#leamonde

[ethernalium]

Vagrant Story + Concept art

[fallenrazziel]

My favorite video games / gaming sagas in 10 images

VAGRANT STORY

[brenoerre]

Ashley Riot. #inktober #inktober2019 #ash #ashleyriot #vagrantstory #yasumimatsuno #finalfantasyxii #finalfantasytactics #tacticsogre #akihikoyoshida #fanart #ivalice #ivalicealliance #squaresoft #leamonde #jrpg #japan #playstation #underrated #videogame #ballpoint #pen #art #drawing #arte #desenho https://www.instagram.com/p/B3lLk5Egy8T/?igshid=1lw43jvyp9362

[livvyplaysfinalfantasy]

Other XII fans: Wow, I wish we could have gone further west in XII! Me, a full-time Vagrant Story: Take me straight to Leá Monde circa 706. There may be elementals named Leamonde Entites in what was once Nabradia, but you can’t convince me that the necrohol of Leá Monde gets founded later on top of the ruins of Nabudis, least of all because of the enormous differences in geography between the two places. And given Leá Monde���s two-thousand-year history, it would be totally plausible for the city to exist in its heyday during XII’s timeline. I want all the ancient Kiltian religious drama, all the wine cellars, and all the weird implications for the fate of, say, Vaan’s immortal soul. KEEP 👏 VALENDIA 👏 WEIRD 👏.

[thesecrettimes]

Medicare Will Lastly Cowl At-Residence COVID-19 Checks — however Not Till Spring

Folks with Medicare will quickly be capable to get the price of at-home COVID-19 testing kits lined. However the profit will come weeks or maybe even months after it’s been obtainable to thousands and thousands of privately insured People. The Facilities for Medicare and Medicaid Providers (CMS) simply introduced a forthcoming program to offer Medicare beneficiaries with as much as eight free at-home COVID-19 exams per thirty days from taking part pharmacies. “Medicare doesn't presently pay for over-the-counter COVID-19 exams,” the CMS says, however notes Medicare will start masking the exams “in early spring 2022.” In the meantime, most People have already got entry to free exams. As of Jan. 15, individuals with personal medical insurance have been eligible for protection of as much as eight at-home exams per thirty days, per individual included on the well being plan, as a part of a White Home testing program to fight the rampant unfold of Omicron. Solely at-home exams cleared by the Meals and Drug Administration are lined. Medicare beneficiaries had been overlooked of the preliminary program, in impact excluding greater than 63 million People who skew older and are at increased threat of demise and extreme sickness from COVID-19. “This can be a good instance of how dysfunctional Medicare and our well being system usually has been,” says Mary Johnson, a Medicare and Social Safety coverage analyst at The Senior Residents League. In lieu of free at-home exams, authorities officers have been urging Medicare beneficiaries to make the most of the present testing choices, which embrace 1000's of free in-person testing websites and free lab testing when ordered and administered from their physicians. As Johnson notes, for older or disabled individuals who have Medicare as a substitute of personal insurance coverage, these choices will be logistical nightmares — and downright harmful. They’re more likely to lead to at-risk people congregating in crowded traces and ready rooms with different people who find themselves probably sick with COVID-19. “It doesn’t make sense,” she says. To get testing by means of the presently obtainable choices, “there are normally a variety of hoops to leap by means of, and it’s not handy.” Within the meantime, all People — no matter insurance coverage standing — are eligible for residence supply of 4 free at-home COVID-19 exams. Checks can be found on-line at COVIDtests.gov or by telephone at 1-800-232-0233 and are shipped by the U.S. Postal Service. For weeks, advocacy teams, lawmakers and Medicare beneficiaries themselves have been urging the Biden administration and different federal companies to get Medicare to cowl at-home take a look at prices. “We all know that folks 65 and older are at a lot higher threat of significant sickness and demise from this illness – they want equal entry to instruments that may assist maintain them protected,” mentioned Nancy LeaMond, an govt vice chairman at AARP, in a Feb. 3 information launch. The CMS seems to have modified course because of the outcry, however Medicare beneficiaries will nonetheless have to attend at the least one other month to get their at-home exams lined. People with Medicare Benefit Plans might already qualify without spending a dime at-home COVID-19 exams as a result of these plans are administered by personal insurance coverage firms. The CMS recommends checking straight with the supplier to verify.

