/PRNewswire/ -- Special interests who tried to attack physician-owned hospitals in Congress last year by attaching harmful measures to the Farm Bill and War Supplemental Bill are at it again. Now, a handful of lawmakers are trying to use a children's health care bill to limit patients' access to some of the best hospitals in the country.
"We know that physician-owned hospitals are good for patients and good for the economy," said Molly Sandvig, Executive Director of Physician Hospitals of America (PHA), the national association representing the interests of physician hospitals. "It is completely counterintuitive that at a time when our country is experiencing an economic downturn, high rates of unemployment, and inadequate access to healthcare, Congress would consider killing an industry that provides over 55,000 jobs nationally and that provides patients access to the best quality healthcare available in America."
There are currently 199 physician-owned hospitals nationwide. Together, these facilities employ thousands of doctors, nurses, and support staff. They also provide a local economic engine through property taxes, higher wage jobs, and greater health care choices for local residents.
A recent study of the economic impact of physician-owned hospitals in Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas conducted by the Health Economics Consulting Group found that:
"Physician-owned hospitals add considerable value to state economies, ranging from a net effect of $117.8 million in Pennsylvania to $2.3 billion in Texas. The combined impact across all eight states is $2.9 billion. This implies that physician-owned hospitals, through their employment and capital expenditures, generate a total of $3.9 billion in economic activity in these eight states alone."
The proposed language being added to the children's health care bill (SCHIP) would not allow hospitals to grow and would essentially cause these hospitals to whither on the vine since they could not adjust to marketplace demand. Also, there would be no protection offered for hospitals under development and no physician hospitals built after January 1, 2009 would be allowed to take Medicare or Medicaid patients. Closure of physician-owned hospitals would eliminate $2.4 billion in total payroll, $509 million in federal taxes, $1.9 billion in trade payables, and will put 55,000 full- and part-time employees out of work.
There are also 85 hospitals currently under development nationally. On these hospitals, an estimated $1,830,909,350 has been expended with $574,358,090 still outstanding, ready to be spent. The addition of these 85 hospitals would also equate to an estimated 23,000 more jobs.
"HR 2 is punitive legislation and the physician hospital piece is an insignificant offset to the costs of SCHIP. It is hard to understand how Congress can propose an important increase in medical services to children while simultaneously cutting back on hospitals that provide services to this population, among others," said Sandvig.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
'President Obama: Make Clarity, Transparency, Simplicity a Priority,' Say 79% of the American People
/PRNewswire/ -- "People are desperate for clarity and simplicity in order to make informed decisions," says Alan Siegel, Founder and Chairman of global brand consultancy Siegel+Gale. "There is a huge opportunity for government and business to overcome cynicism and regain lost trust through the way they communicate with their constituents and customers."
A new survey of 1,214 American homeowners and investors conducted by Siegel+Gale between December 29, 2008 and January 5, 2009, released today, shows an overwhelming majority demand more clarity in communications from companies and the government. Fully 84% of all consumers say they are more likely to trust a company that uses jargon-free, plain English in communications. And 79% say they think it is "very important" that President Obama "mandate that clarity, transparency, and plain English be a requirement of every new law, regulation and policy."
"Transparency and authenticity are the new marketing imperatives," says Lee Rafkin, Siegel+Gale's Global Director of Simplification. "People are fed up and desperate for institutions and brands that offer simple and honest communications they can understand. That's the clear message from our most recent research survey."
Complexity Up; Trust Down
Three-quarters of survey respondents (75%) say that complexity and lack of understanding have played a significant role in the current financial crisis. Moreover, 63% of those surveyed feel that "banks, mortgage lenders, and Wall Street intentionally make things complicated to hide risks or to keep people in the dark."
Trust in companies is predictably down, the survey shows. Compared to one year ago, 37% are less likely to trust their mortgage lender, 36% are less likely to trust their broker or financial advisor, and 35% are less likely to trust their bank.
However, consumers agreed they should shoulder some of the blame for the financial crisis. Over half of all surveyed admitted to not reading or attempting to understand the complicated documents they sign. And 50% agreed with the statement, "Financial products are inherently complicated. It's the final responsibility of the customer to make sure they understand all the risks."
