SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE OREGON HEALTH PLAN
May 29, 2003 Hearing
Room C
3:00 P.M. Tapes 11-14
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sen. Peter Courtney, Co-Chair
Sen. Jackie Winters,
Co-Chair
Sen. Kate Brown
Sen. Bill Fisher
Sen. John Minnis
Sen. Bill Morrisette
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Sen. Margaret Carter
Sen. Lenn Hannon
STAFF PRESENT: Marjorie Taylor, Committee
Administrator
Heather Gravelle, Committee
Assistant
MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD: Prioritization of populations
served and benefit packages provided by the Oregon Health Plan – Public Hearing
These minutes are in
compliance with Senate and House Rules.
Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact
words. For complete contents,
please refer to the tapes.
|
TAPE/# |
Speaker |
Comments |
|
Tape 11, A |
||
|
005 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Calls meeting to order at 3:10 p.m., makes
announcements, and opens a public hearing on the prioritization of
populations served and benefit packages provided by the Oregon Health Plan. |
|
PRIORITIZAATION
OF POPULATIONS SERVED AND BENEFIT PACKAGES PROVIDED BY THE OREGON HEALTH PLAN
- PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
020 |
Kelley Kaiser |
Co-Chair, Medical Advisory Committee. Advocates for
increased revenue and urges committee to choose benefits based on
evidence-based medicine (EXHIBIT
A). |
|
069 |
Jean Thorne |
Director, Department of Human Services. Introduces Barry Kast, Assistant Director
for Health Services, and Dr. Tina Kitchen, Medical Director for Seniors and
People with Disabilities. Asks that
the members remember the Oregon Health Plan really is interwoven and is so
much of what the department does.
States that if service is not provided for certain groups, that in
turn may cause cost shifts to other parts of the department or other parts of
government. States that Kast and
Kitchen will talk about the services. |
|
085 |
Thorne |
Comments on a new federal law that will allow
enhanced federal Medicaid match to the states and the strings that are
attached. The new law provides state
fiscal relief. One is an enhanced
Medicaid match of 2.95 percent for five quarters beginning this past
quarter—beginning the last two quarters of federal fiscal year 2003 and the
first three quarters of fiscal year 2004.
The federal government estimates that will provide about $100 million
to Oregon. States they are looking at
those revisions because it may have been based on some of Oregon’s past
expenditures so it may be somewhat less.
The other piece is called “flexible assistance” and is, in essence, a
grant to the state of about $116 million to use for a variety of purposes. |
|
101 |
Thorne |
States there are some strings on the enhanced
Medicaid match. There are some
maintenance of efforts requirements.
A key provision is that in order to keep all the money to which Oregon
is entitled, we must not restrict our Medicaid eligibility. |
|
100 |
Sen. Minnis |
Asks for a copy of the document Thorne is reading
from. |
|
105 |
Thorne |
States she is reading from the tax cut bill
including the fiscal relief and will send information to members. |
|
120 |
Thorne |
States there is a maintenance of effort provision
that requires that states not restrict their Medicaid eligibility below that
which is in effect on September 2, 2003.