How and when can Medicare beneficiaries get free COVID-19 exams?

Whereas The Senior Residents League’s Johnson welcomes the Medicare coverage change as excellent news, she is worried with precisely how and when this system will roll out — and which pharmacies will provide the exams. Within the CMS’s response to Cash’s inquiries, it might not present a time-frame past “early spring.” As for which pharmacies are taking part, the CMS says these particulars are nonetheless “beneath growth” however might be obtainable quickly. Johnson additionally expressed concern that at-home exams will not be your best option for everybody on Medicare. Many older and/or disabled people might have bother performing the exams accurately, which may result in inaccurate outcomes until administered by a caregiver or medical skilled. Nonetheless, Johnson says it’s a internet win. “Not going into the physician’s workplace,” she says, “that’s going to make a complete lot of individuals relieved that they don’t should make that journey.”

Cash Basic

To have a good time our fiftieth anniversary, we have combed by means of many years of our print magazines to seek out hidden gems, fascinating tales and classic private finance suggestions which have withstood the take a look at of time. Dive into the archives with us. Signal Up

Extra from Cash:

Learn how to Get Free At-Residence COVID-19 Checks: Key Particulars In regards to the Authorities’s New Plan ‘No one Involves This On line casino and Wins.’ Meet the Podcaster Taking over the Well being Insurance coverage Trade You Can Change Your Medicare Benefit Protection Till March 31 Read the full article

[medicarevideos]

50th Anniversary - Medicare & Medicaid Event: 50 Years, Millions Of Healthier Lives

50th Anniversary – Medicare & Medicaid Event: 50 Years, Millions Of Healthier Lives

This event commemorates the 50th Anniversary of the Medicare and Medicaid programs and includes a panel of experts discussing how Medicare and Medicaid have changed society and the ways in which we can work together to strengthen and improve health care for future generations. Learn more about the 50th Anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid: We accept comments in the spirit of our comment policy:…

[pentegra-retirement-services]

HEALS May Not Offer Much for Retirees – But What About TRUST?

