Connect with us

Kaiser Health News

An Arm and a Leg: The Woman Who Beat an $8,000 Hospital Fee

Published

on

Dan Weissmann
Wed, 17 Jul 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Hospital facility fees. They can feel like a charge just for walking in the door. Hospitals say they go toward overhead on facilities with lots of specialized equipment and staff, like emergency rooms.

But these fees have grown and become more common in recent years. And as hospitals buy up outpatient facilities, patients are starting to get charged facility fees for routine tests, procedures, and visits to the doctor’s office.

In this episode of “An Arm and a Leg,” host Dan Weissmann speaks with Georgann Boatright, a retired speech pathologist from Oxford, Mississippi, who was told by her local hospital that she needed to pay an $8,000 “operating room fee” for a routine test. She was determined not to get overcharged, even if it meant driving hours out of state to get the test someplace cheaper.

Dan Weissmann


@danweissmann

Host and producer of “An Arm and a Leg.” Previously, Dan was a staff reporter for Marketplace and Chicago’s WBEZ. His work also appears on All Things Considered, Marketplace, the BBC, 99 Percent Invisible, and Reveal, from the Center for Investigative Reporting.

Credits

Emily Pisacreta
Producer

Claire Davenport
Producer

Adam Raymonda
Audio wizard

Ellen Weiss
Editor

Click to open the Transcript

Transcript: The Woman Who Beat an $8,000 Hospital Fee

Note: “An Arm and a Leg” uses speech-recognition software to generate transcripts, which may contain errors. Please use the transcript as a tool but check the corresponding audio before quoting the podcast.

Dan: Hey there! A couple of months ago, we asked you to help us report on a type of fee that seems to be sneaking onto more and more medical bills. They’re often called “facility fees.” It’s like a cover charge just for walking in the door. And these kinds of fees are familiar to a lot of folks from places like emergency rooms, which do have a LOT of specialized equipment and staff in the facility behind that door. That’s basically the case for a cover charge: Once you get in the door, there’s a lot of stuff there. But in some cases, with facility fees, the door is just the entrance to a doctor’s office. Because facility fees– they’re often charged by hospitals. And hospitals own a lot of doctors’ offices these days. And once they take over, there’s no law that says they can’t just call that doctor’s office part of their facility and start charging. 

We asked what you’d been seeing. A bunch of you sent us stories, and copies of your bills, and your insurance statements. And when we called to follow up, you took our calls. You had A LOT to say. 

Teresa: Oh, it made me so mad, so mad. Anne: I mean, it’s a 10-minute appointment for a prescription. 

Amanda: I don’t understand any of it. Where did this number come from? 

Dan: We learned a bunch. Especially from those of you who are not new to this kind of thing. 

Francesca: It was a running joke with my husband and myself that like, okay, it’s time for my weekly, one-to-two hour phone call with Cigna. 

Dan: People who’ve been contending with the health care system for a while, dealing with chronic illnesses, or going to the doctor for monitoring, or having some kind of ongoing treatment. 

Anne: I see her once a year. I’ve seen her once a year for 18 years at the time. And then they started charging the facility fee. 

Dan: And I’ve always said here, we have a lot to learn from each other. And what we learned here is a lot more than is gonna fit in one episode. So we’re gonna start here with one story that really stood out. Partly because it involved the biggest dollar amount we saw: An eight-thousand dollar facility fee. And partly because the person we heard from … didn’t end up paying it. And partly because of what it took for her to avoid paying it. She had what I might call a lifetime of preparation– including lessons I think a lot of us can learn from. And she has the kind of grit that not all of us have. But I’m hoping that some of it might rub off. So let’s meet her. 

Georgann Boatright: My name is Georgann Boatright, and I am a retired speech pathologist. 

Dan: Georgann lives in Oxford, Mississippi. She works for the university there, Ole Miss, coordinating special events. 

Georgann Boatright: It’s lots of fun. Never a dull moment. Everything from weddings to conferences. 

Dan: The day we talked, she had made coffee for 500 people. Before eight am. And here’s how she describes her response to that eight-thousand dollar charge. 

Georgann Boatright: I was like, that’s insane. And of course, being the obnoxious human being that I can be at times, and a little bit pushy, you know; sometimes you got to do that. I’ve always been that advocate for everybody else, so sometimes I have to advocate for me.

Dan: Georgann pushed back– we will talk about how far she had to go. And among other things, we’re talking about actual miles she had to travel. It was not easy. But it was worth it. Let’s take a ride. 

This is An Arm and a Leg– a show about why health care costs so freaking much, and what we can maybe do about it. I’m Dan Weissmann. I’m a reporter, and I like a challenge. So the job we’ve chosen here is to take one of the most enraging, terrifying, depressing parts of American life, and bring you a show that’s entertaining, empowering, and useful. 

