SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE OREGON HEALTH PLAN
June 4, 2003 Hearing
Room C
3:00 P.M. Tapes
24-27
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sen. Peter Courtney, Co-Chair
Sen. Jackie Winters, Co-Chair
Sen. Kate Brown
Sen. Margaret Carter
Sen. Bill Fisher
Sen. Lenn Hannon
Sen. John Minnis
Sen. Bill Morrisette
STAFF PRESENT: Marjorie Taylor, Committee
Administrator
Heather Gravelle, Committee
Assistant
MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD: HB 3624 A – 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 24, A |
||
|
005 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Calls
the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. and
opens a public hearing on HB 3624 A. |
|
HB 3624 A – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
010 |
Barney
Speight |
Kaiser
Permanente. Presents a prepared
statement (EXHIBIT A). |
|
065 |
Speight |
Continues
presentation of his statement on Physician Care Organizations (PCOs) (EXHIBIT A, page 2). |
|
110 |
Sen.
Carter |
Asks
for clarification on payment for services when a patient is sent to another
hospital. |
|
115 |
Speight |
Provides
an explanation on payment for services. Uses Kaiser as an example, which has
contracts with other hospitals in the area.
The physician would have to follow the patient. States they would not be dumping a PCO
patient under the care of a Kaiser physician into a hospital where a Kaiser
physician is not available. The
hospitals, including Kaiser Sunnyside, would be reimbursed on a
fee-for-service basis as opposed to what would happen under a fully capitated
health plan (FCHP). |
|
128 |
Sen.
Carter |
Asks
if Kaiser would have to pay the hospital more than the State is paying
Kaiser. |
|
18 |
Speight |
Responds
that under the current FCHP, that is happening. The patient would continue to be managed independently of the
reimbursement differential. |
|
135 |
Sen.
Fischer |
Asks
if the capitation rate would be less than the fee-for-service. |
|
135 |
Speight |
Agrees
it would be less. States he will provide information on rate issues. |
|
140 |
Speight |
Continues
presentation of his statement on PCOs (EXHIBIT
A, page 2). |
|
170 |
Speight |
Continues
presentation of his statement on the ”Kaiser Provision” (EXHIBIT A, pages 2 and 3). |
|
205 |
Co
Chair Winters |
Asks
how many people will be covered. |
|
206 |
Speight |
Responds
that under the OHP, Kaiser served approximately 20,000 eligibles in the
Marion and Polk Counties and the Portland area. Believes their current eligibility is around 8,000 or slightly
less. Explains they have worked with
the agency to continue serving those members on a fee-for-service basis. They have sent a letter approved by OMP to
their members saying as long as they remain in Medicaid, if they are on
fee-for-service, they can continue to receive their services from
Kaiser. They will work with eligibility
workers, safety net clinics, and others to continue to participate in
Medicaid on a fee-for-service basis.
States that the fee-for-service basis is not the best model for Kaiser
Permanent to work in. They would
rather play the game and be able to increase the number they serve and get
back to the 20,000 they previously served. |
|
240 |
Speight |
Continues
presentation of his statement (EXHIBIT
A, page 3, paragraph 5). |
|
259 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Asks
if Speight has seen all the amendments that have been proposed to HB 3624. |
|
|
Speight |
Responds
that he has not seen all of them.
States he just wanted to get the conceptual amendment out (EXHIBIT A, page 3). |
|
266 |
Speight |
Continues
presentation of his prepared statement (EXHIBIT
A, page 5). |
|
329 |
Sen.
Carter |
Comments
she previously raised the question of fairness and found out that the state
would pay Kaiser on the FCHP level and if they contract with a hospital, they
have to pay the commercial rate. |
|
343 |
Bruce
Bishop |
Oregon
Association of Hospitals and Health Systems.
Presents a prepared statement opposing Section 12 of HB 3624 (EXHIBIT B). |
|
428 |
Bishop |
States
they believe the HB 3624-A10 amendments (EXHIBIT
C) will resolve the issue and make it much more likely they will have
good working relationships among components of the health care systems. Hospitals,
fully capitated health plans, and PCOs that will help move the OHP forward
again. |
|
433 |
Sen.
Carter |
Asks
which amendment would clarify Section 12. |
|
435 |
Bishop |
States
that the HB 3624-A10 amendments (EXHIBIT
C) would clarify it. Explains
that they did not have the HB 3624-A10 amendments when they prepared their
testimony. |
|
TAPE 25, A |
||
|
026 |
Sen.
