A Quote by Kathleen Sebelius

The way the law is written, people who are under 250 percent of poverty, who have a marketplace plan, also are eligible to have some of their deductible and co-pay expenses paid through cost-sharing. Insurance companies basically front the money and are reimbursed by the federal government, by HHS.
People in the individual marketplace should have more options. The plan that we - the discussion draft that we have out, actually opens up for people who are zero percent to 100 percent of the federal poverty level, not eligible for Medicaid, would open up the opportunity for them to purchase insurance with help from the federal government.
Republican House members, including Tom Price, when he was still in the Republican House, sued HHS, suggesting that payment to insurance companies for cost-sharing exceeded the authority of HHS. That case was basically withdrawn when President Trump was elected, in hopes that the Affordable Care Act would be repealed - but we're back to the law.
The secretary actually already has a good deal of authority within the confines of the Affordable Care Act. Step one really is a question of whether or not HHS will continue to reimburse insurance companies for cost-sharing expenses.
The term 'cost shifting,' as I use it, refers to those items in a university's budget that used to be reimbursed by the federal government but are no longer paid for by them.
If you look at the expenses of a great pharmaceutical company, they pay between about 10 to 15 percent of their expenses for research, but they use 30 to 40 percent of their incomes for marketing and promotion. It is not completely wrong that they spend so much, but it is not correct to say that there is a direct connection between the price of drugs and the cost of research. It could be more between the cost of marketing and the cost of the drugs.
We ought to follow through on an idea that was first proposed by President Clinton to allow people over the age of 55 who are not eligible for Medicare into the Medicare system, at cost, and below cost for those who can't afford it. That takes care of a significant number of the people who don't have health insurance.
Government is taking 40 percent of the GDP. And that's at the state, local and federal level. President Obama has taken government spending at the federal level from 20 percent to 25 percent. Look, at some point, you cease being a free economy, and you become a government economy. And we've got to stop that.
One of the biggest reasons for higher medical costs is that somebody else is paying those costs, whether an insurance company or the government. What is the politicians' answer? To have more costs paid by insurance companies and the government. ... [H]aving someone else pay for medical care virtually guarantees that a lot more of it will be used. Nothing would lower costs more than having each patient pay those costs. And nothing is less likely to happen.
Here's where the insurance companies really fail us. They over-pay hospitals, specialists and drug companies and then raise premiums to cover the costs. Further, when they pay hospitals 115% of what it should cost to care for a patient, they are paying for inefficiency that can be dangerous.
We should allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines. That will create a true 50-state national marketplace which will drive down the cost of low-cost, catastrophic health insurance.
The federal government is basically an insurance company with an army.
We've got people that are paying premiums of $1,000 a month out there, and then they've got a deductible of $1,000. If you're making $40,000, $50,000, $60,000 out there and you've got an Obamacare plan, by and large you've got an insurance card, but you don't have any care because you can't afford the deductible.
We need a wealth tax that on a one-time basis is going to take back at least some small fraction of the great windfall that the upper 1 percent, or 5 percent and pay down the government debt, pay back the federal debt because we can't put this on the next generation or they're going to be buried paying taxes.
I advised the insurance companies to apply certain rate adjustments only to plans where the federal government provides assistance in order to save Montanans money and keep rates lower on other plans.
Even under Obamacare, there are people that get subsidized insurance. But that has a $6,000 deductible. What do you think they do with that $6,000 deductible? They are still a nonpayer.
We see healthcare shifting from a procedure reimbursement, where in this country doctors are reimbursed for how many procedures they conduct, to a world where people will be reimbursed for the outcomes - did the patient actually get better, and what was the total cost of the cycle of care.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!