States they are working with the federal government to determine what
“in effect means.” They do know it
relates to Medicaid eligibility and to eligibility under 1115 waivers, which
is the waiver Oregon currently has under the Health Plan. States if there are optional groups such
as pregnant women that the legislature may no long want to cover under
Medicaid, and the legislature wishes to reduce the eligibility, it would need
to be done quickly. It could be done under
a state plan amendment and be in effect prior to September 2 in order to
claim the money. |
|
137 |
Thorne |
States that on the 1115 waivers, because that must
be negotiated with the federal government, they believe if the legislature
wanted to eliminate coverage for standards, they don’t believe it could be
done prior to September 2, 2003. The
federal government requires a phase down so it would probably mean January 1. They think that means Oregon could claim,
if coverage for Standard is eliminated as of January 1, Oregon likely would
still be able to claim the enhanced match of the additional 2.95 percent for
the current quarter, the next quarter, and the last quarter of this calendar
year, but would forego the enhanced match for the other two quarters that are
a part of this. |
|
155 |
Thorne |
The committee needs to recognize that there are some
potential implications of reducing eligibility; we can reduce benefits but we
cannot reduce eligibility without some kind of potential loss of some of the
enhanced match. Adds that it does not
relate to CHIP eligibility. |
|
163 |
Sen. Morrisette |
Advises Thorne that the committee will be meeting on
Saturday to make decisions. |
|
155 |
Thorne |
Responds that many states are grappling with the new
provisions and the federal government is also trying to figure out what this
means. States she thinks they can
clearly say if we eliminate Standard, and unless there is someway to get it
in effect before September 2, there will be some loss of the enhanced match. |
|
|
Co-Chair Winters |
Asks that Thorne provide the committee before the
meeting on Saturday with a copy of the legislation and any summaries and
information from other states and the federal government. |
|
180 |
Thorne |
Comments she understands there has been some
discussion about the possibility of prioritizing Medically Needy before Standard. Advises that if the Medically Needy
program is restored and Standard is not, it easily will increase the size of
the Medically Needy program because there will be people who meet the
criteria under Medically Need who would not spend down. |
|
196 |
Thorne |
Asks that Barry Kast talk about some of the issues
around mental health and chemical dependency, and Tina Kitchen to talk about
the issues around long-term care population, services, and the eligibility
groups that are on the committee’s list. |
|
200 |
Barry Kast |
Assistant Director for Health Services, Department
of Human Services. Provides information on the mental health and chemical
dependency benefit that was provided to the Standard population before March
1. Provides background information
from the mid 1980s through the mid 1990s. States that during 2002, 29,000
eligibles were served under the Standard benefit in either mental health or
chemical dependency programs; 13,500 were in chemical dependency and 16,000
in mental health. This group consumed
about 18 percent of the cost of mental health pharmaceuticals and 22 percent
of the 390,000 prescriptions that were written. Cutting that benefit has had some significant impacts. The first effect was the alcohol and drug
treatment contractors lost about 60 percent of their revenue because it had
been shifted into the health plan.
The criminal justice system experienced significant reductions,
too. This population of people who
have been convicted of driving under the influence of intoxicants uses a lot
of services. Nearly 3,000 people were
maintained on methadone under this benefit.
The drug courts that were to divert people out of criminal justice in
many cases have lost access to services.
Acute mental health care has been increasing—not surprising since the
benefit produced an out-patient service.
They have seen about a 50 percent reduction in out-patient visits
since March. |
|
225 |
Sen. Morrisette |
Asks if Kast has the statistics in writing. |
|
230 |
Kast |
States he will provide that information. |
|
235 |
Kast |
States that about 30 percent of children in foster
care have parents who are involved with alcohol and drugs. About 41 percent of child protective cases
have a drug and alcohol component.
Many of these families are eligible under this benefit and do not have
services available through the Medicaid program. |
|
240 |
Dr. Tina Kitchen |
Medical Director for Seniors and People with
Disabilities. Presents statement on
Optional OHP Services and Long Term Care and Employed Persons with
Disabilities (EXHIBIT B). |
|
366 |
Ann Uhlu |
Board Member of the Women’s Commission on Alcohol
and Drug Issues. States there had
been great treatment of women and children until March 1, 2003. Oregon has had more women’s treatment
slots per capita than any other state in the union. States they are assuming that alcohol and drug for pregnant
women and women and children will stay as a benefit, and that the legislature
is considering the additional population of women. Comments on women losing custody of their children temporarily
and the need for alcohol and drug treatment.
The estimate is $25 million for additional foster care if the services
are not provided. As of March 1 these
people can not get the services and can not get their children back. Comments further on cost of foster care,
lack of foster parents, the backlog of need when coverage was first provided,
and women 45-60 who are unemployed or are employed in low pay jobs with no
health coverage. |
|
Tape 12, A |
||
|
030 |
Rick Treleaven |
Executive Director, BestCare Treatment Services, and
Mental Health Director, Jefferson County Mental Health. Submits prepared statement and asks for the
committee to consider extending the chemical dependency benefits to the
non-categorical adults and families along with primary care benefits (EXHIBIT C). |
|
085 |
Tim Hartnett |
Executive Director, CODA. Presents a prepared statement advocating for inclusion of alcohol
and drug treatment in the Oregon Health Plan (EXHIBIT D). |
|
165 |
Jeff Davis |
Administrator, Marion County Health Department, and
Vice President, Association of Oregon Community Mental Health Programs. Submits prepared statement (EXHIBIT E) and supports previous
testimony on reinstatement of mental health and chemical dependency benefits
into the Oregon Health Plan, and the need for care of the medically
needy. Comments on interconnections
between mental health and chemical dependency service and other service
systems. |
|
190 |
Davis |
Explains graphs attached to his testimony (EXHIBIT E, pages 4, 5 and 7). |
|
245 |
Randy Sorvisto |
A recovering heroin addict, and a Co-Chair,
Recovering Association Project.