The survey asked how much of an impact jargon-free, plain-English explanations and disclosures would make on consumer interest in a number of categories. Consumers reported:
-- a 79% increased interest in investing in a financial product,
-- a 73% increased interest in selecting a broker or a financial advisor,
-- a 67% increased interest in purchasing a life insurance policy,
-- a 63% increased interest in taking out a loan, and
-- a 63% increased interest in applying for a credit card.
A new survey of 1,214 American homeowners and investors conducted by Siegel+Gale between December 29, 2008 and January 5, 2009, released today, shows an overwhelming majority demand more clarity in communications from companies and the government. Fully 84% of all consumers say they are more likely to trust a company that uses jargon-free, plain English in communications. And 79% say they think it is "very important" that President Obama "mandate that clarity, transparency, and plain English be a requirement of every new law, regulation and policy."
"Transparency and authenticity are the new marketing imperatives," says Lee Rafkin, Siegel+Gale's Global Director of Simplification. "People are fed up and desperate for institutions and brands that offer simple and honest communications they can understand. That's the clear message from our most recent research survey."
Complexity Up; Trust Down
Three-quarters of survey respondents (75%) say that complexity and lack of understanding have played a significant role in the current financial crisis. Moreover, 63% of those surveyed feel that "banks, mortgage lenders, and Wall Street intentionally make things complicated to hide risks or to keep people in the dark."
Trust in companies is predictably down, the survey shows. Compared to one year ago, 37% are less likely to trust their mortgage lender, 36% are less likely to trust their broker or financial advisor, and 35% are less likely to trust their bank.
However, consumers agreed they should shoulder some of the blame for the financial crisis. Over half of all surveyed admitted to not reading or attempting to understand the complicated documents they sign. And 50% agreed with the statement, "Financial products are inherently complicated. It's the final responsibility of the customer to make sure they understand all the risks."
The survey asked how much of an impact jargon-free, plain-English explanations and disclosures would make on consumer interest in a number of categories. Consumers reported:
-- a 79% increased interest in investing in a financial product,
-- a 73% increased interest in selecting a broker or a financial advisor,
-- a 67% increased interest in purchasing a life insurance policy,
-- a 63% increased interest in taking out a loan, and
-- a 63% increased interest in applying for a credit card.
Taxpayer Watchdogs Offer List of 'Ax-Ready' Programs as Alternative to Mayors' Pork Projects
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The U.S. Conference of Mayors has sent Congress a $96.6 billion wish list of "shovel-ready" projects to allegedly create jobs and improve the nation's infrastructure, but the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) are offering a different solution to stimulate the economy: an updated list of "ax-ready" programs and legislation that would reduce wasteful spending. Last October, NTU and CCAGW sent a letter to then-Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama outlining ways to reduce federal outlays.
"Before Election Day, NTU and CCAGW answered the Presidential hopefuls' calls for going through the budget 'line by line' to root out waste and inefficiency," NTU President Duane Parde said. "Now, we're highlighting more 'ready-to-cut' areas of the federal government for Congress to act on instead of stuffing states full of pork." CCAGW President Tom Schatz added, "Congress must cut wasteful spending now, at the same time the stimulus package is being considered. Promising to address the mounting fiscal burden on taxpayers at a later date means that nothing will ever happen."
Among the mayors' "'Ready to Go' Jobs and Infrastructure Projects" are well over $1 billion in projects involving sidewalks; $1 million for annual sewer rehabilitation in Casper, WY; $6.1 million for corporate hangars, parking lots, and a business apron at the Fayetteville, AR airport; 28 projects with the term "stadium" in them; and 117 projects mentioning landscaping and/or beautification efforts. The taxpayers should be most teed off at the 20 golf courses included in the list.
Some alternatives to the mayors' list could be found through NTU's research arm, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF), which through its BillTally program has compiled a list of legislation that would reduce federal spending. NTUF also maintains a roster of 2,150 spending-cut bills introduced in the last nine Congresses that totaled over $9.5 trillion, only 69 of which were eventually signed into law (for a savings of $89.6 billion). Finally, NTU reviews data from the Bush Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool, which found nearly 220 programs in 2007 that were ineffective or did not demonstrate results.