Carter |
Asks
if Speight supports the HB 3624-A10 amendments (EXHIBIT C). |
|
027 |
Speight |
Responds
affirmatively and states that he worked with Bishop and other representatives
and stakeholders to try to define the problem and the solution and believes
the amendments go toward that. There
needs to be additional negotiations because there are some blank lines that
must be discussed. |
|
033 |
Sen.
Carter |
Asks
if Doug Barber also supports the HB 3624-A10 amendments. |
|
020 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
he would like to discuss hospital reimbursement issues, fee-for-service,
managed care, etc. States he recently
requested information from OMAP and received a very brief and unprofessional
letter regarding the request. Asks
the witnesses to explain how OMAP sets the rates and fees. |
|
025 |
Bishop |
Responds
he is probably not expert enough to describe how the rates are set. States he
can explain the statutory standards for the rates. The statutory standard is that the state will pay rates that
are necessary to cover the cost of the services. |
|
049 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Asks
how the rates are determined. |
|
|
Bishop |
Responds
that the Health Services Commission first does a prioritization of services
and then those services are costed out by an independent actuary. Adds that it is a scientific analytical
process that he cannot understand. |
|
055 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
that he does not know how Bishop would be able to understand because so far
the agency has not been able or willing to provide that information. Comments on amendments he is having
drafted on public records that would require that the “black box” is public
information, and is also considering amendments that would discipline the
Department of Human Resources for failing to provide the information subject
to the Oregon Constitutional provision that provides for up to 24 hours
imprisonment for disrespecting the legislative assembly. Comments further on lack of cooperation by
state agencies in providing requested information. |
|
076 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Comments
it is important that the legislature get the information requested so the legislators can make informed decision.
|
|
085 |
Sen.
Minnis |
States
that he is also preparing subpoenas for the information. |
|
087 |
Doug
Barber |
Peace
Health. Explains that the
organization includes Sacred Heart Hospital in Eugene, Peace Harbor Hospital
in Florence, and Cottage Grove Hospital.
Speaks in opposition to Section 12 of HB 3624 A, the mandate to serve;
there is no comparable statute in any Oregon law for the provider of health
care or any other services to serve all patients or all customers regardless
of their contracts. Doctors should
not be forced to treat any and all patients even if they have no contract to
serve them. Clinics, pharmacies, and nursing
homes should not be forced to provide services outside their contracts, and
hospitals should not be forced to provide services outside their contracts
with the exception of federally required emergency services. Asks that the language in Section 12 be
deleted and that the committee adopt the HB 3614-A10 amendments (EXHIBIT C). Notes the blank line for the percentage of Medicare costs
that would be reimbursed. Adds that
if the blank is low enough, they will oppose it. |
|
100 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Thanks
the witnesses for their clarity on Section 12. Advises that the committee will not be doing a work session on
the bill today. |
|
128 |
Jeff
Heatherington |
President
of Family Care, Inc., an OHP contractor, and Chair of Coalition for Healthy
Oregon, an association of fully capitated health plans serving the Medicaid
clients. Submits copies of
presentation graphics and speaks to points outlined (EXHIBIT D). |
|
204 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Asks
why obesity is not being addressed. |
|
220 |
Heatherington |
States
he is advised that obesity is a below-the-line diagnosis under the OHP. |
|
|
|
|
|
234 |
Heatherington |
Continues
presentation of graphic on delivery of services (EXHIBIT D, page 3). |
|
249 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Asks
if there are auditing provisions. |
|
|
Heatherington |
Responds
affirmatively. Explains the audit
provisions. The various audits are done either quarterly, semi-annually, or
annually. |
|
262 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Asks
if there are independent audits. |
|
262 |
Heatherington |
Responds
they are required to submit a certified public audit to the department on an
annual basis, and they make quarterly financial reports. |
|
255 |
Ruby
Haughton |
Legislative
and Public Affairs Director for Care Oregon, and a member of Coho. Speaks to points outline in graphs
presented by Heatherington (EXHIBIT D,
page 4). |
|
321 |
Houghton |
Reviews
charts (EXHIBIT D, pages 4 and 5). |
|
333 |
Heatherington |
Comments
on key issues in HB 3624 A (EXHIBIT D,
page 6). |
|
350 |
Sen.
