Practice Economics

Supreme Court to decide whether doctors can sue over low Medicaid payments


 

References

Mr. Wasden added that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services had not found issue with Idaho’s payment rates nor had initiated any disciplinary actions against the state.

“If CMS believes a state has failed to correct a deficiency, CMS may initiate a process to withhold federal funds, either entirely or limited to the fund associated with the noncompliant service,” Mr. Wasden said in court documents. “At no time relevant to this case has CMS ever initiated any compliance action or otherwise complained about the state’s rates.”

Twenty-seven states reached out to the high court in support of Idaho. The states said they have been subject to numerous, unwarranted lawsuits because of misguided interpretations of the Supremacy Clause.

A number of physician and patient advocacy associations joined a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the centers, including the AAFP and the American Medical Association. The physicians’ court brief noted that 32 states reduced and/or froze Medicaid rates in 2012, and 23 did the same in 2013. As a result, Medicaid payment rates have often fallen below the average cost to deliver care and make it untenable for physicians to take on Medicaid patients.

“Noncompliance with Medicaid’s equal-access mandate will continue unless private enforcement is allowed to challenge states that adopt Medicaid payment rates based on arbitrary or politically expedient budgetary decisions,” AMA President Dr. Robert M. Wah said in a statement.

Jane Perkins

Jane Perkins

The Supreme Court’s decision will have a significant impact on whether physicians and other providers continue to participate in Medicaid and whether patients can find necessary care, added Jane Perkins, legal director of the National Health Law Program, a nonprofit that advocates the rights of low-income patients. The National Health Law Program issued its own friend-of-the-court brief in support of the centers.

“There are a tremendous number of potential ‘bigger picture’ impacts” to the court’s decision, Ms. Perkins said in an interview. “Researchers have found time and again that while many things go into a provider’s decision whether or not to participate in Medicaid, one of the main things is the payment rate. If [Idaho wins], I really fear the already problematic state of provider participation in many places is only going to get worse."

agallegos@frontlinemedcom.com

OnTwitter @legal_med

Pages

Recommended Reading

Medicare @ 50: Popular with patients; problematic for physicians
MDedge Rheumatology
Happy holidays from Medicare: 250,000 docs to get meaningful use penalty
MDedge Rheumatology
Survey: Med students disdain private practice
MDedge Rheumatology
Giving patients ownership of data key to solving health IT woes
MDedge Rheumatology
Charging doctors with homicide
MDedge Rheumatology
CMS will hold 2015 Medicare payments for 2 weeks
MDedge Rheumatology
The EHR ball dropping
MDedge Rheumatology
Legislation would ease burden of Stage 2 meaningful use
MDedge Rheumatology
CMS Administrator Tavenner to step down in February
MDedge Rheumatology
Next step in single MD/DO accreditation marked by ACGME board appointments
MDedge Rheumatology