Medicaid program; cost limit for providers operated by units of government and provisions to ensure the integrity of federal-state financial partnership. Final rule with comment period

This regulation clarifies that entities involved in the financing of the non-Federal share of Medicaid payments must be a unit of government; clarifies the documentation required to support a Medicaid certified public expenditure; limits Medicaid reimbursement for health care providers that are operated by units of government to an amount that does not exceed the health care provider's cost of providing services to Medicaid individuals; requires all health care providers to receive and retain the full amount of total computable payments for services furnished under the approved Medicaid State plan; and makes conforming changes to provisions governing the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to make the same requirements applicable, with the exception of the cost limit on reimbursement. The Medicaid cost limit provision of this regulation does not apply to: Stand-alone SCHIP program payments made to governmentally-operated health care providers; Indian Health Service (IHS) facilities and tribal 638 facilities that are paid at the all-inclusive IHS rate; Medicaid Managed Care Organizations (MCOs), Prepaid Inpatient Health Plans (PIHPs), and Prepaid Ambulatory Health Plans (PAHPs); Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and Rural Health Clinics (RHCs). Moreover, disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments and payments authorized under Section 701(d) and Section 705 of the Benefits Improvement Protection Act of 2000 are not subject to the newly established Medicaid cost limit for governmentally-operated health care providers. Except as noted above, all Medicaid payments and SCHIP payments made under the authority of the State plan and under waiver and demonstration authorities, as well as associated State Medicaid and SCHIP financing arrangements, are subject to all provisions of this regulation. Finally, this regulation solicits comments from the public on issues related to the definition of the Unit of Government.     

Bill of Sale Lending: Reforming a ‘Toxic’ Form of Credit

The Bills of Sale Acts were enacted in Victorian times as a form of secured credit whereby ‘goods’ owned by a borrower could be assigned under the bill of sale to a lender who would have title to the goods transferred to him. The lender would then allow the borrower to retain possession of the goods in exchange for instalment payments with interest. In the twenty‐first century these bills are most commonly used as ‘logbook loans’ for vehicles with extortionate interest rates and very little protection for individual consumers. This article examines the operational background to the Bill of Sale Acts. It focuses upon particular concerns for consumers and businesses and provides critique of the registration process before examining the proposals and consultations for reform currently before the Law Commission.     

Medicaid program; revision to Medicaid upper payment limit requirements for hospital services, nursing facility services, intermediate care facility services for the mentally retarded, and clinic services. Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), HHS. Final rule

This final rule modifies the Medicaid upper payment limits for inpatient hospital services, outpatient hospital services, nursing facility services, intermediate care facility services for the mentally retarded, and clinic services. For each type of Medicaid inpatient service, existing regulations place an upper limit on overall aggregate payments to all facilities and a separate aggregate upper limit on payments made to State-operated facilities. This final rule establishes an aggregate upper limit that applies to payments made to government facilities that are not State government-owned or operated, and a separate aggregate upper limit on payments made to privately-owned and operated facilities. This rule also eliminates the overall aggregate upper limit that had applied to these services. With respect to outpatient hospital and clinic services, this final rule establishes an aggregate upper limit on payments made to State government-owned or operated facilities, an aggregate upper limit on payments made to government facilities that are not State government-owned or operated, and an aggregate upper limit on payments made to privately-owned and operated facilities. These separate upper limits are necessary to ensure State Medicaid payment systems promote economy and efficiency. We are allowing a higher upper limit for payment to non-State public hospitals to recognize the higher costs of inpatient and outpatient services in public hospitals. In addition, to ensure continued beneficiary access to care and the ability of States to adjust to the changes in the upper payment limits, the final rule includes a transition period for States with approved rate enhancement State plan amendments.     

Black Political Representation: An Examination of Legislative Activity Within U.S. House Committees

How minority legislators influence policy development in Congress remains a relevant question for those interested in race and political representation. This article addresses this question using evidence from participation in committee work—a vantage point that has received minimal attention in scholarship on black political representation. I interpret racial differences in participation in House committees across a range of policy areas, demonstrating that black members participate at higher rates within committees than whites on both black interest and nonracial bills. The results suggest that race has a substantive effect on members' policy priorities and their legislative activity within committees.     