Carter |
Asks
for clarification of managed care as seen by the witnesses. Comments on the Kaiser system. |
|
320 |
Harrington |
Responds
that in terms of their definition of managed care, it is pretty much what you
find here in terms of the fully capitated delivery system and the
requirements that are set up by OMAP.
Reads definitions on page 3 of HB 3624. Under the OHP, managed care means guaranteed access and
management of care. |
|
398 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
there are private paid managed care programs and he assumes there is some
actuarial data or analysis that goes into what the cost per patient are. Asks if there are any studies or analysis
between OMAP or government-run programs versus private-run programs on a
fee-for-service basis. |
|
423 |
Heatherington |
Responds
that the public systems for the Medicaid population are more expensive on a
per-person basis than the general population. The reason is these people have greater health needs than the
average populous. |
|
435 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Ask
if the State of Oregon, as the middleman, sucks up more money in
administration. |
|
437 |
Heatherington |
Responds
that he does not think so under the OHP.
Thinks that the administrative costs under the OHP are a lot less,
generally around eight percent, and that is less than in the commercial
market. |
|
443 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
that each time it goes through another layer it costs more money so there is
less money to serve the needs of the patients. |
|
460 |
Heatherington |
Responds
that the studies done by OMAP show we get more bangs for the buck in the OHP
system than in an open card system, and more money is delivered to the
providers of the services. Explains
that they make sure the client gets to the right provider rather than
wondering around the system. A lot of
extraneous services are not being used that are unnecessary, or inappropriate
to the condition. A primary care
visit in a physician’s office might cost $50 to $70. The same visit in an emergency room might
cost $300 to $500. |
|
TAPE 24, B |
||
|
025 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
it is highly frustrating because there does not seem to be any clear
information provided to legislators on which to make good decisions. Comments he doesn’t know if there is any
research-based analysis that is independent. |
|
035 |
Heatherington |
Responds
that Sen. Minnis’ concern is covered in his comments on Section 9 of HB 3624
A. Comments on rate setting (EXHIBIT D, page 6). |
|
045 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
on lack of information from state agencies. |
|
055 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Comments
that the issue on accurate information is serious, whether it is on the OHP
or anything else. States she
understands the trend nationally is going to more fee for services. Asks if
there are some movements to fee for service, why are we moving to managed
care. Asks if what is happening in
Oregon is different than what is happening someplace else from a cost basis. |
|
065 |
Haughton |
Responds
that the trend away from managed care occurred as a result of people in the
commercial market feeling like they were blocked from receiving care. The trend is returning, even in the
commercial market. We have to manage
costs. In order to mange the cost, 44
of the 50 states use managed care for Medicaid. The trend is, from a state-run program, that managing the care
of the population in this way and providing access and making sure that the
individual gets to the right place at the right times and sees the right
provider is crucial in maintaining good health. The words managed care and
capitation are very similar to when we used surcharges. States they should not have used the terminology
in that way. We should have talked
about managing the care of individuals, human beings. |
|
093 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Asks
what the cost comparisons are for the six states that do not use managed
care. |
|
095 |
Haughton |
Responds
they are having financial difficulties. |
|
100 |
Heatherington |
States
that the rates for managed care can only go so low and then they can not
accept risks. At that point they move
out of the system. |
|
105 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
States
it goes back to the question of not having the ability to massage data. |
|
108 |
Heatherington |
States
that one of the earlier versions of Section 9 of HB 3624 was to have
Legislative Fiscal do the independent work.
If the legislature were to do the work upfront, it might give a little
more comfort level. |
|
117 |
Sen.
Minnis |
States
he agrees with Heatherington. States
he has for a number of years advocated that the legislative assembly invest
in appropriately skilled staff to provide the analysis apart from the
agencies’ information. Asks if there
is any analysis per populations in fee-for-service versus managed care as it
relates to the kinds of illnesses—would one be able to say that persons in
fee-for-service tend to be healthier than persons in managed care. |
|
115 |
Heatherington |
States
he doesn’t know how to answer on the Medicaid population. He does not know if the study done by OMAP
was done by disease categories. |
|
136 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Asks
how many AIDS patients are on Medicare. |
|
138 |
Haughton |
Responds
that CareOregon has 800 AIDS patients. |
|
138 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Asks
how many AIDS patients are in Oregon. |
|
|
Haughton |
Responds
there are about 1,500. |
|
|
Sen.