On July 27, 2020 the Senate Republicans rolled out their Health, Economic Assistance, Liability Protection and Schools (HEALS) Act, which would be another $1 trillion relief package for a nation still reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic. What does it do for retirement policy? Not much, especially when compared with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act that was signed into law on March 27, 2020, details of which are available here. On a retroactive basis, HEALS does three main things in the retirement space. It would clarify that employer-sponsored money purchase plans are included in those retirement plans that qualify for the temporary rules enacted under the CARES Act, which allow individuals to make penalty-free withdrawals from certain retirement plans for coronavirus-related expenses. Such plans cover less than one-fifth of private industry workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It would also clarify the due date for single-employer pension plan minimum required contributions; that date was delayed for 2020 by CARES. In addition, while the CARES Act allows eligible retirement plans to rely on an employee’s self-certification that he or she qualifies to receive a coronavirus-related distribution, HEALS adds that the plans also may accept an employee’s self-certification that he or she meets the requirements for the increased limits on retirement plan loans. There are also various fiscal measures that HEALS addresses – the ins and outs of a second Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for small businesses, another round of $1,200 stimulus payments, and the like  but that is pretty much it for the retirement issue. However, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) has reintroduced the Time to Rescue United States’ Trusts (TRUST) Act, for inclusion in HEALS. TRUST requests that, at the beginning of January 2021, the U.S. Treasury Department deliver a report to Congress on the state of a number of what are perceived as “endangered” federal trust funds. Congressional leaders would then appoint members to serve on bipartisan “Rescue Committees” one per trust fund with the mandate to draft legislation that restores solvency and otherwise improves each trust fund program. If a Rescue Committee reports a qualifying bill for its trust fund program, it would receive expedited consideration in both chambers. While 60 votes would be required to invoke cloture for final passage in the Senate, only a simple majority would be needed for the motion to proceed. Of most relevance to our discussion, one of the trust funds involved is the Social Security Trust Fund, which according to some reports will deplete its reserves by 2035 if further funding is not made available. If you think this sounds like a way of cutting Social Security funding, you are not alone. Cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid has been proposed by various Congressional leaders for years – an understandably frightful idea for the nation’s aged and aging (that is, all of us) populations. Nancy Altman, president of advocacy group Social Security Works, said that TRUST “creates a closed-door process to fast-track cuts to Social Security. It is a way to undermine the economic security of Americans without political accountability.” Altman also questioned the wisdom of proposing such cuts during the pandemic, maintaining that Congress “should be focused on protecting seniors, essential workers, and the unemployed. Instead, they are plotting to use the cover of the pandemic to slash Social Security.” AARP Executive VP and Chief Advocacy & Engagement Officer Nancy LeaMond has also objected to adding TRUST to HEALS, calling the former “a bill that is unrelated to the crisis and that wrongly targets Social Security and Medicare to reduce deficits that have expanded because of needed pandemic relief. “These programs are critical to millions of Americans who rightfully expect Congress to be careful stewards of their earned benefits,” she continued. “Social Security is the principal source of income for over half of older American households, and roughly one quarter of those age 65 and older depend on it for nearly all (90% or more) of their income. And Medicare provides the critical health coverage they need. The TRUST Act provisions should be dropped from the bill.” For his part, Romney said: “There is no interest on the part of either Republicans or Democrats to cut Social Security or Medicare for current retirees or people nearing retirement. At the same time, we’re going to have to make sure that what we propose for younger people coming along is something that is fiscally sustainable.” Whether one sides with Romney or not, the concept of cutting Social Security and Medicare for anybody should give one pause. It does not seem prudent to be entertaining such thoughts, especially at this moment of crisis; for anyone who either depends on these programs now, or will depend on them later in life, the first cut to such programs may very well be the deepest. Source: https://www.pentegra.com/current-thinking/retirement-industry-trends-and-marketplace-expertise/heals-may-not-offer-much-for-retirees-but-what-about-trust/

[airknight]

shout out to the fact that you can blind the vagrant soul (and leamonde entites for that matter), a giant killer orb made of darkness

[liz-goodwin]

Key GOP Senator: House may change bill after CBO projected hikes for seniors

President Donald Trump, flanked by House Ways and Means Committee Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, left, and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Greg Walden, R-Org., speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, Friday, March 10, 2017, during a meeting on healthcare. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

WASHINGTON — House Republicans apparently told antsy senators in a closed-door meeting Tuesday they may try to amend their health care bill to address concerns that it will significantly increase costs for seniors.

Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., told reporters after the meeting that Reps. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, and Greg Walden, R-Ore., chairmen of the powerful Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce Committees, said they realized the legislation’s projected premium hikes for older Americans was an issue that must be addressed.

“They did seem to express sympathy for that 60-year-old who currently is making $20,000 a year,” who would face big premium hikes, Cassidy said. “They did not give specifics of how to address that, but they did acknowledge that that was an issue to be addressed.”

The concession came a day after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report projecting the GOP legislation would result in 24 million people losing health care coverage by 2026. The report seems to have increased distaste for the legislation in the Senate, where at least seven Republicans have expressed concerns about the health care overhaul since the House unveiled it early last week.

Monday’s CBO report predicted older Americans in the individual market would see their premium costs soar if the bill passes. A 64-year-old making $26,500 a year would pay $14,600 per year to buy insurance on the individual market under the Republican health care plan, the CBO projected. That’s more than seven times as much as he or she would pay under the current law.

Cassidy, a physician and one of a handful of Republican senators who have raised concerns about the bill’s effects even before the CBO report said he’s waiting to see the final legislation before deciding whether to support it or not. The Louisiana lawmaker introduced his own bill to replace Obamacare alongside Republican Sens. Susan Collins, Johnny Isakson and Shelley Moore Capito.