Cross-subsidies and payment for hospital care

This study uses hospital data from the 1979 American Hospital Association Reimbursement Survey in a multivariate framework to assess the impact of discounts and third-party reimbursement on hospital costs and profitability. Three central issues are addressed: (1) Is a differential payment justified for Medicare, Medicaid, and/or Blue Cross on the basis of differential costs? (2) Have the cost-containment efforts of the dominant payers reduced total payments to hospitals? and (3) What part of the overall savings in payments to hospitals is in the form of reduced costs rather than reduced profits? On the basis of the evidence in this study, we find (1) that the differential payment is not justified; (2) that the cost-containment efforts of the dominant payers have reduced total payments to hospitals somewhat, but a substantial amount of cost-shifting remains; and (3) that the savings is in profits, rather than in costs.     

Rewarding Dysfunction: Interest Groups and Intended Legislative Failure

Why do majority parties choose to add extreme dead on arrival bills to their legislative agendas rather than enactable legislation? Majorities in Congress choose this strategy in order to accrue political support from their allied interest groups who reliably reward this legislative behavior. By examining all bills that receive floor consideration from 2003 through 2012, as well as interest group scorecards and campaign commercials, I find support for my theory. Dead‐on‐arrival bills generate electoral benefits for majority‐party lawmakers, are more politically valuable than other bills, and are more often used to credit rather than punish legislators.     

TRICARE; Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS); bonus payments in medically underserved areas. Final rule

This final rule implements a bonus payment, in addition to the amount normally paid under the allowable charge methodology, to physicians in medically underserved areas. For purposes of this rule, medically underserved areas are the same as those determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services for the Medicare program. Such bonus payments shall be equal to the bonus payments authorized by Medicare, except as necessary to recognize any unique or distinct characteristics or requirements of the TRICARE program, and as described in instructions issued by the Executive Director, TRICARE Management Activity. This rule promotes a reimbursement enhancement to a limited number of physicians designed to increase TRICARE beneficiary access to care.     

Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS); mental health services--DoD. Final rule

This final rule is to reform CHAMPUS quality of care standards and reimbursement methods for inpatient mental health services. The rule updates existing standards for residential treatment centers (RTCs) and establishes new standards for approval as CHAMPUS-authorized providers for substance use disorder rehabilitation facilities (SUDRFs) and partial hospitalization programs (PHPs); implements recommendations of the Comptroller General of the United States that DoD establish cost-based reimbursement methods for psychiatric hospitals and residential treatment facilities; adopts another Comptroller General recommendation that DoD remove the current incentive for the use of inpatient mental health care; and eliminates payments to residential treatment centers for days in which the patient is on a leave of absence.     

Medicaid program; deduction of incurred medical expenses (spenddown)--HCFA. Final rule with comment period

This final rule with comment period permits States flexibility to revise the process by which incurred medical expenses are considered to reduce an individual's or family's income to become Medicaid eligible. This process is commonly referred to as "spenddown." Only States which cover the medically needy, and States which use more restrictive criteria to determine eligibility of the aged, blind, and disabled, than the criteria used to determine eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits (section 1902(f) States) have a spenddown. These revisions permit States to: Consider as incurred medical expenses projected institutional expenses at the Medicaid reimbursement rate, and deduct those projected expenses from income in determining eligibility; combine the retroactive and prospective medically needy budget periods; either include or exclude medical expenses incurred earlier than the third month before the month of application (States must, however, deduct current payments on old bills not previously deducted in any budget period); and deduct incurred medical expenses from income in the order in which the services were provided, in the order each bill is submitted to the agency, by type of service. All States with medically needy programs using the criteria of the SS program may implement any of the provisions. States using more restrict criteria than the SSI program under section 1902(f) of the Social Security Act may implement all of these provisions except for the option to exclude medical expenses incurred earlier than the third month before the month of application.     

Medicaid reimbursement of teaching hospitals

This paper examines current Medicaid policies on the reimbursement of hospitals' medical education expenses. These policies are of interest because of the pressure on Medicaid programs to reduce expenditures. Data for the paper come mainly from two sources: a survey of Medicaid programs and a survey of teaching hospitals. Teaching hospitals receive a disproportionate share, nearly 70 percent in 1978, of Medicaid short-term hospital payments. Nevertheless, most Medicaid programs either have no explicit policies in this area or have not acted aggressively to limit reimbursement of hospitals' teaching expenses. Revenues from Medicaid are most important to public teaching hospitals. Thus, across-the-board reductions in Medicaid's reimbursement of teaching expenses would most severely affect public institutions, many of which already face cuts in their local government appropriations. Savings to Medicaid would also be short-lived, since teaching hospitals would have the incentive to reduce teaching program size and substitute reimbursable personnel (nurses and staff physicians) for residents.     

