Industry: Don’t Tread on Us

ATLANTA — Call it being fed up, or maybe fired up. With
increasing vigor, the home medical equipment industry is blasting
back at misleading media and government reports — and that is
making a difference, industry leaders say.

“Our determination to set the record straight in the media has
given us big opportunities to air our side of the story on several
occasions,” said Michael Reinemer, vice president, communications
and policy, for the American Association for Homecare. “For
instance, our blistering response to a couple of very misleading
digs by a former Medicare administrator on C-SPAN earned us a
half-hour on the air
to set the record straight … Last month, we were quoted on
the front page of USA Today on the HME sector’s support
for anti-fraud measures.”

It’s a major turnaround from the days not so long ago when the
HME sector did little to ward off the assaults of government
agencies and media that resulted in a public perception of an
industry where fraud ran rampant and companies liberally milked the
Medicare program dry.

Now, threatened by the prospect of DMEPOS competitive bidding and
other crippling CMS initiatives, HME stakeholders are rising up to
fight for their businesses and their beneficiaries’ quality of
care.

“Some of the negative stories that have come out were clearly
backlash from some Washington insiders who reacted to our
aggressive stance opposing the bidding program,” Reinemer said.
“Other misleading stories have been planted by the HHS Office of
Inspector General … In their never-ending effort to shine up
their own image and expand their budget, OIG has wrongly and
unfairly tarnished ours.”

It isn’t just AAHomecare that is watchdogging the information
emanating from the various sources, however. Individual
stakeholders have taken up the cause as have independent groups
such as the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness, a Washington
watchdog organization that has lobbied against competitive bidding
— even assisting in a lawsuit in hopes of gaining greater
transparency in the project from CMS.

Last month 166 renowned economists joined in, punching
holes in CMS’ competitive bidding plan in a Sept. 26 letter to
Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., chair of the House Ways and Means
Subcommittee on Health. The industry got another boost via a Sept.
30 “Freakonomics” post in the The New York Times about the
economists’ letter titled “Fix
Medicare’s Bizarre Auction Program.”

After reading their letter to Stark, Barb Stockert of Sanford
HealthCare Accessories in Jamestown, N.D., wrote to Sen. Kent
Conrad, D-N.D., alerting him to the economists’ opinions and, based
on their concerns, Stark’s
questions to CMS about the program. Stockert also noted the
need for a Senate companion to H.R. 3790, which, supported by 257
members of the House, would eliminate competitive bidding.

“Our industry is in real need of a Senate companion bill,”
Stockert wrote. “The last thing anyone needs right now is another
failed government program, so I think it is imperative that serious
consideration on this program has to be done. If this program is
allowed to begin, it is going to seriously limit access for
Medicare beneficiaries, and be the direct cause of job loss and
business closings.”

In Redding, Calif., Tony Lewis and Steve Gavras, owners of New
West Medical, hosted Rep. Wally Herger, R-Calif., on a company
tour. The goal: to get Herger to sign on to H.R. 3790. But he
declined to support the bill.

In an Oct. 6
interview, Gavras told the Redding Record Searchlight
that Herger’s support of competitive bidding came at the expense of
patients and risked a “much larger expense” in the future. “He is
doing what he probably has accused the Democrats of doing; pushing
the expense down the road … I hope somebody will look at the
increase in hospital costs over the next 20 years,” Gavras told the
newspaper.

While Herger’s response wasn’t the desired one, his visit
“resulted in good coverage in the local newspaper and television
station,” Reinemer said.

On Sept. 29, The Sun (San Bernardino) printed a
rebuttal from Esta
Willman, owner of Medi-Source Equipment and Supply in Yucca
Valley, Calif., responding to an editorial praising the CMS
program. She noted the newspaper’s piece contained factual errors
and did not examine the consequences for Medicare
beneficiaries.

“Your opinion piece … suggests that seniors will benefit
from lower prices,” Willman wrote. “But most Medicare beneficiaries
have insurance policies that cover co-payments, so the insurance
companies are the ones who will be spending less money, not the
seniors.”

Willman pointed out that the editorial confused “the Medicare
bidding system, which is a price-setting mechanism, with the issue
of provider accreditation, which is a long overdue anti-fraud
measure. Thankfully, the accreditation requirement is already in
effect. The bidding system has nothing to do with stopping
fraud.”

The CMS project places Medicare beneficiaries in jeopardy, said
Willman. “This program is actually designed to eliminate about 90
percent of the equipment providers in a given market area, which
reduces competition based on quality and service. As a result, it
will be harder to ensure access to home care,” she wrote.

Randy Wolfe, president of Lambert’s Health Care, Knoxville,
Tenn., guides AAHomecare’s grassroots Stand Up for Homecare
campaign. He noted its supporters have gotten smarter about public
relations efforts with “more advance planning, quicker responses
and more pointed positions that refute or clarify incorrect or
negative generalizations that may come though the press from time
to time.”

Being more aggressive in telling the industry’s story, he said,
shifts the emphasis of public discussion “to the homes of families
and the patients we care for across the country.”

Said Reinemer, “The net result of these public awareness efforts
and responses is that millions of Americans are hearing the truth
about the value of home care and about our perspective on some of
the policy challenges we face in Washington. Also, public officials
and the media are less likely to make misleading statements about
HME — because they know we are watching, and we will call
them on it.”

View more competitive bidding
stories.