CCAGW's research arm, Citizens Against Government Waste, has just issued the "2009 Prime Cuts," which has 700 cut recommendations totaling $1.9 trillion over five years. It includes the elimination of duplicative and inefficient programs such as the Market Access Program, which costs $231 million over five years to help large and profitable American companies advertise abroad.
"The mayors have billed their projects as 'shovel-ready,' but the only shoveling going on would be out of taxpayers' pockets," Parde concluded. Schatz added, "The best way to stimulate the economy and create jobs is to cut wasteful spending and keep money in the private sector."
"Before Election Day, NTU and CCAGW answered the Presidential hopefuls' calls for going through the budget 'line by line' to root out waste and inefficiency," NTU President Duane Parde said. "Now, we're highlighting more 'ready-to-cut' areas of the federal government for Congress to act on instead of stuffing states full of pork." CCAGW President Tom Schatz added, "Congress must cut wasteful spending now, at the same time the stimulus package is being considered. Promising to address the mounting fiscal burden on taxpayers at a later date means that nothing will ever happen."
Among the mayors' "'Ready to Go' Jobs and Infrastructure Projects" are well over $1 billion in projects involving sidewalks; $1 million for annual sewer rehabilitation in Casper, WY; $6.1 million for corporate hangars, parking lots, and a business apron at the Fayetteville, AR airport; 28 projects with the term "stadium" in them; and 117 projects mentioning landscaping and/or beautification efforts. The taxpayers should be most teed off at the 20 golf courses included in the list.
Some alternatives to the mayors' list could be found through NTU's research arm, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF), which through its BillTally program has compiled a list of legislation that would reduce federal spending. NTUF also maintains a roster of 2,150 spending-cut bills introduced in the last nine Congresses that totaled over $9.5 trillion, only 69 of which were eventually signed into law (for a savings of $89.6 billion). Finally, NTU reviews data from the Bush Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool, which found nearly 220 programs in 2007 that were ineffective or did not demonstrate results.
CCAGW's research arm, Citizens Against Government Waste, has just issued the "2009 Prime Cuts," which has 700 cut recommendations totaling $1.9 trillion over five years. It includes the elimination of duplicative and inefficient programs such as the Market Access Program, which costs $231 million over five years to help large and profitable American companies advertise abroad.
"The mayors have billed their projects as 'shovel-ready,' but the only shoveling going on would be out of taxpayers' pockets," Parde concluded. Schatz added, "The best way to stimulate the economy and create jobs is to cut wasteful spending and keep money in the private sector."
Committee on Capital Markets Regulation Releases Recommendations for Reorganizing U.S. Regulatory Structure
/PRNewswire/ -- The Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, noting that the U.S. financial crisis has put the issue of financial regulatory structure on the front burner of public policy for the first time in decades, today released the following statement and recommendations for reorganizing the nation's financial regulatory structure:
The crisis has made possible reforms on a scale not imaginable since the Great Depression. Indeed, the severity of the crisis, the scope of the regulatory failures and the antiquated, patchwork design of the U.S. regulatory structure have given rise to a broad consensus regarding the need for sweeping regulatory reorganization.
This consensus presents a historic opportunity to bring U.S. financial regulatory structure into the 21st century, ensuring our role as a global leader in financial markets. Done properly, reform will restore market confidence, increase consumer and investor protection, improve regulatory quality, stimulate capital formation, enhance our ability to manage systemic risk and facilitate global policy coordination.
The Committee on Capital Markets Regulations believes there is enormous room to improve our regulatory structure. The U.S. employs more financial regulators and expends a higher percentage of its gross domestic product on financial oversight than any other major country. There are approximately 38,700 financial regulatory staff in the U.S., versus some 3,100 in the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, financial regulatory costs in the U.S. total $497,984 per billion dollars of GDP, versus $276,655 in the United Kingdom.
Yet recent events suggest that the far larger staffs and greater funding in the U.S. have not resulted in a correspondingly higher quality of supervision. The U.S. Treasury recognizes this, and issued its own bold recommendations, "Blueprint for a Modernized Financial Regulatory Structure," in March 2008.
At its core, federal financial regulation performs four functions: providing a lender of last resort, supervising and regulating financial institutions for safety and soundness, regulating market structure and conduct and providing for consumer/investor protection. Any regulatory structure must effectively perform these four functions. Further, the Committee believes that the functions must be coordinated by the President through the office of the Secretary of the Treasury. However, determining which part of the regulatory structure performs some or all of these functions is a more difficult challenge.