Georgann Boatright grew up in Oxford, went to Ole Miss– the University of Mississippi, right in town. And after a decade and change in places like Huntsville, Arkansas, and towns near Springfield, Missouri, she moved back to Oxford about 15 years ago. 

Georgann Boatright: My mom came ill. And so I moved back to Mississippi to be with her for the end. 

Dan: Georgann herself had a health scare not long after– it turned out to be a non-cancerous tumor. Her local doctors couldn’t figure out the problem, but she found good treatment at West Cancer Center in Memphis, about an hour and a half away. And then, in 2022, an actual breast cancer diagnosis. She went back to the West Cancer Center in Memphis for treatment. And while she was being treated for breast cancer, her doctors found a thyroid problem. 

Georgann Boatright: But they were kind of like, okay, we’ll put that on a back burner for right now because we got to take care of this first. 

Dan: So, they did! And you know, that took months, of course. Once she was done– and no evidence of cancer for a few months!– they picked up the thyroid thread. Her endocrinologist in town suggested what’s called a needle biopsy: no incision, just pulling a sample with basically a syringe, guided by ultrasound. And Georgann was plenty familiar with the procedure because she’d had two of them for her breast cancer.

Georgann Boatright: Well, of course, having just done all this other stuff, I was kind of like, oh, okay, just another biopsy. No big deal. 

Dan: Her endocrinologist suggested the local hospital, Baptist Memorial, North Mississippi. And started getting her scheduled there. 

Georgann Boatright: I was just sitting in my office doing my thing and, you know, answering emails, trying to get people to sign up and do a wedding. So, they called me and said, “Hey, you know, we need a thousand dollars up front.” And I’m like, why? I’ve already met my deductible. Da, da, da. You know, and they’re like, Oh, well, this is just this is just your copay.” 

Dan: None of this sounded right to Georgann, based on her experience. 

Georgann Boatright: I’d had two biopsies done in the past year, just in the process of doing the breast stuff. And I was like, that’s not normal. 

Dan: At the cancer center in Memphis, a thousand dollars was in the ballpark for the whole procedure, like before insurance paid anything. And Georgann’s share, after insurance, was like a fraction of that. 

Georgann Boatright: And I went, excuse me, because of course I was expecting, you know, under a hundred bucks, you know. And they acted very offended that I questioned. She was like, “Well, this is standard.” And I was like, “But I’m confused,” and, you know, and the more questions, she got kind of defensive. 

Dan: Georgann says she quickly developed a little sympathy for the woman on the other side of the call. 

Georgann Boatright: I was like, this person has no clue. This is their job. They’re given this information. They’re given my phone number. They’re told to collect a thousand dollars from me. You know, I mean, it’s not her fault. 

Dan: So, Georgann quickly made a new plan. First step: get a line-item version of that estimate, in writing. And next: find somebody else to talk with. 

Georgann Boatright: I was like, “Well, hey, how about you just do me a printout and I’ll come by the hospital and pick that up. If you’ll just leave it with somebody near the desk …” 

Dan: … Then Georgann figured she can actually see what these charges are for and you know, maybe talk to somebody who’ll know a little more. She went that same day. 

Georgann Boatright: I wanted to get the biopsy done. I wanted to find out what was going on. You know, once you’ve had cancer, it kind of, that C word just does not sit well with your brain. You kind of, it starts eating at you and you’re like, I really want to know. 

Dan: And she wanted to know why the hospital wanted a thousand dollars from her. She got that printout– the line item estimate. It showed thirteen thousand dollars in charges. And the single biggest charge– more than half of the whole bill– eight thousand dollars– was for an “operating room” charge. It wasn’t labeled “facility fee,” but that’s exactly what it was. Georgann sent us this line-item estimate. We showed it to a medical-bill coding expert; she confirmed– this is a facility fee. And I’ll just mention again: Of all the people who sent us bills with facility fees on them, this was the highest by a LOT. Alot a lot. And seeing this “operating room” charge really set off alarm bells for Georgann. Because Georgann had just had TWO needle biopsies. And they sure as heck had not taken place in an operating room. 

Georgann Boatright: It’s a needle aspiration. It is ultrasound-guided. So it’s done in radiology. This is not in an operating room. 

Dan: When she got to Baptist, Georgann did get to talk in person with a billing specialist. It wasn’t a satisfying heart-to-heart, but it gave Georgann the clarity she needed. 

Georgann Boatright: At a certain point in the conversation, I was just kind of like, “You do realize that there is not an operating room involved in this?” And she said, “Well, of course, there is.” I was like, “No, there really isn’t.” “Oh, well, that’s just our standard procedure.” And so she stuck with that. And so I was like, okay, well, since you’re going to just stick with this, I’m going to just let this go. Because if I can’t seem to get you to understand that I’m not going to pay you 8,000 dollars for an operating room that I’m not going to go in, we’re not going to get anywhere. 