Explains that he works with people in the early stages of coming out
of detoxification, both Standard and Plus clients. Comments on his recovery process as a consumer of OHP, and his
success working in the field.
Comments on lack of access to treatment by parents who have lost their
children in Multnomah County, and the need for OHP coverage. |
|
|
Jamie Schuman |
A recovering addict, mother, and wife. Explains her story of becoming an addict,
learning of the OHP after coming to Oregon, and her recovery. |
|
370 |
Dan Perkins |
Recovering heroin addict from Portland. Comments on
his hopelessness then going through the detoxification center with the help
of the OHP. Comments on his
success. |
|
420 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Thanks the witnesses for their personal testimony. |
|
440 |
Linda Williams |
Recovering heroin addict. Comments on her success with assistance of the OHP. |
|
TAPE 11, B |
||
|
019 |
Thomas Jones |
Recovering addict.
Comments on his success as a result of the OHP. States he still collects
Oregon Health Plan Plus benefits due to mental illness. Has worked for a
company for 20 months. Mentions son who suffers from drugs and mental
illness. Asks that alcohol and drug
coverage be provided through the OHP. |
|
034 |
Rev. Carolyn R. Palmer |
Public Policy Director, Special Concerns Ministries;
Legislative Representative, Multnomah County In-Home Care Advisory Committee;
and 504 Disability Ward, Housing Authority of Portland. Advocates for Title 19 funds for
prescription coverage, medical transportation, and funding for Level 14
mobility. States that the smaller
churches are not able to maintain even one person. Also advocates for transportation for the medically needy, and
more revenues. |
|
100 |
Janine DeLaunay |
Oregon Disabilities Commission. Submits prepared statement (EXHIBIT F). Comments she believes it is their job to determine the health
needs of Oregonians and to figure out the services that will meet those needs
and to find a way to pay for those.
The commission is concerned that if a cap is set and then somehow
figure out how to either get some people in and some out, or try to pare down
services, it is not a good way to do things and does not do what the OHP was
designed to do, which was to provide a basic health care package for
Oregonians that need health care in the most effective way. To ask anyone to prioritize who is more needy
or deserving of a benefit is not a good question to ask. States she is also hearing about the need
to restore the medically needy program for citizens who cannot afford
medications. |
|
110 |
DeLaunay |
States that the People with Disabilities Program
helps disabled persons be employed and pay taxes and contribute and still
maintain their health care benefits and the long-term care benefits so they
can be provided attended care and other services while they are working. If the program goes away, people with disabilities
will no longer be employed. Each
service under the OHP is linked to another and to say one is more important
is difficult. It is important that we
pay for prescription drugs and mental health and chemical dependency
services, vision coverage, and therapies.
States she believes we need to consider revenue to fund these
services, and that the Oregon Disabilities Commission could not prioritize
services. |
|
165 |
Ellen Lowe |
States she testifies on behalf of low income Oregonians
who go to the Oregon Food Bank and Oregon Law Center for assistance. Asks that the committee examine the
financial capacity of the OHP members to participate in the cost-sharing,
particularly the premiums. States
that nearly 50 percent of the adults on Standard are below 25 percent of the
federal poverty level. They believe
the decrease in the Standard OHP enrollment is another indication of the lack
of ability to pay; premiums become a denial of access for many. Those choosing to stay with the OHP are
very likely the ones with chronic illnesses.
Their profiles are not the same as the non-categoricals before the
advent of Plus and Standard. It leads
to adverse selection which needs to be reflected in the capitation
rates. The rates should accommodate
the challenges so the patients can be served with coordinated care in their
local areas. |
|
206 |
Lowe |
States the OHP faces another related fiscal
crisis. It involves questions about
adequacy of reimbursements to providers.