“The chairmen spoke of trying to amend it to address concerns,” Cassidy said. “I reserve judgment until I see the bill that comes over.” Republicans Sens. Pat Roberts of Kansas and Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma also expressed concerns about costs for seniors, CNN reported. “I don’t think it’s right,” that seniors will be charged more, Inhofe said.

Spokesmen for Walden and Brady did not immediately return requests for comment on what measures they were considering taking to address the issue. The powerful AARP came out against the legislation last week, citing higher costs for seniors. The group’s Executive Vice President Nancy Leamond reiterated her concerns Tuesday on Twitter.

Unacceptable. CBO numbers reinforce why AARP opposes House bill. https://t.co/dIaXRUsvM7

— Nancy LeaMond (@NancyLeaMond) March 14, 2017

Democrats have seized on the health care plan’s effects on seniors in attacking the GOP plan. Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., spoke against the bill next to a giant poster board on the Senate floor Wednesday with “Senior Tax” written on it. Sen. Bob Casey of Ohio estimated cost hikes for 50 to 64 year olds in each of his state’s counties on Twitter using the hashtag “#noagetax.”

In a press conference after the conference meeting, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the replace bill will go forward because the “status quo is unsustainable.” He defended the legislation from the CBO’s prediction that millions would lose coverage under it and said he believed premiums would be lower than the office estimated. “It’s pretty hard to predict coverage when the government stops telling you to buy something you don’t want,” McConnell said.

The Senate leader said the health care bill would be open to amendments from senators if it passes the House.

The House Budget Committee will mark up the legislation Thursday before it goes to the floor for a vote.

[narcisbolgor-blog]

Republicans Obamacare Replacement Just Got A Powerful Enemy

WASHINGTON Provisions in the House Republicans Obamacare replacement billthat would raise insurance costs for older Americans are drawing resistance from the influential seniors lobby.

The American Health Care Act, as Republicans are calling it, would allow insurers to make premiums for older Americans five times what they charge younger workers provided that a states regulations allow for it. Obamacare had capped this ratio, known as an age rating, at 3 to 1.

The measure was chief among the reasons AARP, the nations largest organization for older Americans,cited in explaining its opposition to the House bill on Tuesday evening.

Older Americans need affordable health care services and prescriptions,AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond said in a statement. This plan goes in the opposite direction, increasing insurance premiums for older Americans and not doing anything to lower drug costs.

AARP, which has nearly 38 million members ages 50 and older, is also firmly opposed to a pair of major changes to Medicaid that the House bill includes. One is a rollback of Obamacares Medicaid expansion, which made the program available to millions of low-income adults, many of them seniors, who had no insurance before. The other is a new Medicaid funding formula that could leave states on the hook for more and more money, a report from the left-leaningCenter on Budget and Policy Priorities concluded Tuesday. That might force states to make cuts that hurt seniors, many of whom rely on Medicaid for nursing home care and other health services.

Medicaid cuts could impact people of all ages and put at risk the health and safety of 17.4 million children and adults with disabilities and seniors by eliminating much needed services that allow individuals to live independently in their homes and communities, LeaMond said. This harmful legislation would make health care less secure and less affordable.

AARP used its considerable political power to help pass Obamacare in 2010, despite the opposition of many members about 400,000 left the organization in protest. AARPs objection to key elements of the Republican bill to replace the landmark law could prove just as influential.

[AARP] backed it and paid the price for backing it, so why not support it against repeal? said Fred Lynch, a professor at Claremont McKenna College and author of One Nation Under AARP. The Congress is genuinely afraid of age power, and theyd just as soon let the sleeping giant go on sleeping.

The only possible leader right now is AARP, so its sort of in their hands, he said.

The mammoth organization has already registered its opposition to the two measures in letters to Congress in late January and early February.

AARP premiered a new video advertisement for the campaign on Monday, suggesting it was ramping up its efforts to kill the provision.

In the tongue-in-cheek ad that runs for just over a minute, a man chopping wood alongside a squirrel named Charlie expresses his anger at the age tax.