Dan: And Georgann knew she had an alternative: She could go back to the cancer center in Memphis. It was a bit of a drive, but she trusted them to do good work and not to overbill her. So that’s what she did. Her out of pocket cost was eighty dollars. We asked Baptist all about Georgann’s experience, and what was behind this eight-thousand dollar charge. Especially since medical and surgical supplies were listed as separate line items. 

A hospital spokesperson wrote back: “The price a patient sees on the hospital bill also reflects all the people who care for them and keep the hospital operating, not just the services provided, such as nurses and caregivers at the bedside, pharmacists, lab technicians, food service staff, environmental service professionals and security personnel who, among many others, keep the hospital running 24/7. We believe we charge fair and reasonable prices for our expert care.” 

Of course, we also asked Baptist why there would be an operating room charge at all, when the patient didn’t expect to be seen in an operating room. The spokesperson wrote back: “I’m not sure why there was a discrepancy. But, in general, the pricing information we share with patients is only an estimate, and the final bill can vary. We encourage patients to contact us with any questions.” OK, then. And I just want to say: I think– well, I KNOW– that I’ve undersold what it took for Georgann to make that decision. I mean, yeah, we’ve seen, Georgann showed a lot of initiative, and savvy, and decisiveness, and a certain amount of grace in navigating a couple of conversations with her local hospital’s billing department. But we haven’t seen EXACTLY what made her so prepared for those conversations, and to make her decision so quickly. And if we’re gonna learn from Georgann’s example, we’ve gotta look at that. That’s coming right up. 

This episode of An Arm and a Leg is a co-production of Public Road Productions and KFF Health News. Public Road is the organization I founded to make this show. The name comes from Walt Whitman; I’ll tell you about it sometime. KFF Health News is a nonprofit newsroom covering healthcare in America. Their journalists do amazing work– win all kinds of awards, every year. I’m honored to work with them. So, what allowed Georgann Boatright to navigate those conversations with her hospital billing department so skillfully? And to quickly decide to drive to another city for care? Well, let’s start with her old job as a speech pathologist. You might remember, when she did that job, she was living in places like Huntsville, Arkansas. Or, as Georgann describes it … 

Georgann Boatright: … Absolutely the middle of nowhere, Arkansas. 

Dan: It’s not like a speech therapist is gonna have a ton of clients in town. Georgann worked for an agency that sent her all over the place. 

Georgann Boatright: I was driving about three- to five-hundred miles a day when I retired. 

Dan: A day! 

Georgann Boatright: Yeah, well, they’re spread a little thin in that area. 

Dan: Yeah. Yeah. Right. How fast were you driving? Like, how many hours are we talking about being on the road? 

Georgann Boatright: I was usually on the road 12 to 14 hours a day. 

Dan: Oh my god. 

Georgann Boatright: Yeah, but that’s because, you know, I was bouncing in and out everywhere from Liberty, Missouri, which is outside of Kansas City, all the way down into Arkansas. 

Dan: So, we start to get the idea that driving an hour and a half from Oxford to Memphis is, you know, not such a big deal to Georgann. But there’s this other thing. Which is what Georgann spent all those hours in her car actually doing. Because she was not listening to podcasts, I can tell you that. She was dealing with health insurance. On behalf of her colleagues and her patients. 

Georgann Boatright: I was the person in our company that would do all the appeals. I got really good at getting Medicare, Medicaid, Blue Cross Blue Shield– all the insurances to pay. 

Dan: Georgann did all this by phone, with somebody back at the home office transcribing for her. It was part of her gig– because she had all that time in the car. The agency she worked with also employed physical therapists and occupational therapists, sending them out to nursing homes. And those colleagues would have multiple appointments a day at the same spot. 

Georgann Boatright: I would only have like, maybe one or two patients during the course of the day, and then I would end up doing paperwork the rest of the day or helping someone else do paperwork. 

Dan: Because not only did Georgann have time with all those hours in the car. She had something else: language skills. 

Georgann Boatright: The crew that I worked with, they were mostly from the Philippines, and we partied very well. And I ate a lot of good food, and I gained weight. And no fault of their own, English wasn’t their first language. So that was part of my job was to make sure that the language barrier wasn’t the problem for the physical and occupational therapists getting paid. 

Dan: So for five years, she spent most of her long workday dealing with insurance. 

Georgann Boatright: That was what I did, and I was really, really good at it. You know, when you get on a first name basis with the reps in your area, you know that you’re a thorn in their side. When they would see my name, they’d be like, “We might as well just go ahead and pay this one because she’s going to find a way to get it through.” 

