Wednesday, January 16, 2019

Funding UCR School of Medicine

California’s Senate and Assembly have unanimously approved identical bills appropriating $15,000,000 annually from the General Fund to the Regents of the University of California for allocation to the School of Medicine at UC Riverside. The Inland Empire has the lowest ratio of primary care physicians and specialists of any region in the state. The Council on Graduate Medical Education, a federally funded and authorized group that assesses the physician workforce and reports to federal policymakers, recommends a minimum of 60 to 80 primary care physicians and 85 to 105 specialists per 100,00 people. Sadly, the physician and specialist ratio in the Inland Empire is barely half of that recommended number. The UC Riverside School of Medicine is a critical factor in addressing this need, and consistent state funding is needed for the school to maintain its accreditation.

Gary Honts Named Chief Executive Officer for JFK Memorial Hospital

Gary Honts, who has been leading JFK Memorial Hospital in an interim role since September 2012, has been named permanent chief executive officer.  As CEO, Honts will oversee strategic, operational and clinical activities for the 156-bed facility and related outpatient clinics.

“Gary is a highly qualified CEO with more than 30 years of healthcare industry experience during which he has led a wide variety of healthcare organizations including community hospitals, large trauma centers and an academic medical center,” said Jeffrey Koury, senior vice president for Tenet’s California region. “During his tenure at JFK Memorial, Gary has demonstrated exceptional leadership capabilities.  His extensive experience in hospital operations coupled with his knowledge of the hospital, its staff and the community will continue to make him an outstanding leader of the executive team.”  

Since joining JFK Memorial, Honts has developed and executed strategies to provide high-quality, integrated care in the Coachella Valley community. Prior to his leadership post at JFK, Honts served as CEO at Creighton University Medical Center (CUMC) and Community Hospital of Los Gatos.  He also held leadership positions at Atlanta Medical Center, St. Joseph Hospital (now a part of CUMC) and Hilton Head Hospital.  Honts earned an undergraduate degree from the University of Nebraska and a master’s degree in health administration from the University of St. Francis in Joliet, Ill.

“I have thoroughly enjoyed getting to know the Coachella Valley since joining JFK Memorial and I’m eager to continue our plans for growth and service to the community,” Honts said. “With the continued growth in the region, our hospital and its outpatient clinics, such as the JFK Bone and Joint Institute, provide critical services to the area. We’re committed to meeting the evolving health care needs of our patients and the community.”

JFK Memorial Hospital has been providing medical care to residents in the Central/Eastern Coachella Valley since 1966. The hospital offers a 24-hour emergency room, comprehensive orthopedic services, general surgical services, cardiac and vascular care, urology services, women’s and maternity/obstetrical services, pediatric services, acute care for the elderly unit, ambulatory surgery center and other inpatient and outpatient services. JFK Memorial Hospital is fully accredited by The Joint Commission, the nation’s foremost hospital accreditation agency.

Legislative Alert: Urge Your Assembly Member to Support Bill to Close ACA Loophole

Please contact your legislators today and urge them to support this important bill, which would increase funding for Medi-Cal providers and incentivize large companies to provide adequate employer-sponsored coverage.
Additional information, including talking points, is available below.

Call (877) 362-8455 to be connected with your legislator

Click Here to Take Action!

 Click Here if you Made the Call!

AB 880 (Gomez) would address a loophole in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by requiring large employers (500 or more employees) to pay a penalty for each employee enrolled in Medi-Cal. The funding generated would be used to expand access to care by increasing Medi-Cal provider rates and to pay for the nonfederal share of Medi-Cal costs.

The ACA requires individuals, employers and government to share responsibility for health coverage.  Individuals must have health coverage or pay a penalty. The government, through the “optional” Medicaid expansion and other efforts, will increase eligibility to millions of uninsured. Employers with an average of at least 50 full time employees will either provide affordable health coverage or pay a penalty for each employee who accesses subsidized coverage in the state exchange. However, nothing in the ACA or current law discourages large employers from reducing the hours or wages of their employees in order to make them Medi-Cal eligible.

Given that Medi-Cal pays some of the lowest provider rates in the country, coupled with the increased demands on the system as the state expands eligibility to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, the system simply cannot survive if large businesses begin shifting the costs of their employees' health care onto taxpayers. California already pays its Medi-Cal providers the lowest rates of all Medicaid programs in the nation. Although California has taken major steps to make health care coverage a reality for many people in our state by reducing the number of uninsured, the true test of our commitment will be improving Medi-Cal provider rates to ensure access to care.