Minnis |
Asks
if they are $5 patients. |
|
142 |
Haughton |
Responds
they are very high dollar patients, very expensive. |
|
144 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Asks
if we have a clue why they are in CareOregon instead of a fee-for-service
program. |
|
147 |
Houghton |
Responds
that CareOregon is located in all areas of the state, primarily in the
greater Portland area where there are two very large, high volume AIDS
clinics. |
|
153 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
that he is mystified why CareOregon has 800 AIDS patients who are high dollar
and their reimbursement rates are not sufficient to sustain the operation. |
|
155 |
Heatherington |
Continues
presentation speaking to Section 10 of HB 3624 A on mental health drugs (EXHIBIT D, page 6). |
|
173 |
Heatherington |
Continues
presentation speaking to Section 12 of HB 3624 a and hospital access (EXHIBIT D, page 6). States that they oppose the HB 3624-A10
amendments which remove the mandate on hospitals (EXHIBIT C). They do have a payment schedule as a percentage of
Medicare that they believe is appropriate.
Without the mandate, there is the ability of a hospital in a community
to totally tip over the managed care system.
The big concern is in Portland because the big hospital systems could
decide to limit their Medicaid to such an extent that there would not be
managed care. The cost would be very
high for the state. |
|
227 |
Haughton |
Continues
presentation speaking to Sections 13-15 of HB 3624 A on bulk drug
purchasing. Comments that Paul
Cosgrove will be submitting the HB 3624-A11 amendments relating to nursing
homes (EXHIBIT E). States that the pharmaceuticals that
are being supplied to individuals in nursing homes should be a part of their
system. Those individuals already
have an exemption and they are surprised pharmaceuticals are not in. States they support the HB 3624-A10
amendments. States that she did have
a conversation with the mail order pharmacies; the fully capitated health
plans cannot support this amendment.
They are interested in working with the mail order pharmacies on a
non-mandated approach to mail order pharmacy. |
|
249 |
Bill
Murray |
Chief
Executive Officer, Doctors of the Oregon Coast South (DOCS), a managed health
care plan. States he prefers to say
they are in the business of coordinated care instead of managed care. That means matching members and providers
to ensure there is the right care at the right time at the right place for
all services that the state has chosen to cover. Most of their time is spent arranging access to care and they are
consistently trying to see that members complete treatment plans so future
costs to the system are minimized. Believes
the coordination promotes participation.
|
|
293 |
Murray |
States
that rates are a very difficult process.
Thinks HB 3624 A goes toward trying to distinguish between what are
actual costs and actual payments that the state can afford. Believes the bill encourages and guarantees
access to care and services. Thinks
the alternative system, fee-for-service system, really may cost less but it
does so at the cost of access and quality of care and eventually the health
outcomes of those individuals that are covered. |
|
320 |
Murray |
States
that the HB 3624-A6 amendment (EXHIBIT
F) addresses nurse practitioners.
Believes the intent is to allow nurse practitioners to be paid for
their services when the nurse practitioner is more than 15 miles from a
person or entity that the OHP contracts with. States that his concern with that is there appears to be no
limitations whether or not those are covered services, or whether there would
be an ability to manage or coordinate those services. This needs to fall within the same rules
that all other providers must follow.
States they try to contract with nurse practitioners across the state
because there is a provider shortage.
The concept of incorporating nurse practitioners into the system is
good; there just needs to be caution to make sure the same controls are in
place so they can fulfill their obligation of coordinated care. |
|
378 |
Mike
Volpe |
Corvallis
resident and a 10-year recipient of services under the OHP. Submits a prepared statement and expresses
concerns about the uncertainty of services that will be provided under HB
3624 A (EXHIBIT G). |
|
454 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
States
she believes the 80 percent is the rate the state is saying they would pay,
not that it is transferred to the client for durable medical equipment. States she will check it out with the
agency but believes the client would not have to pick up the 20 percent.. |
|
TAPE 25, B |
||
|
010 |
Karen
Whitaker |
Director,
Office of Rural Health, Oregon Health and Science University. Presents a prepared statement (EXHIBIT H) in support of the HB
3624-A6 amendments (EXHIBIT F). |
|
035 |
Scott
Gallant |
Oregon
Medical Association. Comments that their
association believes first and foremost the goal under these difficult
circumstances is to try to maintain as many people on the OHP as possible.