You know, Charlie and I were watching the news this morning, and they said that Congress has just introduced a new age-rating bill, the wood-chopping narrator says. And I was like, What the heck is age rating? Then Charlie explained that its Washington politician-speak for overcharging older Americans for their health insurance while lining the insurance companies pockets.

The ad is part of anadvocacy campaign AARP launched Feb. 15 to specifically combat a rise in the age rating, which it is calling an age tax. At the time, the organization encouraged its members to call those in Congress who were active in drafting the health care legislation to oppose the rating provision.

Chip Somodevilla via Getty Images

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), right, addresses questions about the American Health Care Act with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Tuesday.

AARPs concern about how the Republican bill would affect Americans 50 and older is well-founded, according to two health care experts.

Across the board, what it does is shift costs from younger people to older people, said Timothy Jost, a leading health reform expert and emeritus professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law.

Republicans introduced the proposal with the goal of enticing younger Americans to buy health insurance and rebalance insurance risk pools, according to Jost.

The bill would also create a tax credit to buy insurance that increases based on age.But the tax credits are, at most, twice as large for older Americans while the premiums could be five times higher.

It is sending seniors a 2-foot rope to get themselves out of a 10-foot hole, said Sabrina Corlette, a professor at Georgetown Universitys Health Policy Institute.

Corlette predicted that under the Republican plan, many Americans in their 50s and early 60s would be unable to pay for private insurance and would end up going without coverage. That risks driving up medical debt, which could lead to more bankruptcies.

Some might delay retirement to keep employer-sponsored insurance, Corlette suggested.

If there is less coverage as people get older, people ... are less likely to leave a job to care for a family member or pursue their own business, she added.

Many of the older Americans hardest hit by these changes live in rural, Republican-leaning areas, according to aninteractive analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Under the House plan, 60-year-olds earning $30,000 a year would see their tax credits drop 75 percent or more in most of Arizona and large swaths of western Nebraska. The least affected states include solidly Democratic Washington, Vermont, New York and Massachusetts.

Kaiser Family Foundation

A map demonstrating the House bill's effect on tax credits to buy health insurance for 60-year-old Americans earning $30,000 annually.

They didnt run this by the politicians. They didnt look at it seriously in terms of its effect on Republican voters and [Donald] Trump voters, said Jost, who is also a contributing editor at Health Affairs.

AARP represents an older demographic that leans Republican and tended to vote for Trump in November.

Republican senators spent much of their time Tuesday dodging questions about the specifics of the House Republican bill, saying they needed more time to read it.

Asked about the language in the bill that would allow insurers to charge their oldest customers five times what they charge younger ones, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said hes fine with it.

Five-to-ones been a standard part of the process and what it was several years ago, he said. No, five-to-one doesnt concern me at all.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said hes still studying the bill and that theres a lot Im not wild about, but the increase in premiums for older Americans wasnt one of them.

The current price controls are clearly not working, he said. Getting away from price controls would probably improve the viability of the individual market.

Pressed on the fact that it could mean older workers will have to postpone their retirement if the Republican bill passes, Toomey said, I will leave it at that.

Unlike her colleagues, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) expressed concern about the change.

Well it depends on how you structure the credit because, in fact, seniors are more expensive, but if you offset that by giving them a greater credit you can make sure that theyre not hurt by the reality that seniors use more health care, she said.

But Collins acknowledged that preliminary analyses of the credits afforded under the bill to older customers suggest they wont keep pace with the higher premiums.

Well, thats an issue that I have. I need more information about the credits and also about the fact that it looks like the credits are the same amount whether you make the bottom of pay scale, or income scale, or the top.

More From this publisher : HERE

=> *********************************************** Source Here: Republicans Obamacare Replacement Just Got A Powerful Enemy ************************************ =>

Republicans Obamacare Replacement Just Got A Powerful Enemy was originally posted by 11 VA Viral News

[dinafbrownil]

Border Fight: Trump’s Plan To Import Cheaper Drugs From Canada Faces Hurdles

In a historic shift, the federal government Wednesday proposed allowing states to import drugs from Canada. Officials said they believe it can be done safely and save significant money for Americans.

