FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2334148082> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2334148082 endingPage "38" @default.
• W2334148082 startingPage "11" @default.
• W2334148082 abstract "Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Government NewsFull AccessBush’s Proposed Health Budget Inadequate, Committee SaysKate MulliganKate MulliganSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:5 Apr 2002https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.37.7.0011“But” was the word that resounded most frequently at the March 13 meeting of the House Energy and Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Health and Environment about the Bush administration’s health care proposals.Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Tommy G. Thompson, “[Y]ou rightly invest generously in the National Institutes of Health [NIH], which supports research into new medical treatments, but you cut funding for the Agency for Health Research and Quality [AHRQ], which plays a critical role in communicating that research to the medical community and the public.”Many committee members commended the proposed doubling of the NIH budget over five years and the increase of 6.3 percent in the HHS budget for Fiscal 2003 over the previous year. The largest percentage increase will be in funding for bioterrorism efforts. The figure for Fiscal 2003 in the HHS budget is $4.3 billion, a 45 percent increase over Fiscal 2002.The members followed their praise, however, with concerns about inadequate funding for prescription drugs for the elderly, the use of tax credits to help the uninsured (see Original article: page 4), and cuts to programs such as health professions grants (72 percent decrease) and rural health programs (42 percent decrease).Even Republicans joined in on the attack. Rep. Greg Ganske (R-Iowa) said that Iowa hospitals were “hemorrhaging red ink” because of inadequate Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement for rural hospitals. He asked, “What good will it do for seniors in rural areas to have prescription drugs if there are no hospitals to serve them?”Rep. Charles Norwood (R-Ga.) argued against the administration’s position that any increases in the health budget must be “budget neutral,” that is, offset by equivalent cuts in other areas of that budget. He expressed concern about the exodus of physicians from the Medicare system because of recent reimbursement cuts and suggested that the administration’s entire budget be searched for potential savings.Prescription Drugs for MedicareThe administration’s proposals for prescription-drug coverage came under the heaviest attack. President Bush proposed spending $77 billion over 10 years to provide prescription drugs to low-income Medicare beneficiaries and $116 billion for unspecified Medicare modernization efforts, including additional prescription-drug coverage. A discount-card program for prescription drugs would offer Medicare-endorsed discount cards to assist beneficiaries with prescription-drug costs.Model Medicaid drug waivers would allow states to offer drug coverage through Medicaid to individuals with incomes up to 200 percent of the federal poverty level. States receiving drug waivers would be required to do so at no additional cost to the federal government. States could also use waivers to provide drug benefits through Medicare-endorsed prescription-drug cards or use cost-control methods such as prior authorization.Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.) called the amount of federal money proposed for drug coverage “woefully inadequate.” Brown charged that the drug proposal represented an effort to “go after” entitlements.He said, “You are using this budget to means-test Medicare and provide drug coverage outside the Medicare benefits package, knowing full well that Medicare’s future depends on its ability to deliver comprehensive health coverage and its availability to all seniors, regardless of income.”The most recent projections from the Congressional Budget Office show that national spending on prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries over the next 10 years will reach $1.8 trillion, about 10 times more than what Bush proposed for Medicare reform and a drug benefit.Medicare Managed CareBush proposed $4.1 billion over three years to increase the rates paid to insurance companies that participate in Medicare+Choice, the Medicare managed care program. Companies have been pulling out of the program, leading to decreasing benefits and increasing copayments (Psychiatric News, December 21, 2001; January 4).In response to a request for an assurance that an influx of funds to the program would prevent further erosion in the benefits offered by the companies and in their participation, Thompson replied that although such an assurance is legally impossible, the companies were exiting because they could not afford to participate at current reimbursement rates.Thompson said, “One hundred and ninety billion dollars [the total of all increases in Medicare spending over 10 years] is a giant first step. Let’s begin.”He added that in response to a February letter from Reps. William Thomas (R-Calif.) and Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.), HHS was developing a list of recommendations about budget items that could be cut to offset proposed increases in physician reimbursement under Medicare.As of press time, the House had passed a budget resolution that would allocate $350 billion over 10 years for a Medicare drug benefit and a Medicare reform proposal, and the Senate was expected to pass a resolution with a larger Medicare figure.“The President’s Fiscal Year 2003 Budget: An Overview of Health Programs” is posted on the Web at www.kff.org/content/2002/4041/. ▪ ISSUES NewArchived" @default.
• W2334148082 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2334148082 creator A5018974735 @default.
• W2334148082 date "2002-04-05" @default.
• W2334148082 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2334148082 title "Bush’s Proposed Health Budget Inadequate, Committee Says" @default.
• W2334148082 doi "https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.37.7.0011" @default.
• W2334148082 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2334148082 type Work @default.
• W2334148082 sameAs 2334148082 @default.
• W2334148082 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2334148082 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2334148082 hasAuthorship W2334148082A5018974735 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C108170787 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C181907467 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C2776534028 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C2779999868 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C2780765947 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C3116431 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C10138342 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C108170787 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C138885662 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C144024400 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C144133560 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C160735492 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C17744445 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C181907467 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C199539241 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C2776534028 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C2778137410 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C2779999868 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C2780765947 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C3116431 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C36289849 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C41895202 @default.
• W2334148082 hasConceptScore W2334148082C71924100 @default.
• W2334148082 hasIssue "7" @default.
• W2334148082 hasLocation W23341480821 @default.
• W2334148082 hasOpenAccess W2334148082 @default.
• W2334148082 hasPrimaryLocation W23341480821 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2014274529 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2043181794 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2356293943 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2510100913 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2619562127 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2917299354 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W2917503600 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W3048370860 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W3094726970 @default.
• W2334148082 hasRelatedWork W780757368 @default.
• W2334148082 hasVolume "37" @default.
• W2334148082 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2334148082 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2334148082 magId "2334148082" @default.
• W2334148082 workType "article" @default.