|
Sample letter opposing Competitive Bidding
[INSERT DATE]
[INSERT ADDRESS]
Dear Senator [ ]:
Thank you for your continuing efforts to ensure that Medicare dollars are being spent in the best interests of our elderly American.
It is my understanding that Congress may plan to again consider establishment of a competitive bidding system for orthoses and DME and demonstration projects for competitive bidding of all Part B services in 2003. This issue was addressed last year in Sec 311 of S. 3018, but was not enacted prior to recess. As a [certified hand therapist/occupational/physical therapists] and a Medicare Part B provider, I am writing to request your opposition to any legislation that would allow competitive bidding of therapist provided Part B services.
While I support improving Medicare efficiency, and understand the rationale for introducing a competitive bidding system modeled to the private sector, the proposed legislation fails to successfully replicate this type of market, in that no consideration is given to quality and performance. It is to this issue of quality that I am most capable to speak.
The proposed Medicare legislation ignores the issue of quality of care, which must serve as an equal consideration to efficiency if reform is to be successful. As a hand therapist, I have earned a degree in occupational/physical therapy and subsequently have pursued advanced education specific to the upper extremity. Given this training, my services are sought by physicians and patients alike to ensure successful rehabilitation. If a less qualified clinician/practitioner is allowed to deliver these services or if the treatment is delayed due to the bidding process, the implications are far-reaching. The continuum of care offered by physician, therapist and patient is paramount, not only to patient recovery, but also efficiency in healthcare delivery. To disrupt this relationship could compromise treatment received and require additional surgeries, procedures, or rehabilitation. In this scenario, there exists an increased cost factor to Medicare, gap insurance providers, the beneficiary and healthcare providers.
In addition to my stance as a practitioner, let me also offer my opinion as an American citizen—any pricing system that ignores quality or provider accountability will never retain my support.
The implications of this legislation are far-reaching, but there must be greater understanding to the long-term implications to both beneficiaries and providers before implementing these alternatives.
I appreciate your attention to this matter and urge you to consider the aforementioned arguments and exempt therapists from any competitive bidding system that may be developed in the future.
Sincerely,
Back to Center for Medicate & Medicaid Services
|