But U.S. consumers looking for relief from the high cost of prescriptions should not expect the strategy to provide help anytime soon ― at least not before 2021. And many expensive medications will be excluded, including injectables such as insulin, controlled substances such as opioids, and biological drugs.

The prices of many prescription drugs are cheaper in Canada than in the U.S. since most developed countries set price controls on medicines.

As a result, many Americans have traveled across the border for decades to buy drugs or used internet sites to order drugs from Canada and other countries — even though federal officials say it’s technically illegal and dangerous.

Nancy LeaMond, executive vice president of AARP, welcomed the administration’s move. “The ability to import lower-priced medicines would help states manage their ever-tightening budgets, save taxpayers’ money, and lower drug costs for its citizens,” she said in a statement.

Yet critics say the administration’s plan ― offered in a 169-page proposed rule seeking comments from states, drugmakers and other stakeholders ― has more to do with President Donald Trump seeking to shore up reelection chances for 2020 than bringing dramatic changes to how people afford drugs.

Don't Miss A Story

Subscribe to KHN’s free Weekly Edition newsletter.

Sign Up

Please confirm your email address below:

Sign Up

One sign of that was Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar’s trip to Florida’s State Capitol to make the drug importation rule announcement with Gov. Ron DeSantis. Florida, Trump’s recently “adopted” home state and an electoral-voter-rich target for presidential candidates, is the largest of five states looking for federal permission to import drugs from Canada. The others are Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and Colorado.

Neither Azar nor the administration’s document had an estimate on how much Americans or states could save from the importation plan or what it would cost to operate. Azar also refused to predict when anyone would get help from the implementation plan.

“There are a whole range of obstacles ― both legal, logistical and political to this ever moving forward,” said Rachel Sachs, an associate professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis who follows drug regulation policy.

Here are some of those hurdles:

Will Canada Play Ball?

The Canadian Pharmacists Association called on the Canadian government to oppose the importation plan, arguing that it could cause a shortage of drugs there. Even if Canada were willing to help — a big if — it’s unlikely the country of 37 million people would be big enough to help in a big way. (California alone has 40 million people.)

“It is important to recognize that Canada’s market for pharmaceuticals is too small to have any real impact on U.S. drug prices,” Kirsten Hillman, Canada’s acting ambassador to the U.S., said in a statement following her meeting in November with Joe Grogan, Trump’s domestic policy chief.

Big Pharma Isn’t On Board.

The drug industry has a lot to lose if drug importation is allowed because its prices in the United States could be dramatically reduced. And it’s going to fight any efforts to allow that to happen. Investors showed little concern as drug stocks were either up or little changed after the HHS announcement.

Azar said the administration is counting on global wholesalers and distributors to work with states to import Canadian drugs. But major drug manufacturers are expected to pressure those companies against doing this, Sachs said.

In addition, the drug industry could turn to Congress to help stop any importation initiatives. PhRMA, the pharmaceutical industry trade group, showed its might on Capitol Hill this year, helping to quash Trump’s drug-pricing bill, which was one of the administration’s top priorities. And neither of the major bills being considered by Congress includes an importation clause.

The drug industry said its long-standing concerns about drug safety remain firmly in place.

“It is disappointing the Administration once again put politics over patients,” PhRMA President and CEO Stephen Ubl said in a statement. “The Administration chose to proceed with an importation scheme that could endanger American lives, could worsen the opioid crisis and has been called unworkable by Canadian officials.”

The Plan Still Has To Pass Legal Muster.

The 2003 law creating the Medicare prescription drug program gave the secretary of Health and Human Services authority to permit the importation of prescription drugs. But such a policy could take effect only if the secretary certified to Congress that the implementation will “pose no additional risk to the public’s health and safety.”

No HHS secretary has made such a certification, although Azar has indicated he would be the first.

Even if HHS approves a final plan from a state, the pharmaceutical industry is likely to challenge it in court, where other administration health policies have been stalled or blocked.

Public Expectations Are High But Impact Could Be Low.

After months of study, Florida and Vermont have identified only a couple dozen drugs — many of them to treat HIV and cancer ― where importation from Canada would save the states significant money. That means the large majority of people buying drugs won’t get any help from importation.