We ask that you and your colleagues call, fax or email your legislators TODAY and urge them to protect access to care.   

Phone calls and office visits are most effective, but faxes and emails are important too. If you choose to fax or email your legislators, we strongly encourage that you personalize the letter (provided below), which will greatly increase its impact.

If you are logged into the CMA website, your legislators should automatically be displayed. If not, you can click here to locate your legislators by zip code.

You can also call CMA's legislator connect hotline at (877) 362-8455 to be easily connected to your legislator.  You will be asked to enter your zip code and select your legislator.

Give your name, specialty and let them know that you are their constituent.

Talking Points

  • The Affordable Care Act is built on a foundation of individual, employer and government responsibility. Individuals must have health insurance or pay a penalty. The federal government provides subsidies and an expansion of Medi-Cal. Employers are required to provide affordable coverage or pay a penalty to offset the cost of public subsidies for their full-time employees who go into the exchange.
  • The ACA, however, does not extend the employer responsibility penalty to employers that have workers enrolled in Medi-Cal. As a result, there have been widespread reports of employers dropping coverage for their low-wage employees as a cost-saving measure, anticipating that taxpayers through Medi-Cal will pick up the tab.
  •  Although Medi-Cal is intended to provide essential health care services to many of the poorest and most vulnerable Californians, it has unfortunately become a broken promise for access to health care.
  • Largely due to low reimbursement (ranking 50th out of 50 states), physician participation in Medi-Cal is lower than it should be as we prepare to fully implement the ACA.
  •  As a result, more than half of Medi-Cal patients report difficulty finding a provider. When they are unable to find a provider, many Medi-Cal patients seek preventive and other non-urgent care in the hospital emergency department, the most expensive kind of care.
  • The funds generated by AB 880 will be used to support the Medi-Cal program by paying the non-federal state share of the program costs for workers, increasing the reimbursement rate for providers and shoring up the safety net for all Californians who need care.

Legislative Alert: Urge your Legislator to OPPOSE Bills to Expand Scope of Nonphysician Practitioners

Urge your assembly members to OPPOSE SB 491, SB 492 and SB 493 today!

These bills would provide nurse practitioners with independent practice, allow optometrists to perform surgical and nonsurgical primary care beyond their scope of practice, and create a new advanced practice pharmacist who can prescribe medication and administer immunizations. Ultimately, these bills will put patients at risk and lower the quality of care provided in our state.

Additional information, including talking points, are provided below.

(Click here to) Take Action!

(Click here if you called) I Made the Call!

Call (877) 362-8455 to be connected with your legislator.

CMA is urging you to call your legislators and ask for NO votes on SB 491, SB 492 and SB 493. These three bills will expand scope of practice and remove necessary supervision by a physician and surgeon, ultimate harming patients while decreasing quality of care.

 SB 491 (Hernandez) – This bill would allow nurse practitioners to open practices without any oversight from a trained medical doctor and prescribe dangerous, addictive drugs without supervision. While an important part of the health care delivery system, nurse practitioners simply do not have adequate training or years of education that physicians do in order to be qualified to practice medicine without physician involvement.

SB 492 (Hernandez) – This bill would allow optometrists to provide primary care service including diagnosing diabetes, high cholesterol and hypertension. Under this bill, optometrists would be able to examine, prevent, diagnose and treat any disease, condition or disorder of the visual system, the human eye and adjacent related structures.

SB 493 (Hernandez) – This bill would allow advanced practice pharmacists to evaluate and manage diseases and health conditions without physician consultation. Additionally, any pharmacist would be able to furnish prescription smoking cessation drugs and devices with known harmful side effects including depression and in some cases, suicide.

All three of these bills will be heard in the Assembly Business, Professions and Consumer Protection Committee soon.

Legislators need to know the true impact these bills would have in their districts.

Your calls are imperative to help us stop these bills and protect patients. We ask that you and your colleagues call, fax or email your legislators TODAY and urge them to vote NO on SB 491, SB 492 and SB 493!

Phone calls and office visits are most effective, but faxes and emails are important too. If you choose to fax or email your legislators, we strongly encourage that you personalize the letter (provided below), which will greatly increase its impact.

If you are logged into the CMA website, your legislators should automatically be displayed. If not, you can click here to locate your legislators by zip code.

