posted
121 Walgreens Stores to Stop Taking New Medicaid Patients
More than a hundred Walgreens drugstores will stop accepting new Medicaid patients next month because the company claims it is losing money, the Seattle Times reported Thursday.
Citing "continued reduction in reimbursement" payments, Walgreens said it made the decision to stop taking new Medicaid patients at 121 stores in Washington state. The drugstore chain claims the state's Medicaid program reimburses it at less than the break-even point for 95 percent of brand-name medications given to Medicaid patients, according to the newspaper.
The policy change will reportedly go into effect April 16.
In February, Bartell Drugs made a similar move, opting to stop accepting new Medicaid patients at 57 of its stores in Washington state.
Take the Government's lowball pittance...or stop taking medicare\medicaid patients.
This is the problem with the direction were headed with 'reform'. We don't address any cost drivers...none...
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You never had any control right from the beggining
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
last i checked? the govt has been controlling what you can buy and or sell for about 100 years..
the Bush/GOP medicare prescription drug plan made it illegal for Medicare or medicaid to negotiate "bulk" prices on medications. The VA has been doing that for years and gets good prices, but there are alot of drugs they don't carry..
this article is instersting, make sure to note the date and the amount of money:
Medicare Drug Benefit May Cost $1.2 Trillion Estimate Dwarfs Bush's Original Price Tag
By Ceci Connolly and Mike Allen Washington Post Staff Writers Wednesday, February 9, 2005; Page A01
The White House released budget figures yesterday indicating that the new Medicare prescription drug benefit will cost more than $1.2 trillion in the coming decade, a much higher price tag than President Bush suggested when he narrowly won passage of the law in late 2003.
The projections represent the most complete picture to date of how much the program will cost after it begins next year. The expense of the new drug benefit has been a source of much controversy since the day Congress approved it, with Democrats and some Republicans complaining that the White House has consistently low-balled the expected cost to the government.
As recently as September, Medicare chief Mark B. McClellan said the new drug package would cost $534 billion over 10 years. Last night, he acknowledged that the cumulative cost of the program between 2006 and 2015 will reach $1.2 trillion, but he cited several major savings and offsets that he said will reduce the federal government's bottom-line cost to $720 billion.
At the recent confirmation hearing of Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) pressed the administration to hold down the cost of the prescription drug program to the $400 billion that Bush had originally promised.
Beginning with his January 2003 State of the Union address, Bush pledged to keep the total cost of the drug benefit to $400 billion over 10 years. An estimate by the Congressional Budget Office was close to Bush's figure.
But shortly after Bush signed the program into law in December 2003, the White House revised its projection to $534 billion, but it never offered a detailed breakdown of that estimate.
Last March, Richard S. Foster, Medicare's chief actuary for nearly a decade, said administration officials threatened to fire him if he disclosed his belief in 2003 that the drug package would cost $500 billion to $600 billion.
Moreover, McClellan said, some seniors will be shifted from Medicaid to Medicare, resulting in about $190 billion in savings over the next decade. That is because states will be required to reimburse the federal government for some of those services, and the federal government will not be required to pay out as much in matching funds to states.
i know people are tired of hearing how Bush and the GOPs did this and or did that, but medicare is already going BK right? and Obama hasn't even done anything yet...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
what is amazing is that if you turn on Fox at any time of day or week? they are complaining about the 1 trillion dollar price tag over ten years (the same as this) on the health care bill about four times per hour...
here's a 1 trillion dollar price tag just for prescriptions from 7 years ago that they fully supported & cheered on...
if there was any kind of honesty in all this? we might actually be able to fix what's wrong..
i don't see any hope for that. i don't beleive "starting over" means doing anything either...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Walgreens Welcomes Direction of President Bush's Medicare Prescription Drug Plan.
Article from: PR Newswire Article date: March 4, 2003
"The framework for Medicare prescription drug coverage described by President Bush today is a good first step toward a meaningful benefit for all seniors," said David W. Bernauer, chairman and CEO of Walgreen Co., the nation's largest drugstore company.
Bernauer said he was particularly pleased with two points. "First, the President's plan provides competitive alternatives to PBMs (pharmacy benefits managers)," he said. "Second, Mr. Bush voiced strong support for a patient's right to choose a pharmacy. We're convinced that face-to-face pharmacist/patient relationships are best for healthcare, particularly for seniors who often take multiple prescription drugs …
quote:Originally posted by Peaser: Drug Stores will more than likely be regulated by the government in the next ten years if this health care bill passes.
What I typed is wrong. What I meant to say was that government will run/own drug stores in the next ten years.
in VA? the state govt already own the liquor stores...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The regulation\take over of thedrug stores isn't my concern, yet, Peaser. It's the fact that companies are telling the Gov that their not going to keep taking lowball payments where they lose money.
They have costs...non-generic drugs cost money. Heathcare reform that doesn't address the actual cost drivers will never accomplish anything ... well, anything helpful.
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
In Oregon the state owes the liquor stores to, have for years nobody seems to mind.
So my point is Walgreens,or any other retailer' have a chance to work with a plan if it goes through. If they don't like it get out of the business there will be somebody else that will do it and if not the goverment will. We have had enough of the private sector cry baby atittude in the medical industry they have cried there way to almost destroying the ecomomy and sapping the financial strenght out of American families.
In a few years into this bill millions of people will have more disposable income. Republicans and conservatives say no. Who really cares what these obstuctionist think.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, Ray, some days I almost let myself hope that this Fairytale Land that Obama is promising you (and that you apparrently buy into) is possible....
Where all the money that those evil rich people have stolen has been righteously taken away by our dear leader and given back to it's rightful owners. Where everyone owns a 3 story home and two hybrid cars. Where noone has to work because money grows on trees and cute little animals keep all the bad people away from our borders...
Someday, Ray, who knows?
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
your a fool. What I just said was business 101 if you can't cut it or afford to be in the game go and that means walgreens or anybody eles. What do you want socialism only for the top .
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
As far as protecting our borders I don't think you ever have or will give your service for that like most repubapukes
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep up the name calling, Ray, nothing says take you (or your ponit) seriously than kindergarten behavior. Rofl
As usual you missed both the point of the thread and the sarcasm. Let me spell it out...slowly...
If large chains cannot afford a profit on what medicaid is paying...ie medicaid is paying less than what it costs the company to stock.
Still following?
Do you think Mom and Pop shops can do better?
What did you call it, Ray, Business 101? Here's some (simple) Math to go with it:
If Pharma charges X for a dose of a drug...Store can either sell it to a customer at a profit (if the have private insurance) or at a loss (if they have Medicaid). Which do you think they can do and stay in business?
The cost driver here is what Pharma is charging the Store...or in other areas what Docs or Hospitals are charging the Insurance Cos or Medicare.
This Bill does not address Cost Drivers, Ray. All it does is force private companies to pay these prices for people that will never be profitable to the business...and limiting their ability to cover the increased costs.
There are two unavoidable consequences of this: loss of the private insurance market and stores/hospitals/docs will stop taking gov insurance as it doesn't cover their costs.
This Bill will do more to destroy the healthcare that the 85% of us that DO have than it will do to reform anything.
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
