On May 23, the White House released its 2018 budget proposal, outlining its priorities for the upcoming fiscal year. In health care, the President has proposed cuts to several agencies and programs. The Administration’s annual budget is seen as a statement of policy, not necessarily a legislative proposal certain to become law. That said, ML Strategies has summarized the highlights from the Health and Human Services Budget that are worth monitoring as Congress begins its work on the FY 2018 budget. The summary is available here. ML Strategies will continue its coverage here of ongoing health care issues on Capitol Hill that will need to be addressed later this year, such as the FY18 budget and the Health Care Minibus.
Our ML Strategies colleagues have published a preview for another big week in health care. The American Health Care Act (AHCA) continues to be a big story as the Senate works on its version. This week we watch for updates on these items and how they might impact AHCA discussions:
- Cost-sharing reductions (CSRs) litigation on Monday
- President Trump’s anticipated budget proposal on Tuesday
- The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score on the House AHCA on Wednesday
- Scheduled hearings in the House and Senate on Tuesday (Zika response), Wednesday (FY 2018 budget) and Thursday (budget proposals for Treasury and Tax Reform)
Despite reports last Friday that President Trump may seek to stop the CSRs paid to insurers, on Monday the Administration requested another 90 day extension in the House v. Price case. In a joint filing, the House and the Department of Justice requested the extension as they consider measures that might remove the need for the payments, including legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
On Tuesday, President Trump’s budget proposal will be released. We anticipate major cuts to Medicaid, and to supplemental income and nutritional assistance programs. Then on Wednesday, the CBO will release its score of the AHCA. We don’t anticipate major changes from the original results, but stay tuned for updates.
We will continue to monitor each of these items. Stay tuned for additional coverage on this blog at https://www.healthlawpolicymatters.com/
A bipartisan congressional effort is underway to convince CMS to reverse its biosimilar reimbursement policy implemented under the Obama administration. We discussed the current reimbursement policy in a March 2016 blog post when CMS initially released the guidance. CMS implemented the controversial guidance as a final rule in October 2016.
The current policy requires all biosimilars that are related to a reference product to be given a shared Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) code. For Medicare Part B, reimbursement is then calculated based on the average sales price (ASP) of all of the biosimilars with that HCPCS code plus 6% of their reference product’s ASP. Continue Reading CMS Urged To Reverse Obama-Era Biosimilar Reimbursement Policy
This edition covers upcoming hearings in the House, including one before the House Ways & Means Committee regarding expiring Medicare programs, as well as changes to Medicare’s payment system. It also covers an upcoming hearing before the Senate Finance Committee regarding The (CHRONIC) Care Act of 2017, which has been co-sponsored by Democrats and Republicans.
The ML Strategies team also comments on the possibility of a bipartisan bill designed to fix the Affordable Care Act.
Click HERE to read this week’s edition and stay tuned for additional Previews!
In a recent post we noted that the Maternal, Infant, Early Childhood, Home Visiting (MIECHV) program is one of the many potential riders on the health care minibus. In contrast to an omnibus bill, the “minibus” refers to a handful of policy provisions tied together in one piece of legislation. This minibus will carry a number of provisions into law. How many riders will be onboard the minibus and when the minibus leaves the station remain to be seen.
In this post we provide additional details on the structure, funding, and evaluation of the MIECHV program. Future posts will review additional details of other potential riders on the minibus. Continue Reading MIECHV: A Minibus Rider
The Trump administration is considering releasing a rule to ease the burden that small practices are facing in trying to comply with the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), according to a recent report in The Hill.
By way of background, MACRA consolidates a number of existing reporting programs into a two-track system under which eligible clinicians will receive incentive reimbursement payments through either the Merit-Based Incentive Payment Systems (MIPS) or through certain alternative payment models (APMs). Under MIPS, eligible clinicians can receive incentive payment (or penalties) based on their reporting of various measures. (For a detailed discussion of MACRA and these reporting requirements, see our prior post.) Alternatively, clinicians can be reimbursed under the second track if they participate in an “Advanced APM,” which include certain accountable care organizations (ACOs) and patient-centered medical homes. Continue Reading Insiders Say New MACRA Rule Likely as Providers Look to Sec. Price to Ease Burden
Although telehealth has the potential to improve or maintain quality of care for Medicare beneficiaries, payment and coverage restrictions create barriers that prevent providers from fully utilizing telehealth technologies. That is the core finding of a report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) this month on telehealth and remote patient monitoring use for Medicare beneficiaries.
The GAO report was issued as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), which included a provision for the GAO to study telehealth and remote patient monitoring. In compiling the report, the GAO interviewed representatives of nine provider, patient, and payor associations who provided feedback on, among other things, barriers to providing telehealth services to Medicare beneficiaries. Continue Reading GAO Report: Medicare Reimbursement Policies Impede Telehealth Adoption
Last week, the California Assembly Committee on Business and Professions voted in favor of Assembly Bill 315. AB 315 seeks to amend the California Business and Professions Code: (a) to require PBMs to obtain licensure from the Board of Pharmacy, (b) to state that PBMs have fiduciary duties to their “purchaser” clients (i.e., health plans), and (c) to require PBMs to disclose to their purchaser clients data regarding drug costs, rebates, and fees earned. The favorable vote moves the bill to the Committee on Appropriations.
California is not the only state that is considering adopting a PBM “transparency” law. New York’s Governor Cuomo released a proposal that seeks to require PBMs to both register with the State and obtain a license (from the Department of Financial Services) as well as disclose financial incentives or benefits for promoting the use of certain drugs and financial arrangements that affect customers. The Governor would also like to impose price controls on pharmaceutical manufacturers. New York has a long history of regulating PBMs through a handful of systems because the services that PBMs offer often result in a PBM needing to hold a specific non-PBM license and to adopt a specific corporate structure. In addition, Senator Wyden (D-Ore.) introduced the C-THRU Act to the Senate Finance Committee in March. The C-THRU Act seeks to make PBM rebate data publicly available, require the Secretary of HHS to adopt a minimum percentage of drug rebates that a PBM would need to pass through to certain of its health plan clients, and amend the definition of “negotiated prices” under the Medicare Part D Program. Continue Reading California Advances PBM Licensing and “Transparency” Law
Today, our colleagues at ML Strategies provided another installment of their Health Care Weekly Preview. The preview highlights upcoming activity in the House and Senate and other hot topics on the Hill. Highlights this week include the potential of a government shutdown, uncertainty around cost-sharing reductions for the 2018 plan year, and scheduled mark-ups by the Senate HELP Committee.
For an outlook on health care policy in the coming months in Congress, ML Strategies provided their insight in our prior post.
ML Strategies has provided a Spring Cheat Sheet previewing the coming months in health care policy in the 115th Congress. The Cheat Sheet addresses attempts to amend the American Health Care Act, funding for the federal government, the heath insurance marketplace, FDA user fee acts, and the health care minibus. The full Cheat Sheet is available here. Stay tuned for upcoming coverage of the health care policy actions (and inactions) in Washington, D.C.