Talking Points

  • SB 491, SB 492, and SB 493 harm patient safety plain and simple.
  •  Other health professionals, while hugely important to the health care delivery system and an integral part of medicine, are not trained to diagnose and treat diseases like physicians are.
  •  Rather than further fragment the health care delivery system, we need to be looking at integrated care models that utilize everyone to the best of their abilities.
  •  SB 491, SB 492 and SB 493 will allow NPs, optometrists and pharmacists to practice medicine without being subject to the controls and oversight of the Medical Practice Act. The end result would be that these specific health practitioners would be held to a lower standard of care than physicians providing the same service.
  • If passed, these bills will allow individuals the ability to prescribe dangerous medications such as opioids. The Registered Board of Nursing is simply not equipped to oversee such prescribing and does not have an investigatory arm, as the Medical Board of California does.  
  • In my own experience, under-trained professionals order more tests and imaging studies as well as send patients for more referrals than do physicians.
  • To ensure patient safety, medical care must be administered in coordinated teams led by experienced, fully trained, qualified physicians.  
  • Proponents of this bill are using the guise of health care reform to say that independent practice will expand access to care. That is just not the case.
  • The same economic factors that I face as a physician will impact NPs, optometrists and pharmacists. (Expand on the economic considerations you face each day).
  • The number of physicians in California is unevenly distributed with regards to the general population, but these bills do not solve the problem. The majority of allied health professionals are practicing in the same regions as physicians now. There is no proof that indicates NPs, optometrists and pharmacists will indeed move to rural or under-served areas.
We believe patients are best served when they are provided with meaningful access to safe medical care provided by medical teams led by highly trained and qualified physicians.

RCMA Plastic Surgeon Named New President of California Plastic Surgery Society

RCMA member, Robert A. Hardesty, MD, FACS, former Chief of Plastic Surgery at Loma Linda Medical Center and Medical Director of Imagine Plastic Surgery in Riverside, was named President of the California Society of Plastic Surgeons this past weekend at their annual meeting in San Francisco. Dr. Hardesty will oversee the largest state plastic surgery organization of board certified plastic surgeons in the United States.  

“CSPS is more than just a professional organization,” said Dr. Hardesty.  “First of all, while some physicians who perform cosmetic surgery operate under less stringent guidelines, all California Society members are certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery and must adhere to strict guidelines, ethics and continuing education requirements. In addition, our Society is an advocate for patient safety and research. My goal is to ensure patients are educated about plastic surgery and know the doctor who will be performing their surgery should be a member of ASPS, CSPS and a board certified plastic surgeon.”

Dr. Hardesty will explore new ways in which his Society can help veterans and less fortunate Californians in need of reconstructive procedures. While at Loma Linda University, he founded “Operation Good Samaritan.” (For example, a plastic surgery team from Operation Good Samaritan journeyed to Addis, Ababa, Ethiopia to provide health care to patients and train doctors).  

In addition, Dr. Hardesty plans to accelerate the funding of reconstructive surgery for teenagers and children under the age of 18 whose insurance may not cover needed procedures. (ie: prominent ears and nasal surgery). This assistance will be provided through the Society’s CSPSERF (education research funding) program where funds have been increased.

Dr. Hardesty also vows to build upon the Society’s initiatives to educate both patients and members via new technological platforms.  He relates, “California plastic surgeons have long been on the cutting edge of technology by bringing patients the latest advances in aesthetic medicine.  We plan to expand upon this leadership.”

The delivery of personal, individualized and total patient care has been the hallmark of Dr. Hardesty’s success.  By a vote of his peers, he has been listed by U.S. News & World Report’s in Castle Connolly’s Top Doctors in America: Plastic Surgery & Cosmetic Surgery and Best Doctors in America from 1996 to present. He is also a recipient of the “Patients’ Choice” award given in appreciation and praise for his quality care. (Of the nation’s 870,000 active doctors, only 5% were awarded this honor by their patients).

Dr. Hardesty has trained Board Certified Plastic Surgeons located in Southern California including Beverly Hills and Newport Beach, as well as throughout the United States.  He is the founder of the first nationally accredited and integrated Plastic Surgery Residency Training Program at Loma Linda University Medical Center (LLUMC) and affiliated hospitals. He holds an academic rank of clinical professor at the Loma Linda University School of Medicine and is Double Board Certified in both Plastic and General Surgery.