Providers were assured in SB 27 that their compensation would be fair;
it has not been and has discouraged participation by a growing number of
physicians and plans. Most of the
optional benefits, according to federal law, are not really optional within
Oregon norms. Gives example of dental
services being discussed as an add-on, something separate. States they support dental coverage for
all served populations. |
|
226 |
Lowe |
Adds that as a member of the Health Services
Commission, having conducted hearings on this back to 1989, they hear from
the public that dental services is a priority. Adds that mental health and chemical dependency services are
also essential benefits of a health care plan. Those services are linked to the obligations as a state to work
with families for reunification. The
conditions calling for these treatments are part of the OHP prioritized
list. |
|
235 |
Lowe |
Adds that when the committee is considering HB 3624,
they ask that the committee think of where benefits can be most appropriately
delivered to populations covered by the OHP; that means supporting the
existing safety net clinics, school-based health centers, and urgent care
facilities. If the committee chooses
to narrow the OHP benefits for the non-categoricals to a primary care package,
it becomes even more important to have this local primary care safety net in
place. States that Oregon includes
the general assistance population with the federal mandatory group, the
categoricals. These are Oregonians
who have less than $50 to their name, $1,500 in resources, and have a disability
of at least a year in duration. The
fragile health status of these Oregonians dictates their continuing presence
with the OHP Plus population, the mandatory group. |
|
245 |
Marcia Kelley |
Women’s Rights Coalition. Submits a prepared statement (EXHIBIT G). States she
is troubled that they are asked to set priorities for coverage. States that their organization suggests
that the priorities that this body should be working toward is the priority
of funding services—not considering one population against another. We should be finding all available
resources and leveraging those resources for federal dollars. Priorities should be in assuring
Oregonians that we can read the inscription on the front of the building and
act on those words. |
|
329 |
Lynn-Marie Crider |
Research Director, Oregon AFL-CIO. Submits a prepared statement (EXHIBIT H). Comments on serving on the Application Steering Committee a
couple of years ago when the OHP Standard benefit plan was designed. States they recognizes these are tough fiscal
times for Oregon, and that it distresses them that we would consider reducing
or pushing people out of the safety net of the OHP at the time people
especially need it. Urges that the
committee ask those who are paid as much this year as last to step forward to
assist those who do not have jobs and who currently qualify for the OHP. |
|
355 |
Crider |
States that the OHP was created so that we would
stop rationing people and urges the committee to find a way to provide basic
benefits to all people who are currently covered and to maintain the same
benefits. States that the Health
Services Commission has done a job of thinking carefully about how to provide
cost effective health services to Oregonians and we should not be trying to
lay a whole different system of prioritizing benefits on top of that. |
|
370 |
Crider |
States that they recognize the committee may have to
do some things they would not like to do.
Comments on considerations when creating the OHP Standard
benefit. Suggest that the OHP Standard
should not be maintained in its current form. Ideally, they would eliminate the two tier structure of the
OHP. If we do not have the resources
to do that, we need to design a benefit package for adults that meets their
most pressing needs. That means that
everyone under 100 percent of poverty should have a primary care benefit that
includes preventive care of all kinds including mental health and chemical
dependency services. It is also
critically important that there be no premiums for the primary benefit
package and that the co-pays be very small.
Otherwise we will continue to find that low-income people make the
decision that they cannot afford health care. The primary benefit package costed
by staff and reported to the committee is not the kind of primary benefit
package that they believe should be adopted because it retains the
problematic premium and co-pay structure of OHP Standard while further
diminishing the benefits that people would get from the program. They do support the concept of the primary
care benefit package, that is, the decision to save money by not covering
hospitalization for adults. They
believe the preventive care services should be available. They think the experience they have heard
reported from the safety net suggests that people will pay the money they
need to make a small co-pay when they get services. The clinics will work with them on how to pay the co-pay. The premiums are a barrier to services and
need to be eliminated in a primary care benefit package. |
|
TAPE 12, B |
||
|
005 |
Sen. Brown |
Asks if something is better than nothing even with a
premium, and whether the emergency package for the adult Standard policy, as
suggested by the dental community with a $2 premium leveraged with federal
dollars makes sense. |
|
010 |
Crider |
Responds that she thinks the premium cost would be
about ten percent of the total package.