Drug contamination of US paper currency

It is known that US paper currency in the general circulation is contaminated with cocaine. Several mechanisms have been offered to explain this finding, including contamination due to handling during drug deals and the use of rolled up bills for snorting. Drug is then transferred from one contaminated bill to others during counting in financial institutions. The possibility of contamination of currency with other drugs has not been reported. In this study, the author reports the analysis of 10 randomly collected US$ 1 bills from five cities, for cocaine, heroin, 6-acetylmorphine (6-AM), morphine, codeine, methamphetamine, amphetamine and phencyclidine (PCP). Bills were immersed in acetonitrile for 2h prior to extraction and GC-MS analysis. Results showed that 92% of the bills were positive for cocaine with a mean amount of 28.75+/-139.07 microg per bill, a median of 1.37 microg per bill, and a range of 0.01-922.72 microg per bill. Heroin was detected in seven bills in amounts ranging from 0.03 to 168.50 microg per bill: 6-AM and morphine were detected in three bills; methamphetamine and amphetamine in three and one bills, respectively, and PCP was detected in two bills in amounts of 0.78 and 1.87 microg per bill. Codeine was not detected in any of the US$ 1 bills analyzed. This study demonstrated that although paper currency was most often contaminated with cocaine, other drugs of abuse may be detected in bills.     

Legislating Crime Policy from the White House: Presidential Success with Congress in the Passage of Federal Crime Control Policy

Previous research has found that presidents, in general, have the power to influence congress in the passage of federal crime control policy. What has not been fully explored is whether presidential supported bills are more likely to influence congress to pass federal crime control bills. Therefore, this study draws upon the theory that presidents influence congress to test the hypothesis that president supported legislation on crime will achieve greater success in congress than non-supported bills. Analysis of legislative, presidential and congressional data from 1946 through 1996 suggests support for the theory that presidential supported bills are 2.8 times more likely (or 185% more likely) to become law.     

The Medicare secondary payor provisions: possible rewards and pitfalls

A 1990 report prepared by the Office of Inspector General estimated that as much as $1 billion is lost to the Medicare program annually because (i) secondary payor situations are not detected and (ii) insurance companies often do not pay when they are required to be the primary payors. Office of Inspector General, No. A-09-98-00151, April 1990, Medicare and Medicaid Guide (CCH) [symbol: see text] 39,112, at 25,649. In order to better enforce the MSP provisions, suggestions have been made at the Congressional level to impose sanctions against providers who demonstrate a pattern of inappropriate billing practices such as double billing, repeated failures to screen beneficiaries for other insurance coverage, and the repeated submission to Medicare of bills that should be submitted to another payor. (See the Subcommittee Report on erroneous payments under the MSP program, supra.) Although authority for such sanctions has yet to be adopted, given the fiscal problems currently plaguing the federal government, providers can expect increased enforcement of the MSP provisions as a means of reducing Medicare costs, and should review their screening and billing practices accordingly.     

Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS); reimbursement of individual health providers--Department of Defense. Final rule

The Department of Defense is publishing this document to correct errors in the final rule on reimbursement of individual health providers contained in section 199.14(g). In addition to typographical and proofreading errors, the final rule failed to specify that changes to 1991 payment levels apply to the lesser of prevailing charges or the fiscal year 1988 prevailing charge levels adjusted by the Medicare Economic Index. The Fiscal Year 1991 Defense Appropriations Act prohibited payments "in excess of amounts allowed in fiscal year 1990 for similar services." Such amounts are, by definition, the lesser of prevailing charges, MEI-limited 1988 prevailing charge levels, or actual charges.     

记名提单的原则与实践

在阐明记名提单的概念以及与海运单相比较的基础上,对于《海牙-维斯比规则》是否适用记名提单的问题进行了论述,同时分析了主要航运国家针对记名提单下货物交付的不同态度,并向实务界提出建议。     

Medicaid Program; Medicaid eligibility quality control, progressive reductions in federal financial participation for FYs 1982-84, payment for physician billing for clinical laboratory services, and utilization control of skilled nursing facility services: removal of obsolete requirements--HCFA. Final rule