However, Dr. Hardesty’s proudest accomplishments and blessings are his marriage of over 25 years to Marti Baum-Hardesty, M.D. and their four children: Ashlee, Bradford, Chelsea, and Derik.

For more information about Dr. Hardesty visit

The Role of Clearinghouses in the ICD-10 Transition

Practices preparing for the October 1, 2014, ICD-10 deadline are looking for resources and organizations that can help them make a smooth transition. It is important to know that while clearinghouses can help, they cannot provide the same level of support for the ICD-10 transition as they did for the Version 5010 upgrade. ICD-10 describes a medical diagnosis or hospital inpatient procedure and must be selected by the provider or a resource designated by the provider as their coder, and is based on clinical documentation.
During the change from Version 4010 to Version 5010, clearinghouses provided support to many providers by converting claims from Version 4010 to Version 5010 format. For ICD-10, clearinghouses can help by:

• Identifying problems that lead to claims being rejected
• Providing guidance about how to fix a rejected claim (e.g., the provider needs to include more or different data)

Clearinghouses cannot, however, help you identify which ICD-10 codes to use unless they offer coding services. Because ICD-10 codes are more specific, and one ICD-9 code may have several corresponding ICD-10 codes, selecting the appropriate ICD-10 code requires medical knowledge and familiarity with the specific clinical event.
While some clearinghouses may offer third-party billing/coding services, many do not. And even third-party billers cannot translate ICD-9 to ICD-10 codes unless they also have the detailed clinical documentation required to select the correct ICD-10 code.
As you prepare for the October 1, 2014, ICD-10 deadline, clearinghouses are a good resource for testing that your ICD-10 claims can be processed—and for identifying and helping to remedy any problems with your test ICD-10 claims.

Keep Up to Date on ICD-10
Visit the CMS ICD-10 website for the latest news and resources to help you prepare for the October 1, 2014, deadline. Sign up for CMS ICD-10 Industry Email Updates and follow us on Twitter.

Health Care Reform 2014 Marks a New Era

Starting in 2014, Americans must have minimum essential coverage or pay a tax penalty.  Options for coverage include insurance purchased through the individual market, a public exchange, a government program or an employer-sponsored program.   Minimum essential coverage includes ambulatory services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health/substance abuse treatments, prescription drugs, rehabilitative services, laboratory services, preventive/wellness services and pediatric services.

 Changes Coming in 2014

•    Individual Mandate — Everyone (with few exceptions) will be required to have health insurance or pay a penalty.  Penalties start   at $95 per individual, $285 per family, or 1% of income (whichever is greater), and increase in subsequent years

•    Employer Mandate — Employers with 50 or more full-time equivalent employees must offer minimum essential coverage that is affordable (where employee only contributions do not exceed 9.5% of household income)  for at least 95% of its full-time employees or pay a penalty (i.e. play or pay) if one full-time employee goes to an Exchange and receives a premium tax credit.

      If coverage is not offered, penalty is $2,000 multiplied by the number of full-time employees (minus the first 30 employees).

      If coverage is offered but not affordable or does not cover at least 60% of essential benefits, the employer will be assessed $3,000 for each employee receiving a tax credit or $2,000 per full-time employee (the lesser will apply) (excluding the first 30 employees).

•    All states must have a health insurance exchange available for individuals and small business owners to view, compare, and purchase health plans offering minimum essential coverage.

 •    Subsidies — Through the exchange, individuals may qualify for a subsidy in the form of a tax credit if household income is between 100-400% of the federal poverty level.

•    Guaranteed issue — Health insurers must sell coverage to everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions, and can't charge more based on health or gender.

•    No annual or lifetime limits — Individual and group health plans may not impose annual or lifetime limits.

•    Free preventive care — Plans offering minimum essential coverage must provide several preventive services and screenings at no charge.

 Options for Employers with Less Than 50 Employees

•    Purchase coverage via the SHOP exchange (Small Business Health Option Program) or traditional market.
•    Stop offering coverage and let employees buy an individual plan from the exchange  
•    Provide a defined contribution to assist employees with purchasing coverage.
•    Apply for tax credits to help cover the cost of premiums if the employer:
     Employs 25 or fewer employees.
     Pays annual wages averaging less than $50,000 per full-time equivalent employee.

     Provides at least 50% of the cost of health care coverage for their employees.