The Committee's recommendations address only revisions to U.S. federal regulatory structure. The Committee may consider later whether to address the role of the states and self-regulating organizations ("SROs"), internal agency organization or global coordination.(1)
The Committee is a non-partisan group of independent U.S. business, financial, investor and corporate governance, legal, accounting and academic leaders. It was formed in the fall of 2006 to study and report on ways to improve the regulation of the U.S. capital markets.
(1) In March, the Committee will release a new report -- "Capital Markets Regulation After the Credit Crisis" -- addressing key substantive regulatory issues.
The crisis has made possible reforms on a scale not imaginable since the Great Depression. Indeed, the severity of the crisis, the scope of the regulatory failures and the antiquated, patchwork design of the U.S. regulatory structure have given rise to a broad consensus regarding the need for sweeping regulatory reorganization.
This consensus presents a historic opportunity to bring U.S. financial regulatory structure into the 21st century, ensuring our role as a global leader in financial markets. Done properly, reform will restore market confidence, increase consumer and investor protection, improve regulatory quality, stimulate capital formation, enhance our ability to manage systemic risk and facilitate global policy coordination.
The Committee on Capital Markets Regulations believes there is enormous room to improve our regulatory structure. The U.S. employs more financial regulators and expends a higher percentage of its gross domestic product on financial oversight than any other major country. There are approximately 38,700 financial regulatory staff in the U.S., versus some 3,100 in the United Kingdom. Meanwhile, financial regulatory costs in the U.S. total $497,984 per billion dollars of GDP, versus $276,655 in the United Kingdom.
Yet recent events suggest that the far larger staffs and greater funding in the U.S. have not resulted in a correspondingly higher quality of supervision. The U.S. Treasury recognizes this, and issued its own bold recommendations, "Blueprint for a Modernized Financial Regulatory Structure," in March 2008.
At its core, federal financial regulation performs four functions: providing a lender of last resort, supervising and regulating financial institutions for safety and soundness, regulating market structure and conduct and providing for consumer/investor protection. Any regulatory structure must effectively perform these four functions. Further, the Committee believes that the functions must be coordinated by the President through the office of the Secretary of the Treasury. However, determining which part of the regulatory structure performs some or all of these functions is a more difficult challenge.
The Committee's recommendations address only revisions to U.S. federal regulatory structure. The Committee may consider later whether to address the role of the states and self-regulating organizations ("SROs"), internal agency organization or global coordination.(1)
The Committee is a non-partisan group of independent U.S. business, financial, investor and corporate governance, legal, accounting and academic leaders. It was formed in the fall of 2006 to study and report on ways to improve the regulation of the U.S. capital markets.
(1) In March, the Committee will release a new report -- "Capital Markets Regulation After the Credit Crisis" -- addressing key substantive regulatory issues.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Coalition for a Democratic Workplace to Congress: You Were Elected by Secret Ballot
/PRNewswire/ -- The Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) today launched a new print ad highlighting the hypocrisy of members of Congress who enjoy secret ballots when choosing their leadership, while supporting the anti-worker Employee Free Choice Act, or "card check" bill. This undemocratic legislation will effectively remove secret ballots for workers in union organizing elections and bind employers to contracts that inhibit their ability to create much-needed new jobs.
The new ad reminds Congress that the recent battle between Rep. John Dingell and Rep. Henry Waxman for chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee was decided by secret ballot. Quoting Rep. Louise Slaughter, "It's a secret ballot. Thank the Lord," the ad urges Congress not to take away secret ballots for millions of American workers.
"If secret ballot elections are good enough for members of the Congress, they ought to be good enough for American workers," said Brian Worth with the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace. "It's time for Congress to side with workers and oppose the job-killing Employee Free Choice Act."
Deciding whether to preserve the long-standing democratic right to a private ballot is one of the key issues that will define the Obama Administration in the first two years. The new Administration and the new Congress will face its first true test this year with the anti-worker Employee Free Choice Act. This Act, more aptly titled the Employee
"Forced" Choice Act, is nothing short of a full-frontal assault on American democracy and worker privacy.
