Congressional Democrats have decided to join forces with GOP lawmakers.
To essentially undermine one of the few good things that was accomplished during
the Trump administration.
An end to surprise medical billing,
now the legislation passed under the Trump administration, he signed it into law.
It's now being implemented by the Biden administration,
and it turns out that these corporate Democrats.
Who are very well funded by individuals who profit off of surprise medical
building.
Are essentially trying to interpret the legislation in a way that
doesn't really give us the full protection as patients that we deserve.
So let me give you the details on how this all went down,
this was a great piece written by Osten Almond over at the intercept.
A key provision in the No Surprises act could become a first step towards allowing
the federal government.
To standardize rates for
medical procedures covered under private insurance plans.
An objective the private healthcare industry, of course,
has fought for decades.
That's because it is a for
profit system where they would much rather protect their profits.
Than provide the care necessary to keep people alive, healthy, and safe.
Now providers and insurers will enter forced arbitration,
if they cannot agree on the price for treatment.
Each side will send the arbiter a payment offer and
the arbiter will pick the offer they think is most fair.
Arbiters and this is the part where there's some battle.
Arbiters must prioritize the median in network rate when deciding disputes,
forcing providers to justify any departure from their typical rates.
The rule effectively stops them from price gouging consumers who are out of network,
so let me give you guys more context on this.
We've talked about it on the show before but just as a reminder,
there's been an ongoing problem within our healthcare system.
Where an insured individual goes into a hospital to receive treatment or care.
And then as there in that hospital, while they have absolutely no idea.
Someone who is out of network, some sort of health care provider, a doctor,
a nurse, an anesthesiologist.
Someone who is not covered by their health insurance will provide some
portion of that care during that hospital stay or visit.
And since that individual is out of network, all of a sudden,
the patient gets hit with a surprise medical bill.
So this legislation was meant to put a stop to that to mitigate that,
there were caveats in the legislation that were laughable.
For instance, if you need to be airlifted to a hospital,
this would prevent you from being price gouged by the airlifting ambulance.
But if you are given ground transportation by an ambulance, that is not
covered by this legislation, I don't know why, it is a weird caveat to it.
And it's the United States Congress, like,
would it be legislation if it didn't have weird loopholes and caveats?
But anyway, let me get back to the point of the story.
Now for the most part,
this was finally an effort to do something to mitigate surprise medical billing.
And it was a bipartisan effort, one of the few things that actually did get done by
Congress under the Trump administration.
But now all of a sudden, we're seeing corporate Democrats joined forces with
the GOP to undermine the very point of the policy to begin with.
So last year, in the months leading up to the bill's enactment,
opponents filed a flurry of lawsuits.
Claiming that by enforcing the rule in a manner widely viewed as consistent
with the text of the legislation.
The Biden administration had overstepped Congress's intentions, so
the Biden administration is implementing the legislation as it is written.
There's an independent arbiter who comes in and
that independent arbiter who resolves the price issue.
We'll look at the median cost of the service that the patient is being price
gouged for, to ensure that the price gouging doesn't happen.
These lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans are arguing.
No, see, we didn't, that's actually gonna,
that's going to drive down the costs a lot more than we want.
More importantly, a lot more than our corporate donors want,
let me give you more.
The legal arguments by the way in these lawsuits rely on murky
case law about congressional intent.
But there are some nonpartisan experts who have already weighed in on this.
They're familiar with the No Surprises act and they told
the intercept that the rule is in fact consistent with the legislation's text.
I don't know,
did these corporate Democrats read the legislation that they voted for?
What happened?
Are they completely in the dark or are they just playing stupid now?
Obviously, my suspicion is that they're intentionally playing
stupid to fit whatever needs their corporate donors want.
But here's what congress does come in to try to sabotage this legislation,
which is now a lot by the way past.
A series of letters and statements by members of Congress from both parties
including Senator Bill Cassidy, Republican from Louisiana.
And Senator Maggie Hassan, a Democrat from new Hampshire, and
Representative, look at that, Richard Neal from Massachusetts.
Has nonetheless sought to support filers claims,
the same ridiculous claims that the Biden administration is
implementing this law in a way that wasn't intended by Congress.
Even though he's implementing it exactly how it should
be based on the text in the legislation.
In a May letter addressed to HH Secretary, Xavier Becerra,
treasury secretary Janet Yellen, and Labor Secretary, Marty Walsh.
Senators Hassan and Cassidy,
two legislators who actually played major roles in crafting the No Surprises act.