This final rule removes several obsolete sections of the Medicaid regulations that specify rules and procedures for disallowing Federal financial participation for erroneous medical assistance payments due to eligibility and beneficiary liability errors as detected through the Medicaid eligibility quality control program for assessment periods from 1980 through June 1990. The Medicaid regulations that contain the rules and procedures for the progressive reductions in Federal financial participation in medical assistance expenditures made to the States for fiscal years 1982 through 1984 are removed to reflect the repeal of the statutory bases for the reductions. The Medicaid regulations that provide for physician billing for clinical laboratory services that a physician bills or pays for but did not personally perform or supervise are removed to reflect the statutory repeal of this provision. In addition, the rule removes obsolete regulations that prescribe requirements concerning utilization control of Medicaid services furnished in skilled nursing facilities. This rule is part of the Department's initiate to reinvent health care regulations and eliminate obsolete requirements.     

TRICARE senior demonstration of military managed care--DOD. Notice of demonstration project

This notice is to advise interested parties of a demonstration project in which the Department of Defense (DoD) will provide health care services to Medicare-eligible military retirees in a managed care program, called TRICARE Senior, and receive reimbursement for such care from the Medicare Trust Fund. The program is authorized by section 1896 of the Social Security Act, amended by section 4015 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33). The statue authorizes DoD and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to conduct at six sites during January 1998 through December 2000, a three-year demonstration under which dual-eligible beneficiaries will be offered enrollment in a DoD-operated managed care plan, called TRICARE Senior Prime. The legislation also authorizes Medicare HMOs to make payments to DoD for care provided to HMO enrollees by military treatment facilities (MTFs) participating in the demonstration. This part of the demonstration, to be called Medicare Partners, will allow DoD to enter into contracts with Medicare HMOs to provide specialty and impatient care to dual-eligible beneficiaries currently provided on a space-available basis. Additional legal authority pertinent to this demonstration project is 10 U.S.C. section 1092. Under TRICARE Senior Prime, Medicare-eligible military retirees who enroll in the program will be assigned primary care manager (PCMs) at the MTF. Enrollees will be referred to specialty care providers at the MTF and to participating members of the existing TRICARE Prime network. TRICARE Senior Prime enrollees will be afforded the same priority access to MTF care as military retiree and retiree family member enrollees in TRICARE Prime. DoD will receive reimbursement from HCFA on a capitated basis at a rate which is 95 percent of the rate HCFA currently pays to Medicare-risk HMOs, less costs such as capital and graduate medical education, disproportionate share hospital payments, and some capital costs, which are already covered by DoD's annual appropriation. However, under the authorizing statute, DoD must meet its current level of effort for its Medicare-eligible beneficiaries before receiving payments from the Medicare Trust Fund. That is, DoD must continue to fund health care at a certain expenditure level for its Medicare-eligible population before it may be reimbursed by HCFA for care provided to TRICARE Senior Prime enrollees. The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 required DoD and HHS to complete a memorandum of agreement (MOA) specifying the operational requirements of the demonstration project. That MOA was completed on February 13, 1998, and is published below. Except as provided in the MOA, TRICARE Senior Prime will be implemented consistent with applicable provisions of the CHAMPUS/TRICARE regulation, particularly 32 CFR sections 199.17 and 199.18.     

Payment or reimbursement for emergency services for nonservice-connected conditions in non-VA facilities. Final rule

This document amends the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) ``Payment or Reimbursement for Emergency Services for Nonservice-Connected Conditions in Non-VA Facilities' regulations to conform with a statutory change that expanded veterans' eligibility for reimbursement. Some of the revisions in this final rule are purely technical, matching the language of our regulations to the language of the revised statute, while others set out VA's policies regarding the implementation of statutory requirements. This final rule expands the qualifications for payment or reimbursement to veterans who receive emergency services in non-VA facilities, and establishes accompanying standards for the method and amount of payment or reimbursement.     

论土地资源生态补偿

生态补偿包括国家通过征收环境资源税以保证政府提供土地资源生态产品的公共服务职能;亦包括对因公共利益(生态保护)的需要而受到损失或者付出经济代价的人给予公正的补偿。土地资源生态补偿必须贯彻一种整体主义的生态补偿观。就我国现行的土地资源生态补偿立法和制度运作而言,其现实可行的模式只能是政府主导型。土地资源环境资源税收以生态受益者对国家所进行的环境经济行为机会成本进行补偿为征收标准;土地资源公益征收性质的生态补偿应当贯彻以被征收人生活水平不低于征收前为补偿标准,其补偿范围包括法律规范所规定并予以救济的维生上的财产性不利益和非财产性不利益。