Trish Riley, executive director of the National Academy for State Health Policy, said importation is designed to deliver only a small number of expensive drugs for people who have no coverage or have high deductibles or copayments.

DeSantis said importation is not a “silver bullet” to the nation’s high drug prices. “This is one step in a long process” in helping Floridians get cheaper drugs from Canada. A paper that the DeSantis administration published in August estimated Florida’s Medicaid program and other state agencies could save about $150 million a year by importing drugs, a tiny fraction of its overall pharmaceutical spending.

Can States Meet HHS Safety Requirements?

Azar said states will have to prove how they can hire vendors to connect the Canadian and United States drug distribution systems and adequately track and test drugs as they make their way across the border. The task is complicated and it remains unclear if states will be able to do this, Sachs said.

from Updates By Dina https://khn.org/news/border-fight-trumps-plan-to-import-cheaper-drugs-from-canada-faces-hurdles/

[joshuabcolon]

AARP Applauds Trump For Taking First Step In Cutting Prescription Drug Costs

“There is no justifiable reason for Americans to pay the highest prescription drug prices in the world. High-priced drugs hurt everyone...,” said AARP's Nancy LeaMond on Trump's blueprint for bringing down drug costs. from Forbes - Pharma & Healthcare https://www.forbes.com/sites/robinseatonjefferson/2018/05/16/aarp-applauds-trump-for-taking-first-step-lowering-prescription-drug-costs/?ss=pharma-healthcare via IFTTT

[simplestepsmobility-blog]

Tweeted

New @USCensusBureau projections: by 2035, Americans age 65+ will outnumber those under 18 for the first time in history. https://t.co/07vUBIwVtY

— Nancy LeaMond (@NancyLeaMond) March 22, 2018

[mystlnewsonline]

New Post has been published on https://www.stl.news/aarp-applauds-congressional-passage-raise-family-caregivers-act/64478/

AARP Applauds Congressional Passage of RAISE Family Caregivers Act

WASHINGTON/ Jan. 9, 2018 (STL.NEWS) — AARP welcomes passage in the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives of the bipartisan Recognize, Assist, Include, Support, and Engage (RAISE) Family Caregivers Act (H.R. 3759). The legislation, introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), and in the U.S. House by Representatives Gregg Harper (R-MS) and Kathy Castor (D-FL), requires the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop a strategy to support the nation’s 40 million family caregivers.

“Thanks to the efforts of bipartisan Senate and House champions—Senators Collins and Baldwin and Representatives Harper and Castor—the RAISE Family Caregivers Act will help address the challenges family caregivers face,” said AARP Chief Advocacy & Engagement Officer Nancy A. LeaMond. “Family caregivers are the backbone of our care system in America. We need to make it easier for them to coordinate care for their loved ones, get information and resources, and take a break so they can rest and recharge.”

Every day, millions of Americans provide care for parents, spouses, children and adults with disabilities and other loved ones to help them live independently in their homes and communities. Family caregivers take on a range of tasks including managing medications, helping with bathing and dressing, preparing and feeding meals, arranging transportation, and handling financial and legal matters. The unpaid care that family caregivers provide helps delay or prevent costly nursing home care, which is often paid for by Medicaid.

In addition to requiring the development of a strategy to support the nation’s family caregivers, the bill also establishes an advisory body that will bring together stakeholders from the private and public sectors to make recommendations that communities, providers, government, and others are taking and may take to help make the big responsibilities of caregiving a little bit easier.

The bill heads next to the President for his signature.

About AARP

AARP is the nation’s largest nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to empowering Americans 50 and older to choose how they live as they age. With nearly 38 million members and offices in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, AARP works to strengthen communities and advocate for what matters most to families with a focus on health security, financial stability and personal fulfillment. AARP also works for individuals in the marketplace by sparking new solutions and allowing carefully chosen, high-quality products and services to carry the AARP name. As a trusted source for news and information, AARP produces the world’s largest circulation publications, AARP The Magazine and AARP Bulletin. To learn more, visit www.aarp.org or follow @AARP and @AARPadvocates on social media.