CDW survey data indicates that support for maintaining private ballots in union organizing cuts across party lines. By a significant majority, Democrats, Republicans and Independents support maintaining a worker's right to cast their vote in private. Even among union households, a significant majority (69%) oppose the Employee Free Choice Act. And 76% of union voters say having a federally supervised secret ballot election is the best way to protect workers' rights when organizing a union.
The new ad reminds Congress that the recent battle between Rep. John Dingell and Rep. Henry Waxman for chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee was decided by secret ballot. Quoting Rep. Louise Slaughter, "It's a secret ballot. Thank the Lord," the ad urges Congress not to take away secret ballots for millions of American workers.
"If secret ballot elections are good enough for members of the Congress, they ought to be good enough for American workers," said Brian Worth with the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace. "It's time for Congress to side with workers and oppose the job-killing Employee Free Choice Act."
Deciding whether to preserve the long-standing democratic right to a private ballot is one of the key issues that will define the Obama Administration in the first two years. The new Administration and the new Congress will face its first true test this year with the anti-worker Employee Free Choice Act. This Act, more aptly titled the Employee
"Forced" Choice Act, is nothing short of a full-frontal assault on American democracy and worker privacy.
CDW survey data indicates that support for maintaining private ballots in union organizing cuts across party lines. By a significant majority, Democrats, Republicans and Independents support maintaining a worker's right to cast their vote in private. Even among union households, a significant majority (69%) oppose the Employee Free Choice Act. And 76% of union voters say having a federally supervised secret ballot election is the best way to protect workers' rights when organizing a union.
Caregivers Need a Bailout Too! (or 1% for Families)
/PRNewswire/ -- There are more than 50 million Americans today providing unpaid care for family members and loved ones: an aging or ailing parent, a friend with a chronic health condition, a spouse with Alzheimer's, a sibling with a traumatic war injury, a child with physical or mental challenges. Family caregivers represent a huge but invisible "silent workforce" over 150 times larger than Wall Street's workforce and over 176 times larger than the automobile industry workforce.
While the deteriorating economy has hit all Americans hard, it has hit these Americans even harder. Family caregivers are struggling to pay their own bills and, increasingly, those of their loved ones as well; expenses continue to rise and the hours of care they provide each day continue to go uncompensated. The average caregiver spends $5,534 per year out-of-pocket for caregiving expenses. Like Wall Street, the auto industry, and homeowners, family caregivers need help from Congress to make it through 2009.
Caring.com and the National Alliance for Caregiving, are calling on President Obama and the 111th Congress to target up to 1% of the upcoming economic stimulus package toward supporting family caregivers. They have jointly developed five priority initiatives to help family caregivers that are posted on the Caring.com website, and are asking caregivers to add their voices and vote on which initiatives would help the most. Caring.com and the National Alliance for Caregiving will present the list, votes, and recommendations to President-Elect Obama's transition team for Long-Term Care and key members of the 111th Congress.
"These five initiatives could provide essential relief to family caregivers," said Gail Gibson Hunt, President & CEO of the National Alliance for Caregiving. "President-Elect Obama cared for his mother and grandmother and knows how difficult it is to provide caregiving on top of other family responsibilities."
The five recommended priorities to support family caregivers are:
1. Provide Adequate Funding for the National Family Caregiver Support
Program. The National Family Caregiver Support Program (NFCSP) is the
only federal program that recognizes family caregivers; it helps
individuals who serve as unpaid caregivers for persons sixty or older.
The program provides respite services, counseling, support groups and
other community services to relieve the emotional, physical, and
financial hardships of providing care. For many of the nation's family
caregivers of aging parents, the NFCSP is the only program to sustain
and support them in their caregiving role. It's also an incredible
value. If services provided by informal caregivers had to be replaced
with paid services, the price tag would be in excess of $375 billion.
Yet the NFCSP has experienced level or only modest increases in
funding since its inception in 2001, with current funding at $158M.
Funding for the NFCSP should be doubled, from $158M to $320M, to
address the current under-funding of this vital program.