Thinks that eliminating the premium would up the total in General Fund
and federal dollars by about ten percent.
If the premium is a barrier to people getting services, it is not
worth doing. Thinks the revenue
should be generated someplace. States
she doesn’t know if a $2 premium for the dental service is worth collecting. |
|
025 |
Lowe |
Responds that she applauds the dentist to try and
come up with some services. Within the revamping of narrowing treatments for
the Plus population, it seemed those same services need to be there for the Standard
population as well. Premiums, as
structured in the Standard plan, the almost-no-income Oregonians having to
pay on a monthly basis becomes very difficult. States that paying at the time of service was far easier for
people and they were more likely to seek treatment in a timely way. |
|
045 |
Co-Chair Courtney |
Asks if Crider suggested a primary preventative care
package with no premium. |
|
050 |
Crider |
Responds she thinks that is what would work. |
|
|
Co-Chair Courtney |
Asks Crider what would be in the package. |
|
|
Crider |
Responds that she thinks the plans previously
presented by staff has the right set of benefits: physician services, mental
health and chemical dependency.
Believes she would eliminate the premium and maintain point-of-service
cost sharing. |
|
069 |
Sen. Minnis |
Asks if the union membership has voted on the
position in her statement (EXHIBIT H). |
|
060 |
Crider |
Explains that their union membership elects their
leadership and that she works with the leadership to develop policy and
responses. Explains their leadership,
the Executive Board, which includes representatives of some 50 of the largest
unions did set health care as a priority and said that maintaining a strong
OHP was a priority. The detail of
their position that she has presented has not been voted on by the
membership. |
|
075 |
Sen. Minnis |
Comments that the Portland Police Association, of
which he is a member, has not taken a stand like this, and he is interested
in how the AFL-CIO develops broad based policies and what the membership
actually says about it, as opposed to the Executive Board. |
|
080 |
Crider |
Responds that the philosophy they have about this is
that their organization has taken a stand in favor of covering everybody with
health care and strengthening the OHP. |
|
091 |
Sen. Minnis |
Comments that Crider, as others do, recommends that
revenue be raised to cover these expenses, and the assumption is that the
AFL-CIO membership would pay a portion.
Asks if their membership has actually voted on whether or not they
support increasing taxes or payroll taxes, or some other funding mechanism
for this purpose. Comments it is of
interest to him because he introduced a broad based employer tax for this
purpose. |
|
090 |
Crider |
Respond that their last convention passed a
resolution on the importance of adopting a stronger system of taxation and
funding of public services, and will share that with the committee. States their labor council acted
unanimously in support of the recent Portland tax levy. |
|
100 |
Sen. Minnis |
Asks if the membership voted. |
|
102 |
Crider |
Responds they are a representative body. |
|
105 |
Lisa Kolbuss |
Citizen of Eugene and part-time instructor at Lane
Community College. Comments on the elimination of the Employed-Persons with
Disabilities Program. Speaks about
her diagnosis of bi-polar disorder and treatments for five years, and her
diagnosis of fibromyalgia and further hospitalizations. States she depends on her health care
provider to help her with health needs and in-home activities. States she is on 13 to15 medications a
day, and sometimes require 12-14 hours sleep a day. States the Employed Persons with Disabilities Program provides
medical benefits and the help of an in-home care provider five hours a
week. Her monthly medical expenses,
which includes prescription drugs at $850 to $1,000 a month, and visits to
the chronic pain specialist, allergist, psychiatrist, psychologist, and
in-home health care provider are beyond her monthly income of $1,400 a month
and there is no way for her family to help.