Dan: So when Georgann ended up talking with those folks at her local hospital’s billing office– the folks who were trying to tell her that an eight-thousand-dollar operating-room fee was just standard– she had a pretty good idea of what their jobs were: Just getting the hospital’s money. 

Georgann Boatright: I get that. And I understand that, but you know, you have to understand when you’re calling people and asking them for money that you have to know why they’re paying you money and whether or not you can justify how much they’re paying you. 

Dan: So, just to recap: When Georgann was in those conversations with the local hospital billing department, she had years and years of experience in medical billing. She was, by her account, really really good at it. It doesn’t seem like a stretch to guess that when she talked with these folks at the local hospital’s billing department, she knew a lot more about medical billing than they did. And she knew that this hospital wasn’t her only option. She had just done cancer treatment at West Cancer Center in Memphis. She trusted them, and they hadn’t overbilled her. And she wasn’t afraid of a road trip. That 300-mile, 500-mile-a-day job was a while ago, but just in the last year she’d made the trek to Memphis for cancer treatments, several times. In fact, the story of the wrap-up to that treatment gave me real appreciation for Georgann Boatright’s brand of cheerful grit and determination. For more than a year, Georgann had been planning a big family reunion for Christmas: Her kids, their kids, gathered from across the country, to a lodge near her husband’s mom. 

Georgann Boatright: I wanted his mom who has been getting on in age to get a chance to see the great grands and this kind of stuff. 

Dan: Georgann had made the reservation for the lodge months before her cancer diagnosis. And then, the last day of her radiation treatment got scheduled for December 23. The reunion was scheduled to start that very night. In Branson, Missouri– a five-hour drive from Memphis. 

Georgann Boatright: And I was like, I am not canceling this. Everybody’s like, “Mom, you don’t have to do this,” blah, blah, blah. I was like, “No, I’m going to be healthy and done with this treatment. By the time of this reservation.” I said, “I don’t care what happens!” 

Dan: The procedure that last day was to remove a device that had been delivering targeted radiation doses. And when the day came, an ice storm knocked out the power at West Cancer Center. The medical staff suggested, you know, rescheduling. 

Georgann Boatright: They’re like, “Well, do you want to come … No! I want this done. I am not coming back tomorrow. 

Dan: Wow. 

Georgann Boatright: I am going to make this reservation. I’m going to spend the night in a very nice place in Branson, Missouri and play in the snow. 

Dan: It wasn’t gonna be easy. 

Georgann Boatright: There was no power. There was no lights. There was only the little emergency generator lights that come on in a hospital. 

Dan: But they made it work. 

Georgann Boatright: I had it taken out that day. By the flashlights of the nurses 

Dan: The flashlights on the nurses phones! Georgann says she slept in the car while her husband drove them to Branson that day. Mission accomplished. 

Georgann Boatright: It was a great trip, and everybody was there, and it was wonderful to kind of celebrate at the end of that. I was done with radiation. I was like, I’m going to get well now and just keep kicking cancer’s butt. Because I was like, I am not giving up. 

Dan: I said right at the top: This story is epic, right? And I said that whatever’s powering Georgann Boatright, I hope just a little bit of it can rub off on us– on me. So, when Georgann talked with the folks in the billing department at her local hospital, she knew just what she was capable of. Also, it’s worth mentioning, she knew she had some other things that not everybody has: She knew she had excellent insurance because she’d seen it at work when she got the bills for her breast cancer treatment. And she knew she had someone to drive her to Memphis and back. Uber? That would’ve cost a LOT. Actually, Georgann says she priced it recently for her job. 

Georgann Boatright: It’s 145 dollars, and I was like, you got to be kidding me! 

Dan: I believe I could fly to Memphis from Chicago for 145 dollars one way. 

Georgann Boatright: I could get a flight to Southwest for 120. Believe me, I do it. That’s my thing. If I do it during the week, I can go from here to Midway. Yeah. 

Dan: Wait, why is flying to Chicago’s Midway airport Georgann’s thing? Well, the answer actually relates to one more thing Georgann had going for her in this whole scenario. Something– someone– I left out before. 

Melissa McChesney: My name is Melissa McShesney. I live in Chicago, Illinois. 

Dan: Melissa is Georgann’s daughter. She is the mom of two of Georgann’s grandkids. Melissa’s brother– dad to three more grandkids– he also lives in Chicago. Those kids and grandkids are, all of them, the reason Georgann has that airfare at the tip of her tongue. But it’s Melissa who plays a role in this story. Because Melissa works for CMS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services– the federal agency that oversees Medicaid and Medicare. So health insurance is her job. I mean, at least government-funded insurance. 