2. Expand Medicare and Medicaid Benefits to Better Support Family
Caregivers. Medicaid and Medicare must do more help to ease the burden
on family caregivers. Family caregivers are the backbone of the US
long-term care system. Four out of every five adults receiving long-
term care at home rely exclusively on family and friends to provide
assistance. With the annual cost of nursing home care averaging over
$75,000 per person, the ability to keep our aging loved ones at home
longer adds up to huge savings for the government, private insurance,
and families. Medicaid and Medicare are vital to supporting the needs
of family caregivers, and we recommend two essential first steps.
o Under Medicaid, family caregivers should receive a comprehensive
Caregiver Assessment to help identify and support their own needs in
providing care to a friend or loved one.
o Under Medicare, healthcare professionals, including doctors, will
promote educational resources for caregivers and referrals to local
caregiver support organizations.
3. Encourage States to Adopt Paid Family Medical Leave Programs. The
concept of paid family leave is here to stay, with several states and
growing bipartisan support helping the U.S. to catch up with many other
industrialized nations that have long offered such programs. The issue
also became a topic in the presidential election, with President-Elect
Obama proposing a "50-state strategy to adopt paid-leave systems,"
stating, "You shouldn't be punished for getting sick or dealing with a
family crisis." In California, the nation's first state to adopt a paid
family medical leave program in 2004, employees are entitled to up to
six weeks of partial pay each year while taking time off from work to
care for a seriously ill parent, child, and spouse or registered
domestic partner. Most workers receive approximately 55% of their pre-
taxed weekly wage, up to a maximum of $917, while on leave. Using
successful state models already underway in California, Washington, and
New Jersey as prototypes, Congress should provide incentives for
additional states to develop paid family leave policies.
4. Fund the Lifespan Respite Act. In 2006, the Lifespan Respite Care Act
was signed into law to make respite more accessible and affordable to
family caregivers, regardless of age or disability. To date, Congress
has provided no funding. This is unacceptable. The economic value that
accrues from respite is exceptional. Respite has been shown to help
avoid or delay more costly nursing home or foster care placements.
Delaying nursing home or institutional placement of just one individual
with a chronic condition for several months can save Medicaid, private
insurance, or the family thousands of dollars. Congress should fully
fund Lifespan Respite (PL 109-442) at $53.3 million for FY 09, $71.1
million for FY 2010 and $94.8 for FY 2011 to help the nation's 50
million family caregivers regardless of age or disability.
5. Tax Relief for Family Caregivers and Employers. A number of bills with
bipartisan support have been introduced in Congress in recent years to
provide caregiver tax incentives to help offset the thousands of
dollars in lost wages and other expenses that family and informal
caregivers at all income levels incur. Among the approaches currently
under consideration: an annual refundable tax credit for persons with
long-term care needs or their family caregivers, credits for specified
caregiving expenses (such as home care services, respite, food, and
transportation), a tax deduction to help consumers pay long-term care
insurance premiums for policies that meet consumer protections, and
inclusion of long-term care coverage in employer cafeteria plans.
There's no shortage of good ideas for providing tax report for family
caregivers. There has been a shortage of results. We encourage the
111th Congress to act.
"Funding these five initiatives would cost less than 1% of the proposed stimulus package, yet would provide material relief to millions of families struggling with caregiving today," said Andy Cohen, co-founder and CEO of Caring.com.
Family caregivers are asked to visit Caring.com to add their voices to these recommendations, vote on which initiatives would be most helpful to them, and share their experiences with other individuals caring for family members and loved ones. The results of the vote will be presented to the Obama Transition Team for Long-Term Care.
To access the poll on Caring.com, visit:
http://www.caring.com/polls/message-to-president-obama-dont-forget-family- caregivers.
While the deteriorating economy has hit all Americans hard, it has hit these Americans even harder. Family caregivers are struggling to pay their own bills and, increasingly, those of their loved ones as well; expenses continue to rise and the hours of care they provide each day continue to go uncompensated. The average caregiver spends $5,534 per year out-of-pocket for caregiving expenses. Like Wall Street, the auto industry, and homeowners, family caregivers need help from Congress to make it through 2009.
Caring.com and the National Alliance for Caregiving, are calling on President Obama and the 111th Congress to target up to 1% of the upcoming economic stimulus package toward supporting family caregivers. They have jointly developed five priority initiatives to help family caregivers that are posted on the Caring.com website, and are asking caregivers to add their voices and vote on which initiatives would help the most. Caring.com and the National Alliance for Caregiving will present the list, votes, and recommendations to President-Elect Obama's transition team for Long-Term Care and key members of the 111th Congress.