If she looses health coverage and care provider, she will not be able
to work. States that those on the
program pay toward their care; she pays $198.30 a month toward her health
expenses and pays state income taxes and co-pays for medications and medical
care. Asks why more is being cut from
Medicaid when over 30 corporations in Oregon pay only $10 a year in state
taxes. |
|
200 |
Maddy Babkeys |
Widow with four children. States she is representing
her son Joseph, a young adult with developmental disabilities. He receives Social Security deaf benefits,
not SSI although he is disabled. He has been on the Employed Persons with
Disabilities program since last August and works 15 hours per week; his hours
were cut so they wouldn’t have to pay for his medical benefits. He works to pay the premium of
$224.30. Unemployment is not an
option because he still would not receive SSI. Suggests that there be a re-budgeting of funds so those who pay
into the insurance will not lose their benefits. |
|
260 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Advises Babkeys that she will visit with her later
because she does not understand why her son cannot shift from one benefit to
another. |
|
276 |
Babkeys |
Responds that she has consulted with a Social Security
specialist and was advised that it would be a waste of time to pursue this
further because Social Security will not change him because they do not want
another person on the welfare rolls. |
|
265 |
Bill Toland |
Leader for Recovering Association Project, Mid
Valley in Salem, a full time student, and recovering addict. Speaks in
support of OHP. States that because
of the OHP he was allowed as a recovering addict to participate in programs
to get life back. States he is a
client of the Department of Corrections but because of the OHP cuts he has to
pay for anything that has to do with alcohol and drug treatment and does not
have the money to do that. States
there are people who need the programs to get their lives back in order and they
cannot do that without the alcohol and drug treatment. |
|
337 |
Jim Whittenburg |
Submits prepared statement (EXHIBIT I). Comments on
patients not having the co-pay required to receive services. Asks for assistance in contacting a
pharmaceutical company regarding a prescription for an OHP client. |
|
390 |
Robert Tsow |
Leader in the Recovery Association Project for
Multnomah County and recovering addict.
Presents a prepared statement in support of coverage of mental health
and alcohol and drug treatment (EXHIBIT
J). |
|
TAPE 13, A |
||
|
010 |
Gary Cobb |
Recovery Association Project. Presents a prepared statement in support
of coverage for mental health and alcohol and drug treatment (EXHIBIT K). |
|
055 |
David Eisen |
Clinical Director of CentralCityConcern Recovery Services.
States they provide primary care, alcohol and drug treatment, psychiatric
care, mental health care, mentoring, acupuncture services, and alcohol
drug-free housing for over 360 homeless and low-income people on the OHP Standard. They treat over 3,000 unduplicated people
a year. States they are quite
familiar with the stories and there are hundreds if not thousands of people a
year who are benefiting from OHP Standard because of income eligibility and
are turning their lives around. |
|
085 |
Eisen |
States there needs to be accountability in the OHP,
both Standard and Plus. We need to
make sure the people and institutions that get OHP reimbursements have viable
and measurable outcomes. States he is
willing to pay more taxes and wants to know the money is going somewhere that
creates outcomes. |
|
106 |
Eisen |
Comments that if a person misses a premium payment
they cannot reapply to OHP for six months.
From an ethical point of view with regard to continuity of care, they
are viewed as abandoning the patient which becomes a liability to the
clinic. |
|
122 |
Sen. Brown |
Asks what has happened to the clients that were on
the OHP Standard. |
|
120 |
Eisen |
Responds that some died, some committed suicide, and
some went back to the penitentiary. |
|
134 |
Sen. Brown |
Asks Eisen to talk about the effectiveness of
acupuncture in drug and alcohol treatment. |
|
125 |
Eisen |
States that acupuncture is probably the most cost
effective medical intervention that is available on the list of procedures
codes for treating addictions, depression and anxiety. It is drug free, there are outcomes and
research which prove its effectiveness, and can be put into residential treatment
centers and out patient treatment sittings.
It can be used in conjunction with drug option treatment. It is now a standard of care. The Center for Substance Treatment says
acupuncture should be employed in any out-patient drug treatment center. |
|
140 |
Co-Chair Winters |
How many times Eisen and Cobb were in treatment
before you were able to get to recovery. |
|
150 |
Cobb |
States this is his third time of going through
treatment. Comments on treatment
facilities he went to back East that used methadone only and it kept his
addiction alive. States that he was introduced to
acupuncture at Hooper Detox and experienced the safest withdrawal
method. Adds that acupuncture is a
lot cheaper, also. |
|
165 |
Tsow |
States he has never been in a treatment center
before Hooper Detox. States he was a
non-stop heroin addict for 39 years.