They believe there is a significant capacity problem of having physicians
provide services to OHP patients; reimbursement is horrible and may get
worse. Their survey data shows that
60 percent of primary care physicians either do not accept or have
significantly limited the number of Medicaid patients they are accepting, and
a huge proportion of physicians in 2002 decided to quit seeing Medicaid
patients. Believes that is directly
related to the reimbursement circumstances.
HB 3624 A contains a number of concepts that they believe are
important. They believe the PCO
concept is important to be included as a backup mechanism under the rules
that would be adopted by the Office of Health Policy and Research and
OMAP. They support the Kaiser
amendment specifically. |
|
066 |
Gallant |
States
that the most controversial portion of the bill is Section 12 regarding
whether or not hospitals must accept health plan patients if they do not have
a contract at rates paid by OMAP.
States he understand the intent of the HB 3624-A10 amendment (EXHIBIT C) is to provide a structure
that would force parties to negotiate a rate of reimbursement that is
acceptable to both parties, but it is not binding under that proposal. There would be two fall-back mechanisms
for reimbursement. One would be
billed charges, and some undetermined percentage of Medicare. Explains his concern is impact this may
have on the funds that are available to reimburse physicians, particularly in
the Metro areas. States that rates
have been pretty well locked in for pharmaceutical costs in other areas and
the only “fungible” pool of money, if the parties would agree to a higher
rate of reimbursement for in-patient for hospital services, most likely would
be the physician pool of funds, but may not be the net impact of the proposed
amendment. Suggests the committee
request some type of independent, either OMAP or someone else, analysis of
what impact this might have on the other aspects of those who provide
services under the OHP. |
|
096 |
Gallant |
Emphasizes
enabling health plan patients to see primary care physicians. It is important to holding costs down and
they hope to be able to maintain the system. |
|
|
Rep.
Kruse |
Comments
he heard a reference to 80 percent of Medicare for durable medical equipment. States that is just the benchmark, not the
rate. |
|
119 |
Elizabeth
Byers |
Project
Equality and the Mental Health Association of Oregon. Explains her personal situation of being
on Medicaid due to a massive stroke, her efforts to find a doctor to see her,
and coverage by the OHP. |
|
191 |
Byers |
Relates
stories of working with families to enroll them in a health plan. |
|
220 |
Byers |
States
that at any given time 50 percent of those enrolled in a capitated plan do
not have access because they cannot find a doctor to see them in a timely
manner. |
|
229 |
Byers |
Comments
on managed care for people with disabilities who use the OHP because they are
disabled, not because they are income-eligible. States that is the primary population that will be affected by
HB 3624 A, and that those who are disabled have peeks and valleys, sometimes
needing more services and need to communicate effectively with one primary
care provider, either a family physician or a specialist that addresses their
illness. When they need more care,
they are not going to benefit from the managed care process and is afraid
more of those people will fall through the cracks and not get care. Gives example of a triple amputee who
experience phantom limb pain and could not get pain killers. States she is
concerned that as we put more people into managed care, there is less
care. |
|
320 |
Byers |
States
that if a provider is not happy with their interaction with a client, they
can say the client is dismissed and is not allowed to go back to the
clinic. The person is then trapped in
managed care and cannot see a fee-for-service provider, but their managed
care provider will not see them. We
need to have a way for people with any kind of issue to have access without
losing OHP coverage. |
|
356 |
Byers |
States
she is also concerned that we are talking about managing anti-depressant
medications. There is a population
who take anti-depressants who have tried and failed and have now developed
what works for them and what does not.
If we put then into a pharmaceutical managed care environment where
they have to try and fail on other medications before they can get back to
the medication that works for them because of the management, we will lose a
lot of people. People will get worse and
be in hospitals and ultimately use the only resource they believe is
relief. Talks about a previous
witness who lost her mental health benefits when she moved from Portland to
Scappose to take advantage of housing.
In Multnomah County, people who have been fee-for-service are being
put into managed care plans. Their
treatment plans with the fee-for-service providers are now lost. They had no notice and no transition
time. |
|
380 |
Ellen
Pinney |
Oregon
Health Action Campaign. States they
believe that managed care can work and should work to improve access to
necessary services in a timely manner.