_____

SOURCE: news provided by AARP, distributed on PRNewswire.com, published on STL.NEWS by St. Louis Media, LLC (PS)

[leftpress]

AARP and Key Senators Urge Companies to End Age Bias in Recruiting on Facebook

by Jennifer Valentino-DeVries | Articles and Investigations - ProPublica | January 8th 2018

by Jennifer Valentino-DeVries

The largest advocacy group for older Americans and the two top members of the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging are calling on employers and tech companies to stop limiting recruitment ads on Facebook and other online sites to younger workers.

“It appears age discrimination is alive and well in the digital era,” Nancy LeaMond, executive vice president of AARP, said in a statement on Friday.

“We urge online platforms to take the steps needed to ensure they’re not supporting age-biased recruiting and hiring practices. And we continue to call on all employers to end bias in their employment practices,” she said.

Maine Republican Susan Collins, who chairs the Senate Aging Committee, and Pennsylvania Democrat Robert Casey, the ranking minority member, wrote to Facebook, Google and LinkedIn on Dec. 22, asking them how many employment ads on their p...

→ READ MORE ←

Get your Latest News From The Leftist Front on LeftPress.News → Support Us On Patreon! ←

[tortuga-aak]

There's a $10 billion provision in the tax plan that just passed the House — and it's really bugging the AARP

The Republican tax reform bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday includes the repeal of an itemized deduction related to medical expenses, a measure that costs the federal government $10 billion.

The deduction is notably not repealed in the Senate version of the bill. A repeal of the deduction would impact people who spend heavily on certain healthcare expenses like long-term care or fertility treatments.

The AARP isn't happy with the plan's removal of the deduction, calling it a "health tax," and one expert doesn't expect it to make it to the final bill. 

  A provision in the Republican tax plan that just passed the House would repeal of an itemized deduction that applies to healthcare expenses. Cutting that deduction would hit people with high medical costs — those with chronic conditions that require medical devices and other expensive equipment — hard. At the same time, it would only save the federal government about $10 billion, not much in the scheme of the trillions in annual government spending.

In particular, this will impact people whose expenses aren't covered by traditional health insurance, such as those who need long-term care. 

AARP — which lobbies for retirees and the elderly and was one of the top 50 lobbying spenders in 2016, spending more than $8 million, according to The Hill — is calling this a "health tax." 

"The House tax bill repeals the medical expense deduction, resulting in a health tax for taxpayers who get sick or have chronic conditions," AARP executive vice president Nancy LeaMond said in a statement.  "As Congress continues its consideration of tax legislation, we continue to urge the House and Senate to work in a bipartisan manner to maintain tax incentives that promote retirement savings, retirement security and help offset the high out-of-pocket health care costs of older Americans." The repeal of the medical expense deduction only shows up in the House bill, not the Senate's, so it remains to be seen if the change will end up in the final Republican plan.  

Craig Garthwaite, a professor of strategy at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University said he doesn't expect the provision to survive. 

"Never bet against the AARP," he said. 

What removing the deduction would mean 

Under the current tax law, individuals who spend over 10% of their income on medical expenses are allowed to deduct part of those costs from their taxes. The proposed new bill would remove that deduction.

So say your income in a year is $60,000, and you have $20,000 worth of medical expenses. That would mean that you'd have a taxable income of $46,000.

But, Garthwaite said, fewer people might be exposed to this deduction going away than they might have before the Affordable Care Act put an end to lifetime insurance caps. For the most part, it will be people in need of long-term healthcare, such as nursing homes or home care, or people with healthcare expenses that go beyond the scope of their health plans. 

But for those with those kinds of expenses, the removal of the deduction could be extreme. 

"To go after this is a gut punch," Adrienne Lynch, a woman going through in-vitro fertilization, told The New York Times. Lynch has spent more than $43,000 on IVF, she told The Times, lowering her taxable income by $20,000.

NOW WATCH: 'You are the light': Watch controversial Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte serenade Trump with a love song

from Feedburner http://ift.tt/2hwP141