Newest Medicaid Reform Plan Gets Tepid Reception
July 17, 2014 - North Carolina Health News
Members of the Senate presented yet another version of a Medicaid reform plan 
Wednesday. They are expected to have more public-discussion comment on Thursday 
morning at 9.
By Rose Hoban
Dr. Conrad Flickfs primary care office in Raleigh is not the kind of place 
where youfll see a lot of ties. Instead, the eight doctors and nurse 
practitioners at Family Medical Associates of Raleigh are more likely to wear 
polo shirts or scrubs and take the time to sit and listen to patients.
But Flickfs easy-going demeanor drops away quickly when he starts talking 
about the Senatefs latest plan to reform North Carolinafs Medicaid program. His 
voice becomes frustrated and angry.
gTheyfll give great press releases about how this is all about patients, but 
not a single one of them takes care of patients on a day-to-day basis,h Flick 
said Wednesday afternoon. gNot a single one of those people knows what itfs like 
to have to deal with the system that they are about ready to create.h
The system Flick refers to is one presented by state senators during a 
meeting of the Senate Rules and Operations Committee Wednesday morning.
In the plan, senators call for moving the statefs Medicaid program to a 
gfully capitatedh managed care system whereby doctors and hospitals are given a 
set amount of money to care for patients, no matter how complicated, and are 
compelled to live within that budget.
The plan also opens the door for for-profit managed care companies to bid on 
contracts to cover regional care networks.
This differs from the latest House version of the reform plan, which calls 
for physician and provider-run accountable care organizations to manage patient 
care and share in both financial risk and reward. That plan allows for a slower 
transition to bearing full financial risk for providers.
Managed care is a type of arrangement akin to what existed in the 1990s, when 
private managed care insurers predominated in the health care market and doctors 
complained that insurance bureaucrats tied their hands.
And that was the basis of Flickfs complaint.
gTheir job is not so much managing patients as it seems to be managing costs 
and managing the expenses and managing finances,h he said. gTo me, it puts 
another layer between you and the patient.h
On board
The new plan would pull state oversight of Medicaid out of the Department of 
Health and Human Services into a new Department of Medical Benefits. Planning 
would start Aug. 1. The transfer to the new department would be complete by July 
2016.
The new department would be managed by a seven-member board consisting 
primarily of appointees who have experience in the insurance and managed care 
industries. The plan would exclude academics from the statefs medical 
universities from serving on the board because they work for universities with 
hospitals that contract with Medicaid.
Minority leader Dan Blue (D-Raleigh) asked why the board would not allow for 
having health economists from one of the departments at the statefs medical 
schools.
gThey are the ones who write about [health care], who study it intensely – 
academicians who understand this better than anyone,h Blue said.
Sen. Ralph Hise (R-Spruce Pine), who presented the new version of the bill, 
said they were looking primarily for people with corporate experience. He said 
they also didnft want board members with any ties whatsoever to Medicaid, no 
matter how peripheral.
gWe donft want to allow providers to set their own rates,h Hise said.
Chip Baggett, who represents the North Carolina Medical Society at the 
legislature, expressed frustration that there would be no providers on the 
board.
gWhile itfs important to have insurance experience on this board, 
non-provider-led experience on this board, we also need provider-led physician 
ideas c as we look at what the Medicaid plan is going to be going forward,h he 
said.
Others made the point that people with insurance company ties could be on the 
board while insurers would be benefiting from the rates being set.
Aggressive
Members of the committee expressed concern about the gaggressiveh timeline, 
which would have the fully risk-bearing managed care organizations up and 
running within two years. Provider-led plans would have an additional two years 
to move to being fully risk bearing.
gWe donft have until 2020 to wait to get a system in place that can control 
the problems wefve had in Medicaid for nearly a decade now,h Hise responded.
Providers and DHHS representatives also voiced concern about the 
timeline.
gIfm not sure [the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] would approve 
some of these things within this timeline,h said Adam Sholar, the legislative 
liaison for DHHS.
Sen. Josh Stein (D-Raleigh) worried that the short time frame would be too 
quick for any provider-led organizations to get up to speed and be able to 
compete with large managed care companies that would arrive with the actuarial 
and accounting expertise already in place.
gItfs not inconsistent to whatfs happened in other states,h Hise said. g At 
this point, you basically have a four-year time window in which we expect plans 
to be fully capitated.h
He cited examples, primarily from Florida, in which he said full capitation 
was reached within two years. But the Florida expansion came after a 
multi-county pilot plan that started in 2005. Parts of Florida are only this 
month coming online for Medicaid managed care.
Deja vu all over again
This latest plan was created because the House and Senate continue to have differing 
visions for Medicaid reform and is similar to the plan originally floated by Gov. Pat McCrory in April 2013.
In the interim though, there have been public hearings, a study committee, an 
gofficialh plan and at least five versions of the current bill.
gWe have had a budget problem that over the last four years has cost us $2 
billion,h said Hise. gIf we put that off another six years to wait to where we 
can have a controlled system in place to allow a slower build up, that is at a 
huge cost to the taxpayers.h
But Republican House lawmakers, such as Health and Human Services Committee 
Co-chair Nelson Dollar, have pointed out that one of the biggest problems is 
with forecasting Medicaid spending. He has said on numerous occasions that Republicans have fixed many of the structural 
problems with the program since taking the majority in 2010.
Wednesday afternoon, Dollar would only comment that he was gpleasedh the 
Senate had presented a plan.
gThere have been those budgeting and forecasting problems, but the problems 
have been related to that, not to care delivery,h said Greg Griggs, head of the 
North Carolina Association of Family Physicians.
This plan gignores 16 months of hard work that wefve all done to develop a 
plan that works for taxpayers, works for our most vulnerable citizens and works 
for health care providers,h Griggs said.
McCrory spokesman Josh Ellis called the proposed reorganization 
gimpractical,h saying it gundermines the progress that has been made during the 
past year and a half.h
gThis legislative overreach also raises some serious constitutional issues 
and should not be raised in the closing days of the short session,h he said.
Additional reporting provided by Jasmin Singh.