"These five initiatives could provide essential relief to family caregivers," said Gail Gibson Hunt, President & CEO of the National Alliance for Caregiving. "President-Elect Obama cared for his mother and grandmother and knows how difficult it is to provide caregiving on top of other family responsibilities."
The five recommended priorities to support family caregivers are:
1. Provide Adequate Funding for the National Family Caregiver Support
Program. The National Family Caregiver Support Program (NFCSP) is the
only federal program that recognizes family caregivers; it helps
individuals who serve as unpaid caregivers for persons sixty or older.
The program provides respite services, counseling, support groups and
other community services to relieve the emotional, physical, and
financial hardships of providing care. For many of the nation's family
caregivers of aging parents, the NFCSP is the only program to sustain
and support them in their caregiving role. It's also an incredible
value. If services provided by informal caregivers had to be replaced
with paid services, the price tag would be in excess of $375 billion.
Yet the NFCSP has experienced level or only modest increases in
funding since its inception in 2001, with current funding at $158M.
Funding for the NFCSP should be doubled, from $158M to $320M, to
address the current under-funding of this vital program.
2. Expand Medicare and Medicaid Benefits to Better Support Family
Caregivers. Medicaid and Medicare must do more help to ease the burden
on family caregivers. Family caregivers are the backbone of the US
long-term care system. Four out of every five adults receiving long-
term care at home rely exclusively on family and friends to provide
assistance. With the annual cost of nursing home care averaging over
$75,000 per person, the ability to keep our aging loved ones at home
longer adds up to huge savings for the government, private insurance,
and families. Medicaid and Medicare are vital to supporting the needs
of family caregivers, and we recommend two essential first steps.
o Under Medicaid, family caregivers should receive a comprehensive
Caregiver Assessment to help identify and support their own needs in
providing care to a friend or loved one.
o Under Medicare, healthcare professionals, including doctors, will
promote educational resources for caregivers and referrals to local
caregiver support organizations.
3. Encourage States to Adopt Paid Family Medical Leave Programs. The
concept of paid family leave is here to stay, with several states and
growing bipartisan support helping the U.S. to catch up with many other
industrialized nations that have long offered such programs. The issue
also became a topic in the presidential election, with President-Elect
Obama proposing a "50-state strategy to adopt paid-leave systems,"
stating, "You shouldn't be punished for getting sick or dealing with a
family crisis." In California, the nation's first state to adopt a paid
family medical leave program in 2004, employees are entitled to up to
six weeks of partial pay each year while taking time off from work to
care for a seriously ill parent, child, and spouse or registered
domestic partner. Most workers receive approximately 55% of their pre-
taxed weekly wage, up to a maximum of $917, while on leave. Using
successful state models already underway in California, Washington, and
New Jersey as prototypes, Congress should provide incentives for
additional states to develop paid family leave policies.
4. Fund the Lifespan Respite Act. In 2006, the Lifespan Respite Care Act
was signed into law to make respite more accessible and affordable to
family caregivers, regardless of age or disability. To date, Congress
has provided no funding. This is unacceptable. The economic value that
accrues from respite is exceptional. Respite has been shown to help
avoid or delay more costly nursing home or foster care placements.
Delaying nursing home or institutional placement of just one individual
with a chronic condition for several months can save Medicaid, private
insurance, or the family thousands of dollars. Congress should fully
fund Lifespan Respite (PL 109-442) at $53.3 million for FY 09, $71.1
million for FY 2010 and $94.8 for FY 2011 to help the nation's 50
million family caregivers regardless of age or disability.
5. Tax Relief for Family Caregivers and Employers. A number of bills with
bipartisan support have been introduced in Congress in recent years to
provide caregiver tax incentives to help offset the thousands of
dollars in lost wages and other expenses that family and informal
caregivers at all income levels incur. Among the approaches currently
under consideration: an annual refundable tax credit for persons with
long-term care needs or their family caregivers, credits for specified
caregiving expenses (such as home care services, respite, food, and
transportation), a tax deduction to help consumers pay long-term care
insurance premiums for policies that meet consumer protections, and
inclusion of long-term care coverage in employer cafeteria plans.