Melissa McChesney: I only know enough to be dangerous on the private side. But, you know, I have colleagues that know a lot more. 

Dan: Melissa and her mom– two health-insurance experts– can back each other up. 

Melissa McChesney: It’s always great to have another set of eyes. So, sometimes I call her, sometimes she calls me. 

Dan: This time– after those conversations with the hospital billing department– it was Georgann who did the dialing. 

Melissa McChesney: She called me to say, “This doesn’t make any sense. Why is this the most expensive procedure I’ve seen in a year when I just went through breast cancer treatment? At least from the out-of-pocket cost. And I quite frankly didn’t fully know either. 

Dan: So some poking around led Melissa to a story from the Bill of the Month series our pals at KFF Health News do with NPR. 

NPRHost: For our September bill of the month, we’re taking a close look at facility charges … 

Dan: And this story was a pretty exact match with Georgann’s situation: An operating room charge for a needle biopsy. NPR’s website even had a PDF of the original bill, with the billing codes.  

Melissa McChesney: Which was very helpful, actually, because I was able to see the fee that the article was focused on. And I was like, “This is the exact same thing, mom.” 

Dan: And that bit of context? It confirmed for Georgann that she could trust her initial impression: That this “operating room” fee seemed out of whack. And that she could do better. So she had that biopsy at West Cancer Center in Memphis before the week was out. And good news: She’s OK! The biopsy came back benign. Her local endocrinologist has been monitoring her bloodwork. 

Georgann Boatright: And so right at the moment, my thyroid levels are all staying normal. So they’re not concerned that it’s throwing off everything unless it becomes like a huge thing that grows in my neck. 

Dan: And she gets an occasional ultrasound at a local clinic. No needle, no hospital, no facility fees– and keeping an eye on the bills. 

Georgann Boatright: They have been very reasonable. That’s why I was like, okay, well I’ll continue doing this as long as y’all don’t screw me over anymore. 

Dan: One last thing I should tell you about Georgann and how she handled that eight thousand dollar charge the hospital had wanted: This is something she did after her daughter Melissa sent her that NPR story– you know, the one that helped her decide she was definitely going to Memphis. Melissa’s got this part of the story. 

Melissa McChesney: She sent the NPR article and her estimate to her endocrinologist and said, “Just so you know, this is what happens when you refer individuals to this hospital. And you know, it would cost them a lot of money.” I was so proud of her for doing that. it just speaks to my mom and trying to be a person who’s not just worried about her own experience, but the experience of others in her community.

 Dan: I’m telling you, we all want some of Georgann Boatright to rub off on us.An ArmandaLeg Season 12, Episode 1 July, 11, 2024 p.14 You sent us SO MANYstories about facility fees. I hope you can see why we wanted to bring you this one first, but we are not done. We talked with a bunch of you– and we talked with some experts who gave us some insights … and some lessons. 

Shelley Safian: Sometimes you talk to the physician, sometimes you talk to the facility, sometimes you got to go to the president and say, “You know what? This is not right.” 

Dan: And we talked to experts who gave us a look at what policy makers all over the country are doing– or trying to do– about these fees. Because they’re definitely paying attention. Because a lot of people are recognizing: You should not need to be Georgann Boatright to find a way around fees like this. Most of us aren’t. 

Christine Monahan: There’s bipartisan interest in this issue. We are seeing these reforms bubble up across the states. 

Dan: So over the next couple of months, we’ll be sharing a LOT more of what you’ve been helping us learn. Meanwhile, because you’ve been so incredibly helpful here, I’m going to come back to you soon asking for more help on a different story. That’s coming next time. Till then, take care of yourself. 

This episode of An Arm and a Leg was produced by Emily Pisacreta and Claire Davenport, with help from me, Dan Weissmann, and edited by Ellen Weiss. Adam Raymonda is our audio wizard. Our music is by Dave Weiner and Blue Dot Sessions. Gabrielle Healy is our managing editor for audience. Gabe Bullard is our engagement editor. Bea Bosco is our consulting director of operations. Sarah Ballama is our operations manager. 

An Arm and a Leg is produced in partnership with KFF Health News. That’s a national newsroom producing in-depth journalism about healthcare in America and a core program at KFF, an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Zach Dyer is senior audio producer at KFF Health News. He’s editorial liaison to this show. 

And thanks to the Institute for Nonprofit News for serving as our fiscal sponsor. They allow us to accept tax-exempt donations. You can learn more about INN at INN.org. 

Finally, thank you to everybody who supports this show financially. You can join in any time at https://armandalegshow.com/support/. Thanks so much for pitching in if you can– and, thanks for listening.

“An Arm and a Leg” is a co-production of KFF Health News and Public Road Productions.

