Wednesday
May072008
Reduced Medicaid funding may diminish emergency response
The Congressional Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held the second of a two-day hearing on “the impact of the Administration’s Medicaid regulations on the ability of our nation’s emergency rooms to respond to a sudden influx of casualties from a terrorist attack,” said Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA). Waxman said that based on the first hearing, he was concerned about trauma centers that have “little or no surge capacity.” He said that the Bush Administration’s plans to cut Medicaid funding for hospitals would make trauma centers even more incapable of responding to a large-scale emergency situation similar to Hurricane Katrina, the Minneapolis bridge collapse, the Madrid train bombings, or other potential threats.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt agreed with the Chairman that emergency response system was inadequate, but said that Medicaid funding was not the correct tool with which to fix the problem. He said that Medicaid’s first priority is to provide health care for “low-income seniors, children, pregnant women, and people with disabilities,” and not to support institutions. He said that Medicaid “should not become a limitless account for State and local programs and agencies to draw Federal funds for non-Medicaid purposes,” and that “allowing for the continuation of abusive practices of shifting costs to the Federal government is not the appropriate way to ensure our nation’s preparedness.”
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff agreed with Leavitt, and said that there is no guarantee that Medicaid funds would be spent on emergency response.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt agreed with the Chairman that emergency response system was inadequate, but said that Medicaid funding was not the correct tool with which to fix the problem. He said that Medicaid’s first priority is to provide health care for “low-income seniors, children, pregnant women, and people with disabilities,” and not to support institutions. He said that Medicaid “should not become a limitless account for State and local programs and agencies to draw Federal funds for non-Medicaid purposes,” and that “allowing for the continuation of abusive practices of shifting costs to the Federal government is not the appropriate way to ensure our nation’s preparedness.”
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff agreed with Leavitt, and said that there is no guarantee that Medicaid funds would be spent on emergency response.
Early detection key to safeguarding America
According to Langevin, the 9/11 act authorizes the National Biosurveillance Integration Center (NBIC) and requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to submit a report to Congress describing federal, state and local biosurveillance efforts. He noted that the keys to stopping an attack from turning into a catastrophe were early detection, identification, tracking and response.
Robert Hooks, deputy assistant for weapons of mass destruction and biodefense from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Eric Myers, director of NBIC from DHS, issued a joint statement and said that America’s first indication of a bioterrorist attack would be through early detection and warning systems such as BioWatch and the NBIC. Hooks and Myers noted that a ‘comprehensive biosurveillance capability’ could minimize the impact and the duration of an attack.
William Jenkins, Jr., director of homeland security and justice issues from the GAO, said that the DHS had made efforts to make NBIC completely operational by September 30 but it remains unclear what operations the center will be capable of at that point in time. In addition, Jenkins emphasized the importance of improving the technology used by the BioWatch program.