into account the fact that Americans with incomes up to $45,960 for an individual and $94,200 for a family of four will be eligible for federal subsidies.

So why aren't there such big premium increases in other states? New York, for example, already required that insurers provide comprehensive coverage to all who apply. Rates there could fall by half since the pool will expand to include many younger, healthier residents under Obamacare. But New York is more the exception than the rule, experts said.

Rate hikes depend on age and gender. To give consumers a better idea of how premiums will change, CNNMoney took a look at the plans provided by one insurer: Physicians Health Plan of Northern Indiana.

Our analysis found that 21-year-old men will pay a lot more for an exchange plan, but 42-year-old women and 62-year-old men will shell out less for a silver-level plan that comes with a $2,500 deductible and a roughly $25 co-pay for office visits.

Under this scenario, a young man's monthly rate will rise to $214 on the exchange next year, up 63% from today. The woman, however, will pay $284, a drop of more than 7%, while the older man will be charged $615, a nearly 6% decrease. This is because Obamacare requires that women pay the same amount as men and does not allow insurers to charge older participants more than three times the young.

Physicians Health expects most enrollees to sign up for bronze or silver plans, which have lower monthly premiums but carry higher deductibles and co-pays, according to Jim Brunnemer, the insurer's chief financial officer. Today, its members typically buy high deductible plans.

To be sure, there are some states where premiums will fall or come in lower than expected. The Obama administration pointed to a recent Department of Health and Human Services study of 11 states with publicly available premium data that showed rates are below Congressional Budget Office projections.

"When the marketplaces open on Oct. 1, plans will have to compete side by side, and consumers will be able to choose the one that best fits their budget and needs," said Joanne Peters, a department spokeswoman.

While premiums may go up in other states, Obamacare advocates say people will receive more comprehensive coverage. Also, the law limits the amount people have to pay out-of-pocket for deductibles and co-pays to $6,350 in 2014.

"A lot of people will get more for their money," said Sarah Lueck, senior policy analyst for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "Even people paying a higher rate will benefit. It will be a big change in most states."