To keep in touch with “An Arm and a Leg,” subscribe to its newsletters. You can also follow the show on Facebook and the social platform X. And if you’ve got stories to tell about the health care system, the producers would love to hear from you.

To hear all KFF Health News podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to “An Arm and a Leg” on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

——————————
By: Dan Weissmann
Title: An Arm and a Leg: The Woman Who Beat an $8,000 Hospital Fee
Sourced From: kffhealthnews.org/news/podcast/woman-who-beat-hospital-facility-fee/
Published Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 09:00:00 +0000

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/healthsherpa-and-insurers-team-up-to-curb-unauthorized-aca-enrollment-schemes/

Kaiser Health News

Republicans Once Wanted Government out of Health Care. Trump Voters See It Differently.

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Noam N. Levey – 2025-02-27 04:00:00

Like many Americans who voted for Donald Trump, Jason Rouse hopes the president’s return will mean lower prices for gas, groceries, and other essentials.

But Rouse is looking to the federal government for relief from one particular pain point: high health care costs. “The prices are just ridiculous,” said Rouse, 53, a retired Michigan firefighter and paramedic who has voted for Trump three times. “I’d like to see a lower cap on what I have to pay out-of-pocket.”

Government regulation of health care prices used to be heresy for most Republicans. GOP leaders fiercely opposed the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which included government limits on patients’ costs. More recently, the party fought legislation signed by former President Joe Biden to cap prescription drug prices.

But as Trump begins his second term, many of the voters who sent him back to the White House welcome more robust government action to rein in a health care system many Americans perceive as out of control, polls show.

“That idea that government should just keep its hands off, even when things are tough for people, has kind of lost its sheen,” said Andrew Seligsohn, president of Public Agenda, a nonprofit that has studied public attitudes about government and health care.

“We’re wandering around the country with a set of old, outdated frameworks about what ordinary Democrats and ordinary Republicans like,” he said.

Republican voters strongly back federal limits on the prices charged by drug companies and hospitals, caps on patients’ medical bills, and restrictions on how health care providers can pursue people over medical debt.

Even Medicaid, the state-federal insurance program that Republican congressional leaders are eyeing to dramatically cut, is viewed favorably by many GOP voters, like Ashley Williamson.

Williamson, 37, a mother of five in eastern Tennessee who voted for Trump, said Medicaid provided critical assistance when her mother-in-law needed nursing home care. “We could not take care of her,” Williamson said. “It stepped in. It made sure she was taken care of.”

Williamson, whose own family gets coverage through her husband’s employer, said she would be very concerned by large cuts in Medicaid funding that could jeopardize coverage for needy Americans.

For years, Republican ideas about health care reflected a broad skepticism about government and fears that government would threaten patients’ access to physicians or lifesaving medicines.

“The discussions 10 to 15 years ago were all around choice,” said Christine Matthews, a Republican pollster who has worked for numerous GOP politicians, including former Maryland governor Larry Hogan. “Free market, not having the government limit or take over your health care.”

Matthews and fellow pollster Mike Perry recently convened and paid for several focus groups with Trump voters, including Rouse and Williamson, which KFF Health News observed.

Skepticism about government lingers among rank-and-file Republicans. And ideas such as shifting all Americans into a single government health plan, akin to “Medicare for All,” are still nonstarters for many GOP voters.

But as tens of millions of Americans are driven into debt by medical bills they don’t understand or can’t afford, many are reassessing their inclination to look to free markets rather than the government, said Bob Ward, whose firm, Fabrizio Ward, polled for Trump’s 2024 campaign.

“I think most people look at this and say the market is broken, and that’s why they’re willing for someone, anyone, to step in,” he said. “The deck is stacked against folks.”

In a recent national survey, Fabrizio Ward and Hart Research, which for decades has polled for Democratic candidates, found that Trump voters were more likely to blame health insurers, drug companies, and hospital systems than the government for high health care costs.

Sarah Bognaski, 31, an administrative assistant in upstate New York, is among the many Trump voters who say they resent profiteering by the health care industry. “I don’t think there is any reason a lot of the costs should be as high as they are,” Bognaski said. “I think it’s just out of pure greed.”

High health care costs have had a direct impact on Bognaski, who was diagnosed four years ago with Type 1 diabetes, a condition that makes her dependent on insulin. She said she’s ready to have the government step in and cap what patients pay for pharmaceuticals. “I’d like to see more regulation,” she said.

Charles Milliken, a retired auto mechanic in West Virginia, who said he backed Trump because the country “needs a businessman, not a politician,” expects the new president to go even further.

“I think he’s going to put a cap on what insurance companies can charge, what doctors can charge, what hospitals can charge,” said Milliken, 51, who recently had a heart attack that left him with more than $6,000 in medical debt.