They have heard from communities as managed care plans have folded up
and left their communities that they are concerned about access for people
left in fee-for-service. The only
reason to require people to enroll in Medicaid managed care is because we
believe it will improve access, which means reduced costs to the state. Nothing in HB 3624 A allows one to
evaluate whether it will result in improved access or even more basically to
evaluate whether access will continue to be provided. Encourages the committee to consider
benchmarks related to access in addition to other benchmarks in the
bill. |
|
445 |
Pinney |
States
that a lot of discussion around the OHP has focused on making sure the OHP
should look more like the private market—people should have benefits that
look like private market coverage.
Suggests that any managed care entity contracting to provide services
to people on the OHP should be required to incorporate the Oregon’s Patient
Protections Act requirements that are part of managed care plans in the
private market. One is the right to
file a grievance with the plan in addition to the right to request a hearing
with OMAP, their right to have information about the network and service area
restrictions of their network, how to obtain emergency care, the hospital,
doctor and clinic network guide, and assistance to non-English speakers. |
|
TAPE 26, A |
||
|
030 |
Sen.
Brown |
Asks
if most of the suggestions are part of federal law. |
|
035 |
Pinney |
Responds
that not all of them are a part of federal Medicaid managed care law. States she is concerned about that because
she has had a conversation with OMAP about whether or not Oregon was going to
adopt the federal Medicaid managed care requirements. She was told that Oregon is operating
under a waiver and that we did not need to adopt those provisions. Suggests that the federal government CMS
has said that its Medicaid managed care requirements are a floor. Some patient provisions are in Oregon law
that go beyond the floor required for Medicaid managed care. |
|
046 |
Sen.
Brown |
Asks
if Pinney would like to see these items explicitly stated in the bill that is
passed. |
|
|
Pinney |
Responds
affirmatively. Others that she is
particularly concerned about are women age 40 or over can have a preventative
annual routine mammogram without a referral from their primary care provider;
and maternity and newborn care requires a minimum hospital stay of 48 hours. At a very minimum, people on the OHP
required to enroll in Medicaid managed care should have access to those basic
patient protections as well. The
federal Medicaid managed care law requires that enrollees have the right to
receive information regarding their health care be treated with respect and
due consideration, receive information on available treatment options and
alternatives presented in a manner appropriate to the enrollee’s condition
and ability to understand including cultural and literacy issues. |
|
070 |
Pinney |
States
that in addition, she believes another protection should be added. All plans that agree to offer services in
any geographic area should be required to be open to all zip codes in the
area. The issue is creaming or
skimming of zip codes and populations that are high risk. Believes it would be appropriate to
require an evaluation component that at least addresses why a plan that chooses
to close enrollment in certain zip code area report why they have chosen to
do so. |
|
082 |
Pinney |
States
that the bill mentions in its preamble determining benchmarks for setting per
capita rates for reimbursement of health care services. States she is disappointed there is no
mention of setting benchmarks for access for primary care and for people with
special needs. States that Section 2
(1) talks about an entity being able to assign an enrollee to a primary care
provider, but there is no reference of that primary care provider’s ability
to see that patient in a timely manner.
States she does not understand why there should be an age limit under Section
3(2)(D). Adds that a person should
not be required to enroll in managed care in a area where there is a very
limited number of providers, if any, and are not open to new enrollees. |
|
114 |
Pinney |
States
there is a need to acknowledge that providers do dump patients and the
patients need to have the ability to continue to get services. |
|
|
Pinney |
Reviews
Section 5 of HB 3624 A and states she would add “in a timely manner” to the
language, and suggests criteria that should be developed. |
|
|
Pinney |
States
that a truly consumer advisory panel with a cross section of people with
disabilities is a vehicle for a plan to improve access. Managed care plans should be required to
have consumer advisory panels in every area in which they operate. |
|
167 |
Sen.
Minnis |
States
that Pinney is right in respect to regulation. Comments that if the
information is not provided, the legislature does not have the information to
evaluate the many statements made by Pinney about how the program should
function. |
|
190 |
Pinney |
Thanks
Sen. Minnis for his support of her comments.
Urges the committee to consider what might be appropriate to add to
the bill now given that this seems like an opportunity to ensure that if
people are being required to enroll in Medicaid managed care, they at least
have the patient protections that are required under federal law. |
|
180 |
Sen.