 Impact on Individuals and Employers

Individuals, their families, and their employees will have access to health insurance on a broad basis. Employers must assess their options carefully to determine the pros and cons of continuing to provide coverage or allowing employees to access the exchanges.

Although long-term implications are unknown, a number of experts agree reform regulations (i.e., guaranteed issue and mandated level of benefits) may result in increased premiums that will ultimately be passed to employees.

 Learn More

Stay tuned for more health care reform communications, including information on Marsh/Seabury & Smith Insurance Program Management's private health care exchange for members. In the meantime, please call Marsh at 800-842-3761 for more information.
*Marsh and the Association/Society do not provide tax or legal advice.  Please consult with your own advisors to determine how the law’s changes and your decisions impact your personal situation.  

1-332 (5/13) ©Seabury & Smith, Inc. • 777 South Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, CA 90017 • 800-842-3761 •
d/b/a in CA Seabury & Smith Insurance Program Management • CA Ins. Lic. #0633005 • AR Ins. Lic. #245544

Public Health Alert: Routine HIV Screening

An Important Message from the Riverside County Health Officer

Download Message 

Health Reform Heats Up

More than three years have passed since the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was into law, setting into motion some of the most dynamic and volatile years the nation’s health care industry has ever seen.

Since its inception, the law has been a subject of controversy, inspiring hotly contested debates in Washington, D.C., Sacramento and across the entire nation.  For some, this dramatic overhaul of the nation’s health care system represents our national leaders finally making good on the long-overdue promise of “health care for all.” Others claim that the law is a clear overreach of federal authority that threatens to overburden an already fragile economy.

Although the law remains controversial, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the law is constitutional and active steps are being taken to move forward at the federal and state level. With many of the provisions set to take effect on January 1, 2014, state officials across the nation are scrambling to make sure they’re ready to implement the law’s sweeping changes.

The road has already been a somewhat rocky one.

Throughout the implementation process, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has been narrowly meeting its own deadlines, often times leaving states waiting for federal guidance that could dramatically alter their own implementation plans. With several major deadlines coming in the next few months, many observers expect this problem to only get worse.

Adding to the headache for the federal government is the fact that the ACA has received mixed support from the states, which has complicated implementation efforts nationwide. As of early February, only 19 states had elected to develop their own state-run “exchange,” an online marketplace where consumers can purchase subsidized coverage. An additional five states will form state-federal partnerships to operate their marketplaces, while the remaining states have declined to participate, meaning the federal government will be responsible for operating exchanges in those areas.

Despite these problems, the march toward reform continues on.

The Next Major Milestone
The next major milestone toward full implementation is set to take place on October 1, 2013, when state exchanges are set to begin their pre-enrollment. In the first years following these marketplaces going live, more than 32 million currently uninsured Americans are expected to gain coverage, either through an exchange plan or the ACA’s massive expansion of the Medicaid program. Some analysts expect as many as 5 million of these newly insured to come from California.

Three months after the pre-enrollment begins, January 1, 2014, exchanges are set to go live, meaning that millions of Americans will, for the first time, be able to purchase coverage using the federal subsidies promised in the ACA.

In order to navigate this massive undertaking, states will need to decide which plans will be offered through their exchanges, construct the actual online marketplaces through which consumers will purchase coverage and implement major public outreach campaigns to ensure that these citizens – many of whom have never had the benefit of “open enrollment” or a similar purchasing period – understand how and where they can sign up for coverage under the reform law.

California Leads the Way
Despite the uncertainty swirling around the ACA’s implementation, California looks to be on track to meet the coming deadlines.

In the days following the ACA’s passage, California was the first state to establish a health benefit exchange and has been working toward implementation ever since. That exchange, recently named Covered California, has already launched its online consumer marketplace,, and is one of 25 states that have gained conditional approval from the federal government to operate its own insurance marketplace.

There is, however, still much work to be done at the state level.

Unlike most other states, California opted to adopt an “active purchaser” model when building its new exchange, meaning Covered California’s Board of Directors will be responsible for selecting which insurance providers will be allowed to offer products on the exchanges. The selected products, known as qualified health plans (QHPs), will be required to meet a set of benefit standards finalized by the Covered California board late last year. The QHPs will be selected through a competitive bidding process set to begin in the coming months, and it’s anticipated that somewhere between three to five QHPs will be selected for each one of California’s 18 geographical rating regions.