Three-quarters of Trump voters back government limits on what hospitals can charge, Ward’s polling found.

And about half of Trump voters in a recent KFF poll said the new administration should prioritize expanding the number of drugs whose price is set through negotiation between the federal Medicare program and drug companies, a program started under the Biden administration.

Perry, who’s convened dozens of focus groups with voters about health care in recent years, said the support for government price caps is all the more remarkable since regulating medical prices isn’t at the top of most politicians’ agenda. “It seems to be like a groundswell,” he said. “They’ve come to this decision on their own, rather than any policymakers leading them there, that something needs to be done.”

Other forms of government regulation, such as limits on medical debt collections, are even more popular.

About 8 in 10 Republicans backed a $2,300 cap on how much patients could be required to pay annually for medical debt, according to a 2023 survey by Perry’s polling firm, PerryUndem. And 9 in 10 favored a cap on interest rates charged on medical debt.

“These are what I would consider no-brainers, from a political perspective,” Ward said.

But GOP political leaders in Washington have historically shown little interest in government limits on what patients pay for medical care. And as Trump and his allies in Congress begin shaping their health care agenda, many Republican leaders have expressed more interest in cutting government than in expanding its protections.

“There is oftentimes a massive disconnect,” Ward said, “between what happens in the caucuses on Capitol Hill and what’s happening at family tables across America.”


We’d like to speak with current and former personnel from the Department of Health and Human Services or its component agencies who believe the public should understand the impact of what’s happening within the federal health bureaucracy. Please message KFF Health News on Signal at (415) 519-8778 or get in touch here.

The post Republicans Once Wanted Government out of Health Care. Trump Voters See It Differently. appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

Opioid Cash Grab: As Federal Funding Dries Up, States Turn to Settlement Money

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Aneri Pattani – 2025-02-25 04:00:00

Opioid Cash Grab: As Federal Funding Dries Up, States Turn to Settlement Money


At a recent Nevada legislative committee hearing, lawmakers faced off with members of the governor’s administration over how to fill gaping holes in the state’s upcoming budget.

At issue: whether opioid settlement money — paid by health care companies that were sued for fueling the opioid crisis and meant to help states abate addiction — should be funneled to two counties for a safety-net program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, which is aimed at helping low-income children and families.

Previous funding “will no longer be available after June 30, 2025,” the budget proposal says. By then, billions of dollars in covid-era relief from the federal government — including a set-aside for TANF, which can cover emergency aid, job training, child care, and more — is likely to have expired.

Recognizing both the need for and uptake of this assistance, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo’s budget proposal directs $5 million in opioid settlement cash to shore up the program in the state’s most populous counties, Clark and Washoe.

The prospect of such trade-offs is smacking many states in the face as they embark on budget season.

Not only is the river of federal pandemic relief that flowed to public health, education, food assistance, child care, and more over the past few years drying up, but a deluge of actions from the Trump administration has thrown into question once-reliable federal funding for a myriad of social services and health care programs. Congressional Republicans have also threatened cuts to Medicaid, a joint federal and state health insurance program for many low-income people.

Together, these financial headwinds have left many states hunting for alternative funds to maintain crucial services.

Opioid settlement money can seem like an attractive option. More than $10 billion has landed in state and local government coffers in recent years and billions more are set to arrive over the next decade-plus.

But recovery advocates, family members who have lost loved ones to addiction, and legal experts say that money has a specific purpose: to address the ongoing addiction and overdose crisis.

Even if $5 million is a small portion of the hundreds of millions Nevada has received, some say spending it elsewhere sets a troubling precedent. Nevada Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, a Democrat, raised this concern at the February hearing.

“There doesn’t seem to be a direct link to opioids” in the governor’s proposal directing these dollars to TANF, he said. Settlement money should not be used “to backfill budget accounts.”

Richard Whitley, director of the state’s Department of Health and Human Services, insisted at the hearing that this was an appropriate use of settlement dollars. The money flowing through TANF will help “relatives who are raising children whose parents are substance-abusing,” he said.

In addition, Elizabeth Ray, a spokesperson for the Republican governor, told KFF Health News that the money would help families at risk of losing custody of their children due to substance use, with the goal of keeping kids in their homes and “ultimately reducing the need for foster care placements.” Implementing this program through the state’s TANF system would “reduce start-up costs and implementation time,” she wrote in a statement.

But TANF is available to many families living in poverty and it was unclear how these dollars would be targeted to such a subset.

Similar budget conflicts have surfaced in Connecticut — whose Democratic governor, the CT Mirror reports, is asking lawmakers to redirect opioid settlement money to social services that were previously funded through other means, including federal dollars — and Arizona, whose legislature transferred $115 million in settlement money to the state prison system last year to help close a $1.4 billion budget deficit.

