Asunto(s)
Utilización de Medicamentos , Cobertura del Seguro/legislación & jurisprudencia , Seguro de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción/economía , Costos de los Medicamentos , Utilización de Medicamentos/legislación & jurisprudencia , Employee Retirement Income Security Act/legislación & jurisprudencia , Política de Salud , Humanos , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción/administración & dosificación , Honorarios por Prescripción de Medicamentos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
If federal health reforms continue to rely on employer-sponsored health care coverage, ERISA preemption reform should be part of the next steps. State-level reform has acquired greater urgency, while the justifications for preempting that source of reform has eroded. This article recommends a statutory waiver for ERISA preemption as a feasible way to adapt to these circumstances. It offers proposed statutory text for reformers inclined to pursue ERISA reform as health reform.
Asunto(s)
Employee Retirement Income Security Act/legislación & jurisprudencia , Planes de Asistencia Médica para Empleados/legislación & jurisprudencia , Reforma de la Atención de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Cobertura del Seguro/economía , Employee Retirement Income Security Act/historia , Gobierno Federal , Historia del Siglo XX , Pensiones , Gobierno Estatal , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Drug expenditure in the United States has continued to increase unsustainably; the specialty of dermatology has been particularly affected. Resources are limited - someone has to make decisions about what treatments will be covered and how they will be reimbursed. Step therapy is a cost-control method used by insurers to encourage the use of the most cost-effective treatments before more expensive options are attempted. However, a rigid step therapy policy can be problematic when protocols are out of date, or delay necessary treatment leading to unnecessary suffering, increased morbidity, and overall cost. To address some of these concerns, the proposed Safe Step Act (S. 2546 and H.R. 2279) attempts to create a requirement that insurers provide a transparent, expeditious exceptions process for step therapy protocols. Increased flexibility in this process will allow for the unique circumstances of individual patients and improve access to expensive drugs for special cases. However, this bill may be exploited, further weakening insurers' ability to negotiate on cost. We should be cautious about measures that reduce the effectiveness of this tool, particularly if we, as a society, aim to expand access to basic care to all Americans.
Asunto(s)
Control de Costos , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Seguro de Salud/legislación & jurisprudencia , Control de Costos/legislación & jurisprudencia , Employee Retirement Income Security Act/legislación & jurisprudencia , Gastos en Salud , Seguro de Salud/economía , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Although the focus for most single-payer advocates is in Washington, DC, and on proposals for Medicare for all, there are also efforts in a handful of states to enact a state-based single-payer program. Moreover, the odds of legislative passage are better in a state like New York than at the federal level.Even if enacted, however, state-based single-payer proposals face a distinct set of obstacles, including (1) the need to obtain federal permission (via waivers) to repurpose federal dollars, (2) the federal Employee Retirement Income and Security Act, and (3) the burden of state-only action in an interconnected 50-state economy.The most likely result of the energized single-payer movement will be incremental public insurance expansions at the federal and state levels, including state programs to permit the uninsured to buy into the Medicaid program. Such an outcome is consistent with the most plausible path (incrementalism) to a US version of universal coverage.