There's no shortage of good ideas for providing tax report for family
caregivers. There has been a shortage of results. We encourage the
111th Congress to act.
"Funding these five initiatives would cost less than 1% of the proposed stimulus package, yet would provide material relief to millions of families struggling with caregiving today," said Andy Cohen, co-founder and CEO of Caring.com.
Family caregivers are asked to visit Caring.com to add their voices to these recommendations, vote on which initiatives would be most helpful to them, and share their experiences with other individuals caring for family members and loved ones. The results of the vote will be presented to the Obama Transition Team for Long-Term Care.
To access the poll on Caring.com, visit:
http://www.caring.com/polls/message-to-president-obama-dont-forget-family- caregivers.
Senator Reid, Reps. Slaughter and DeGette Introduce the Prevention First Act
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) joined Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY) and Energy and Commerce Committee Vice Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO) to introduce the Prevention First Act, legislation that will improve access to women's health care, reduce the rate of unintended pregnancy and reduce abortions -- all while saving scarce public health dollars.
"The United States has among the highest rates of unintended pregnancies of all industrialized nations. Half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended, and nearly half of those end in abortion," said Majority Leader Reid. "It is time to come together and enact effective policies that will help to prevent unintended pregnancies, reduce the number of abortions, and improve access to health care for women. We can find not only common ground, but also common sense in our Prevention First Act."
"If we want to reduce the number of abortions in this country, the methodology is clear -- empower women to prevent unintended pregnancies through education and access to contraception," said Congresswoman Slaughter. "For every dollar spent on family planning services, it is estimated that almost four dollars is saved in public health spending. This comprehensive approach to protecting women's reproductive health will not only decrease the spread of STDs and reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, but save money."
"It is imperative that we implement a comprehensive, medically accurate, science-based approach to reducing the need for abortion," said Congresswoman DeGette. "The United States has a much higher rate of unintended pregnancy than other developed nations. The Prevention First Act is the key to changing that."
A new study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that the nation's teen pregnancy rate has increased for the first time in 15 years.
This legislation would take a number of steps to reduce unintended pregnancies including:
-- Increase Funding for the National Family Planning Program (Title X).
-- Expand Medicaid Family Planning Services.
-- End Insurance Discrimination Against Women.
-- Improve Awareness about Emergency Contraception (EC).
-- Provide Compassionate Assistance for Rape Victims.
-- Reduce Teen Pregnancy.
-- Ensure that All Federal Programs Provide Medically Accurate
Information.
Research shows, and a majority of the public believes, that improving access to family planning services is the most effective way to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and to reduce abortions.
"The United States has among the highest rates of unintended pregnancies of all industrialized nations. Half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended, and nearly half of those end in abortion," said Majority Leader Reid. "It is time to come together and enact effective policies that will help to prevent unintended pregnancies, reduce the number of abortions, and improve access to health care for women. We can find not only common ground, but also common sense in our Prevention First Act."
"If we want to reduce the number of abortions in this country, the methodology is clear -- empower women to prevent unintended pregnancies through education and access to contraception," said Congresswoman Slaughter. "For every dollar spent on family planning services, it is estimated that almost four dollars is saved in public health spending. This comprehensive approach to protecting women's reproductive health will not only decrease the spread of STDs and reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, but save money."
"It is imperative that we implement a comprehensive, medically accurate, science-based approach to reducing the need for abortion," said Congresswoman DeGette. "The United States has a much higher rate of unintended pregnancy than other developed nations. The Prevention First Act is the key to changing that."
A new study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that the nation's teen pregnancy rate has increased for the first time in 15 years.
This legislation would take a number of steps to reduce unintended pregnancies including:
-- Increase Funding for the National Family Planning Program (Title X).
-- Expand Medicaid Family Planning Services.
-- End Insurance Discrimination Against Women.
-- Improve Awareness about Emergency Contraception (EC).
-- Provide Compassionate Assistance for Rape Victims.
-- Reduce Teen Pregnancy.
-- Ensure that All Federal Programs Provide Medically Accurate
Information.
Research shows, and a majority of the public believes, that improving access to family planning services is the most effective way to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and to reduce abortions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