National recovery advocate Ryan Hampton expects to see more efforts like this nationwide.

“I have a very high level of fear that states are going to be tapping into these settlement dollars in every creative way they can to fill some of these budget shortfalls,” he said. “It’s a grave misuse of funds and one that is going to have dire consequences.”

Although national overdose deaths have declined recently, tens of thousands of Americans are still dying from overdoses each year. In a few states, including Nevada, such deaths increased in the 12 months leading up to September.

“The intent of these dollars is to save lives right now,” said Hampton, who is in recovery from opioid addiction and founded a Nevada-based recovery advocacy organization. He submitted a public comment opposing the Nevada governor’s budget proposal.

Hampton and other advocates worry that using opioid funds for services that, even if crucial, are only tangentially related to addiction risks a repeat of the tobacco settlement of the 1990s.

At that time, cigarette manufacturers agreed to pay state governments billions of dollars annually. Initially, states spent a chunk of that money on anti-smoking programs, said Meg Riordan, a vice president of research at the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, which tracks states’ spending on tobacco prevention programs.

But over time, states encountered budget crunches and many raided or dissolved trust funds they’d set up to protect tobacco money. Instead, they funneled the cash directly into their general funds and spent it on infrastructure projects and budget shortfalls.

“Once the funds start going somewhere else, there’s a risk that they won’t come back,” Riordan said.

Tobacco use remains a leading cause of preventable death in America.

The opioid settlements have more guardrails than the tobacco settlement did, but KFF Health News’ multiyear investigation found lax oversight and enforcement.

Nevada and Connecticut are among 13 states that have explicitly restricted the practice of supplantation, or using opioid settlement funds to replace existing funding streams.

Whitley, Nevada’s DHHS director, and the governor’s office have insisted that none of their proposed uses of settlement funds are examples of supplanting.

At the February hearing, Whitley repeatedly suggested that the budget proposal was misworded, creating a false impression. “We’ll clean that up with the language,” he said.

But he also emphasized the importance of settlement dollars as federal funding sources diminish. “As ARPA [the American Rescue Plan Act] goes away and other flexible funding goes away to address problems, this becomes one that really we have to rely on,” he said.

That perspective seems reasonable to JK Costello, director of behavioral health consulting for the Steadman Group, a company that he said is helping about a dozen local governments across the country administer the settlements.

Ideally settlement money adds to existing services, he said, but realistically, some safety-net programs, even if they don’t directly address addiction, can be a lifeline for people with opioid use disorder. If major cuts in federal spending imperil those programs, using settlement funds to save them could be worthwhile.

“Getting people into great treatment when their housing voucher is cut isn’t really that helpful,” Costello said. “Treatment isn’t going to work if they’re not able to eat or feed their kids.”

The tricky thing is that many community organizations that work directly on addiction and recovery issues are also feeling the crunch of expiring federal aid and expected federal program changes that would reduce their resources, Costello said. When everyone is strapped, deciding where limited settlement dollars can do the most good becomes increasingly challenging.

Some places presciently set aside opioid settlement funds in “emergency” or “sustainability” accounts that could be tapped for addiction services in case of declining federal aid. South Dakota has such a fund with more than $836,000, according to its 2024 opioid report. None of it has been used yet.

Kristen Pendergrass, vice president of state policy for the addiction-focused nonprofit Shatterproof, hopes states turn to rainy day funds first, before raiding settlement accounts.

Nevada has $1.23 billion in its rainy day fund, more than the national median, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts.

“It would be a slippery slope if we stop paying attention now” and allow settlement funds to be used for anything, Pendergrass said. “The money was won to remediate harms and save lives. It should be used that way.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Read the full article

The post Opioid Cash Grab: As Federal Funding Dries Up, States Turn to Settlement Money appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Continue Reading

Kaiser Health News

Montana’s Medicaid Expansion Conundrum – KFF Health News

Published

on

kffhealthnews.org – Sue O’Connell – 2025-02-24 04:00:00

SUMMARY: Montana’s Republican-led legislature and GOP governor are poised to extend the state’s Medicaid expansion program, covering 76,000 adults, beyond its June 30 expiration. With potential changes at the federal level, state lawmakers must act quickly. Discussions prioritize preparing for possible federal rollbacks, including cuts and work requirements. Recent legislation passed in the House to make expansion permanent, while other proposals suggest tightening eligibility and cost control. Although concerns over increased state costs loom if federal support decreases, some lawmakers argue against making adjustments based on uncertain federal policies. Bipartisan opposition has surfaced regarding proposals to curtail the expansion.

Read the full article

The post Montana’s Medicaid Expansion Conundrum – KFF Health News appeared first on kffhealthnews.org

Continue Reading

Trending