If the OHP had not been available, he would be dead or being supported
by the State of Oregon in the Oregon State Prison. |
|
185 |
Sen. Brown |
Asks if treatment was not available previously. |
|
172 |
Tsow |
States he grew up in an era of the myth and stigma
of once-an-addict, always-an-addict and he believed that and did not know
this kind of life was available until he saw treatment. |
|
191 |
Sen. Brown |
Asks if treatment was available in prison. |
|
|
Tsow |
States treatment was not available because he did
most of his time during the 1970s and early 1980s. |
|
196 |
Sen. Minnis |
Asks if acupuncture is effective on methamphetamine
and heroin. |
|
177 |
Eisen |
Responds that acupuncture is effective for all
addictions. |
|
180 |
Sen. Minnis |
Asks where he might find evidence-based
research. |
|
185 |
Eisen |
Refers Sen. Minnis to the internet and invites
members to visit their clinic. |
|
212 |
Mary Lou Hennrich |
Board member, Oregon Health Action Campaign. Introduces Amy Robben, Coalition of
Statewide Safety Net Clinics. Submits and summarizes a prepared statement (EXHIBIT L). |
|
293 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Asks what would happen if someone required
hospitalization under the Standard. |
|
265 |
Hennrich |
Comments on services at the Multnomah County Health
Department that ran a program for uninsured people and serving them under the
doctors’ charity care policies. They
are saying if it must be rolled back, they think it can be done because most
of the care that most people need is on an out-patient basis. |
|
315 |
Co-Chair Courtney |
Asks if the primary care access package includes
hospitalization. |
|
317 |
Hennrich |
Responds that as it was costed out, it does not. |
|
302 |
Hennrich |
Continues summarizing her statement on premiums and
co-pays (EXHIBIT L, page 3). |
|
342 |
Amy Robben |
Coalition for Safety Net Health Clinics. Explains that the clinics cover OHP
patients and those who are uninsured or uninsurable on a sliding scale
basis. The clinics have taken in more
patients and more complex care. The
North Portland Nurse Practitioner Clinic, with one full-time and one
part-time nurse practitioner, sees between 200 and 300 patients a months. The clinics cannot absorb the number of
people who would be uninsured if the OHP Standard is eliminated. States that those on the OHP Standard and
the Medically Needy Program are Oregon’s most vulnerable people. Does not believe money will be saved if
the priority is taken from OHP Plus.
When children are covered and the parents are not and cannot receive
their medication or drug and alcohol treatment, the children suffer. Urges that the entire vulnerable
population be covered and that members visit the clinics in their counties to
see the services they provide. |
|
423 |
Steve Bieringer |
American Diabetes Association and the Association’s
Oregon Executive Director Sally Norby.
Summarizes a prepared statement in support of covered services for
diabetics (EXHIBIT M). |
|
TAPE 14, A |
||
|
001 |
Bieringer |
Continues presentation of his statement (EXHIBIT M). |
|
014 |
Jeanne Justice |
Portland.
Summarizes a prepared statement relating to diabetes (EXHIBIT N). |
|
185 |
Dr. Patrick Hagerty, DMD |
Dentist in private practice in Albany. Submits outline of issues he comments on relating
to treatment of former Fairview residents (EXHIBIT O). |
|
191 |
Dr. Mike Shirtcliff, DMD |
President and CEO of Northwest Dental Services, a
cooperative of 250 dentist in rural Oregon.
Summarizes a prepared statement in support of dental services for
everyone (EXHIBIT P). |
|
250 |
Dr. Cedric Hayden, DMD |
Dental Director, Hayden Family Dentistry, and member
of OMAP Medical Directors, Dental Directors, and Medical Contractors. Comments on his experiences with low-income
dentistry. States that the benefit
package must be based on the prioritized list. The benefit packages have logical components. Medical-dental, doctor-dentist go
together. The plans should include
medicine and dentistry. |
|
260 |
Hayden |
Comments on OHP constituents in specific Oregon
Senate districts. There are no uncovered territories for dental care. The benefit packages are prudent fiscal
investments. There is a large federal
match for every state dollar from the General Fund. There is an enhanced federal match and a grant of $112 million
in addition. The dollars, the grants,
and the co-match grow jobs across Oregon, and Oregon collects income tax on
the federal match. On a package of
$100 million, Oregon will recover about $6 million in state income
taxes. The benefit packages keep
people healthy and able to function and the cost is a good value at about $10
per month from General Funds. |
|
308 |
Sen. Brown |
Comments she is concerned about the legislature
making budgetary and political decisions about pulling a certain population
or certain services out the OHP prioritized list. Asks Dr. Hayden to comment on that. |
|
300 |
Hayden |
Refers to a book containing a list of priorities. States
the health services are ranked according to relative importance. Of the 700 listings, about 35 are
dentistry related. The list was meant
to be used according to the amount of money available for services; you do
not eliminate people. When there is
less money, fewer services are provided.