Minnis |
Comments
that the legislature does not have any data to evaluate. |
|
185 |
Pinney |
States
that if patient protections are not pieces Sen. Minnis would like to
consider, then it would seem at least an evaluation component around access
should be added to the many evaluation components around reimbursement. |
|
235 |
Josie
Chaney |
Southeast
Portland resident. States she would
like to talk about prioritization of common funds. Comments on reduction of programs and for protection of
existing revenues. Asks that the
legislature look at funds that can be brought back into the General
Fund. |
|
245 |
Don
Looney |
Oregon
City resident. Expresses thanks for
restoration of the Medically Needy program. Explains that his best friend committed suicide when his
medications for AIDS were cut off. States he is very fortunate has CareOregon
as his provider and is fortunate as a mental health consumer to live in Clackamas
County. |
|
318 |
Angela
Kimball |
National
Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI).
Presents a prepared statement in support of mental health coverage (EXHIBIT I). |
|
405 |
Steve
Louisa |
Executive
Director, National Alliance for the Mentally Ill Oregon. States there are areas of HB 3614 A that
are very unclear and where there could be more oversight. One of the key things for NAMI is the inclusion
of all mental health medications and open access to medications. States that the bill mentions the
anti-psychotics but the anti-depressants, anti-anxiety, and anti-convulsants
are key components to the recovery process. States his son has been involved
in the Clackamas County mental health system. Comments on the excellent quality of the mental health program
in Clackamas County and in Oregon. |
|
|
Ed
Patterson |
Oregon
Rural Health Association. Submits a
prepared statement in support of the HB 3624-A6 amendments but does not
testify (EXHIBIT J). |
|
438 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Announces
that the committee will reconvene tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. because a number of
individuals have signed up and were not heard today. Speaks with audience about availability on
Thursday. |
|
472 |
Melinda
Mowery |
Clackamas
County, Department of Human Services, Community Mental Health Center. Submits and summarizes a prepared
statement (EXHIBIT K). |
|
TAPE 27, A |
||
|
005 |
Mowery |
Continues
summarizing her statement (EXHIBIT J). |
|
|
|
The
following amendments to HB 3624 A provided to members by staff and were not
discussed are hereby made a part of these minutes: HB 3624-A9 amendments (EXHIBIT L) HB 3624-A12 amendments (EXHIBIT M) HB 3624-A13 amendments (EXHIBIT N) HB 3624-A14 amendments (EXHIBIT O) HB 3624-A15 amendments (EXHIBIT P) HB 3624-A17 amendments (EXHIBIT Q) HB 3614-A18 amendments (EXHIBIT R) HB 3624-A19 amendments (EXHIBIT S) HB 3624-A20 amendments (EXHIBIT T) HB 3624-A21 amendments (EXHIBIT U) HB 3624-A22 amendments (EXHIBIT V) HB 3624-A23 amendments (EXHIBIT W) HB 3624-A25 amendments (EXHIBIT X) |
|
013 |
Co-Chair
Winters |
Closes
the public hearing on HB 3624 A and adjourns meeting. |
EXHIBIT SUMMARY
A
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Barney Speight, 4 pp
B
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Bruce Bishop, 3 pp
C
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A10 amendments, Bruce Bishop, 2 pp
D
–HB 3624, graphics of comments, Jeff Heatherington, Ruby Haughton, Bill Murray,
6 pp
E
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A11 amendments, Paul Cosgrove, 1 p
F
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A6 amendments, staff, 1 p
G
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Mike Volpe, 1 p
H
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Karen Whitaker, 1 p
I
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Angela Kimball, 2 pp
J
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Ed Patterson, 1 p
K
– HB 3624, prepared statement, Melinda Mowery, 2 pp
L
- HB 3624, HB 3624-A9 amendments, staff, 1 p
M
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A12 amendments, staff, 14 pp
N
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A13 amendments, staff, 4 pp
O
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A14 amendments, staff, 1 p
P
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A15 amendments, staff, 2 pp
Q
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A17 amendments, staff, 1 p
R
– HB 3624, HB 3614-A18 amendments, staff, 1 p
S
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A19 amendments, staff, 2 pp
T
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A20 amendments, staff, 1 p
U
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A21 amendments, staff, 3 pp
V
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A22 amendments, staff, 1 p
W
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A23 amendments, staff, 1 p
X
– HB 3624, HB 3624-A25 amendments, staff, 3 pp