DigitalJournal.com File Photo image:39923:2::0

The current American economy seems to be taking casualties in every sector, and the newest on the list are seniors and their medical providers. As of July 1, a 10.6 percent cut to medicare payouts will be assessed to over 600,000 doctors, other medical providers, and even medical equipment providers. The bill has lead to physicians releasing ads hinting that they may cut back or deny new patients with medicare. Medical oriented businesses are also being hurt, some already laying off workers or preparing to close their doors.

Every so many years Americans are faced with a medicare crisis, but as one journalist, Michael F. Cannon of the New York Post, points out back in 2006, traditionally doctors have not cut their patients but have taken more on and have restructured their treatment methods to bill for procedures that cost the most. However, it has also been noted that these measures have led to a decrease in the quality of care that has been observed in the past couple of years. Doctors have complained about being overbooked, understaffed, and limited on treatment options for medicare patients.

The current cut went into effect after the Senate failed to pass a House passed bill that would have imposed a block on the changes made on July 1. The Senate attempted to invoke cloture on the bill to push it through, however that measure failed by 1 vote. Democrats may hang the current mini-crisis on the head of John McCain who was one of two senators not present for the vote because he was campaigning in Ohio. The other was Edward Kennedy (D. Mass) who is undergoing cancer treatments. The House passed the measure with enough members to overrule a veto. Senator Harry Reid plans to extend Thursdays session to address the issue before Congress takes their Independence Day break on July 4.

The Whitehouse has threatened to Veto the bill on grounds that some feel are too strict. Medical News Today reports:

The White House on Thursday again threatened to veto the measure because it makes cuts to indirect medical education payments and imposes limitations on so-called private fee-for-service plans under Medicare Advantage. The Bush administration said that the bill would "reduce access, benefits and choices for many of the approximately 2.25 million beneficiaries who have chosen to enroll in" the plans (Armstrong [1], CQ Today, 6/26). The measure would cut about $14 billion over five years from payments to some plans under MA (Lueck, Wall Street Journal, 6/27). Although Finance Committee ranking member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) voted against cloture, he said, "I personally think the White House has drawn lines in the sand that are unreasonable."

As Congress continues to stall on voting on the bill, some workers are faced with tough decisions. The new medicare deal has lead to layoffs at Trailblazer Health Enterprises LLC, a Texas-based subsidiary of the BlueCross BlueShield of South Carolina. The business lost its contract to another currently contracted firm under the motivation of medicare efficiency. The contract kept 130 people employed who are now facing job uncertainty. However, Trailblazers clientele has been moved over the Highmark Inc. who will bring more jobs to the state. While the people from Trailblazer may find a new home at Highmark, other companies and workers are not so lucky.

Other businesses that provide patient medical equipment will be feeling the pain. Those companies lucky enough to be rewarded a contract with Medicare will face 28 percent cuts on payouts for 10 of the most used items for seniors such as walkers, wheelchairs and oxygen tanks. The strain on business could force layoffs. However other businesses who were not awarded contracts are completely cut from being able to make claims to Medicare for the next 3 years.

The week of July 7, Congress is expected to return motivated to help seniors, doctors, and companies stuck in the medicare quagmire. Speculation has risen about reimbursements to medicare claims made during this week. Some believe Congress will address the issue to avoid angry voting blocs for their party's Presidential nominee, others say the headache would be too large to deal with retroactive pay.