Warned the administration against implementing the act's dispute resolution
process in a way that favored the median in-network rate.
The letter makes an explicit argument for
the providers preferred interpretation of the text, okay, let's stop right there.
But we're gonna bring that graphic back up, the issue here
was the price gouging that was carried out by the providers.
So what it really makes sense to have the arbiter favor what
the provider wants to charge, what's the point of the legislation?
How stupid is that?
But let me continue, let's put that graphic back up, the letter makes
an explicit argument for the providers preferred interpretation of the text.
Claiming that legislators, quote, wrote this law with the intent that
arbiters give each arbitration factor equal weight and consideration.
How about looking at the median cost for
the services provided as the best way of determining what a fair prices.
That would be a fair way to do it, right?
And by the way, we talk about the profit motives for the providers, but
there's also an element of private equity greed involved as well.
Private equity firms are actually the ones that set up this system,
where a patient goes to a hospital.
Under the assumption that the patient is going to an in-network hospital and
is being treated by in-network nurses and doctors.
Private equity firms created the system where an out-of-network provider,
all of a sudden is in the mix and that individual.
Because that individual sees the patient and is not an in network provider,
gets to price gouge.
And when they price gouge, who do you think benefits from that?
We're talking about for profit hospitals and a for profit model,
shareholders are involved.
Private equity firms are involved, they get to benefit from it as well,
this is another case of profits over human lives, profits over people.
Now there's more to this and it's infuriating, because Democrats love to
pretend like they are always looking out for the little guy.
In fact, the very democratic lawmakers who helped craft this legislation are now
the ones who are trying to undermine it.
After the Biden administration issued the arbitration rule at the end of September.
House ways and means committee chair, Richard Neal, and ranking member,
Kevin brady, a Republican from Texas.
Sent the administration another letter mirroring the language used by Hassan and
Cassidy.
Their letter argues that Congress deliberately
crafted the law to avoid anyone factor like the median in-network rate,
tipping the scales during arbitration.
God forbid, that members of Congress would want
to tip the scales in favor of the patient.
Rather than those seeking to profit off of the health care system, God forbid,
they would never want to do that.
It's incredible because on one hand, yes, they're trying to undermine the very
legislation that they crafted in the first place.
But more importantly, understand what they're saying in these letters,
they're effectively admitting.
Well, we don't want to tip the scale in favor of the patients,
that's not something we were intending to do.
When people tell you who they are, believe them,
they're telling you exactly who they are.
Look this clown next to me, Richie Neal, anyway, there's more.
In November of 2021,
a large bipartisan group of house members also sided with providers in the dispute.
Representatives, Tom Swazi, a Democrat from New York, Brad Wenstrup,
a Republican from Ohio.
Raul Ruiz, a Democrat from California, and Larry Bucshon, a Republican from Indiana.
Led 150 of their colleagues in a letter that claimed to lay out in starkly
legalistic terms, the congressional intent behind the No Surprises act.
While the letter's signatories, 79 Republicans and
73 Democrats, look at that bipartisanism, how sweet is that.
Were disproportionately conservative,
a few committed progressives like Barbara lee and Rashida Talib also signed.
Look, I don't know why they signed, maybe they were advised in a terrible way and
had no idea what they were signing on to.
Rashida Talib has been a warrior, a fighter when it comes to those who
have really suffered the consequences of a privatized model.
I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt,
because this is definitely out of step from what I've seen from her.
But you gotta fire whoever advised you to vote in favor of,
to sign on to this garbage letter, just keeping it real.
Don't put your name on something unless you know what you're putting your name on.
Now the move has the potential to drive down the high prices Us providers
charge compared to other countries.
Stoking fears in the healthcare industry that it would lead to standardized rates.
My God, God forbid, the drop in prices would at least partially be
returned to Americans in the form of lower health insurance premiums.
And so the health care industry hates that, they hate it.
And the very people who are very, business interests who are behind
this effort to essentially dismantle a good piece of legislation.
Includes the American Hospital Association,
the American Medical Association, basically private healthcare industry.
They want to be able to price gouge you, they're furious that Congress actually
succeeded in doing something on behalf of patients.
And now, some of the people who actually helped craft that bill in the first place
are turning around apologizing profusely to their dear corporate donors.
And essentially trying to make it seem as though Joe Biden is interpreting
the law in a way that they didn't intend.
Even though the text makes it abundantly clear that he's actually carrying it out
in the way that it was intended.
That's just the fact of the matter.