The prioritized list should be used.
States he sees no particular problem with going up to Line 519, but
the committee should not take out mental health or durable medical equipment,
or dentistry or prescription drugs from the lists. |
|
350 |
Sen. Fisher |
Comments that when the committee was working on the
waiver application, the dental groups were the only ones that came in with
suggestions of how they could extend their services and make it count for
people and keep them in a relatively healthy situation. They cut nearly 50 percent out of their
previous costs. Thanks the dental
groups for their willingness to do this voluntarily. |
|
325 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Agrees with Sen. Fisher. The dental community came
forth with a package and were the only group that looked at the service they could
provide given the scarcity of resources. |
|
387 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Asks that those who did not testify today to provide
their written testimony to staff, and that those who were not heard today
will be heard tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. |
|
402 |
Pam Patton |
Director, Government Relations, Morrison Child and
Family Services in Multnomah County, representing the Department of Human
Services, Multnomah County Child Welfare Advisory Committee. Presents a prepared statement (EXHIBIT Q). |
|
TAPE 13, B |
||
|
020 |
Scott Lay |
Portland.
Presents prepared statement in support of continuing the Employed
Persons with Disabilities Program (EXHIBIT
R). |
|
076 |
Sen. Brown |
Comments that she learned abut the Employed Persons
with Disabilities Program from a constituent who was in the Medically Needy
category and got transitioned into this program when the Medically Needy was
cut off. |
|
085 |
Mike Volpe |
Corvallis.
Presents prepared statement in support of continued services and in
support of raising revenues (EXHIBIT
S). |
|
125 |
Brandi Satterlund |
Clackamas.
Presents a prepared statement in support of continued coverage for
diabetes (EXHIBIT T). |
|
184 |
Karol Wall |
Wilsonville resident and mother of Brandi
Satterlund. Comments on providing
financial support for her daughter, and the need to provide supplies to the
people to sustain their lives. |
|
227 |
Dr. Eugene Skourtes, DMD |
President of Willamette Dental Group. Summarizes prepared statement (EXHIBIT U) in support of dental
coverage for OHP clients. |
|
2800 |
Co-Chair Winters |
Announces that the committee will meet at 1:00 p.m.
on May 30 in Hearing Room A, and adjourns meeting. |
EXHIBIT
SUMMARY
A – Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Kelley Kaiser, 3 pp
B - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Dr. Tina Kitchen, 3 pp
C - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Rick Treleaven, 4 pp
D - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Timothy Hartnett, 3 pp
E - Prioritization of Populations and OHP
Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Jeff Davis, 9 pp
F - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Janine DeLaunay, 1 p
G - Prioritization of
Populations and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Marcia Kelley, 1 p
H - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Lynn-Marie Crider, 3 pp
I - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Jim Whittenburg, 1 p
J - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Robert Tsow, 1 p
K - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Gary Cobb, 1 p
L - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Mary Lou Hennrich, 9 pp
M - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Steve Bieringer, 4 pp
N - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Jeanne Justice, 2 pp
O - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Dr. Patrick Hagerty, 1 p
P - Prioritization of Populations and OHP
Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Dr. Mike Shirtcliff, 6 pp
Q - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Pam Patton, 1 p
R - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Scott Lay, 2 pp
S - Prioritization of Populations and OHP
Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Mike Volpe, 1 p
T - Prioritization of Populations and OHP
Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Brandi Satterlund, 2 pp
U - Prioritization of Populations
and OHP Benefit Packages, prepared statement, Dr. Eugene Skourtes, 1 p