Protecting Physician Interests
Unfortunately several recent decisions by the exchange board have placed California’s physician community on its heels. The California Medical Association (CMA) has been an active participant in stakeholder hearings and is working to ensure that the interests of physicians and their patients are taken into consideration as the exchange prepares to open for business.

Several of issues of concern arose when the board was working to finalize the benefit standards that interested payors will be required to meet in order to have their products considered for the QHP designation.  One major concern for physicians is how the exchange plans to deal with monitoring and ensuring network adequacy among of QHPs.

Throughout the benefit design conversation, exchange staff continued to favor the existing method of network monitoring, which calls for the Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) and Department of Insurance (DOI) to be responsible for ensuring that plans offered to consumers have enough participating providers. In other words, the status quo. Several stakeholders, including CMA, have noted that those two entities are currently unable to ensure adequate networks among existing plans and would likely be overwhelmed by the added task of monitoring additional exchange products. While CMA asked that the exchange take an active role in monitoring networks beginning in 2014, the DMHC/DOI method remained in the final benefit standards adopted by Covered California’s Board of Directors in August, meaning it could become the norm once the state’s marketplace goes live.

CMA also voiced concern over the exchange’s handling of the “grace period” provision included in the ACA. Under current California law, patients who are delinquent on their premiums are allowed a full 90 days to settle up before their policy is terminated for nonpayment. However, under the ACA’s grace period provisions, exchange plans will be allowed to suspend payment for services rendered if an enrollee is more than one month delinquent. If the patient fails to settle up within the three-month grace period, the plan can then terminate coverage for nonpayment and deny all pending claims for services. In this scenario, physicians could potentially be on the hook for 60 days worth of services with no avenue for recourse.

CMA has repeatedly asked Covered California’s board to reconcile the state and federal policy, but to date an adequate fix has not been presented.

Given the exchange’s accelerated timeline, as well as the exchange board’s tendency to revisit issues that were previously thought to be decided, it remains possible that both of these matters, along with others that have caused concern to physicians, could see some sort of resolution before 2014.

To be sure, the next few months will be some of the most important and tumultuous times the medical community has faced in recent memory, but as a CMA member you have the comfort of knowing that your interests are being advocated for in front of all the key players driving the nation’s reform efforts.

For more information on the implementation of health reform in California, subscribe to CMA Reform Essentials. This newsletter, available to both members and nonmembers, covers the activities of the state’s health benefit exchange board and legislation significant to California’s ongoing reform efforts. Subscribe today at

Medicare reimbursement for physicians will be cut by 2 percent on April 1

With no solution on the horizon to the budgetary woes in Congress, physicians should prepare for a 2 percent reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program beginning on April 1.

The 2 percent Medicare “sequestration” cuts are part of the $1.2 trillion in cuts required by the Sequestration Transparency Act, part of a deal worked out to end last year’s debt-ceiling crisis. Under the act, across-the-board cuts will be triggered if Congress fails to come to an agreement on how to reduce the federal deficit. The cuts are evenly split between defense spending and discretionary domestic spending. Medicaid is exempt from the cuts.

The mandatory Medicare cuts will result in a savings of $11 billion in 2013.

The biggest of the sequestration cuts will hit the Department of Defense, which will lose almost $55 billion. Education will lose 100 percent of the $38 billion in annual grants it gives to states. Total cuts for 2013 will be $109 billion.

Although it is possible that Congress will eventually come to an agreement and reverse some of these cuts, physicians should prepare for the possibility of a 2 percent cut to their Medicare claims.

The California Medical Association (CMA) is vigorously fighting the Medicare cuts. CMA leaders were in Washington, D.C., mid-February urging the California Congressional delegation to stop these cuts. We will keep fighting.

While implementation is scheduled for April 1, 2013, the actual impact may not be felt for several weeks, while Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implements the necessary changes.

For more information, see “Sequestration FAQ: How will the cuts affect California physicians?” This FAQ, available in CMA’s online resource library at, answers the most commonly asked questions about the sequestration cuts as they relate to health care. This document will be regularly updated as additional details become available.

Contact: CMA’s reimbursement helpline, (888) 401-5911 or

I Need News & Information


2013 2014 Ebola Outbreak 2014 Election 2016 2018-2021 ACA AIDS Annual Report Appointments Assembly Business and Professions Committee Awards Ballot Initiatives Boxer Budget Burnout CA Ballot Initiatives CAFP California CMA CMA Annual Report Comments Congress Construction Controlled Substance CURES Discontent Dolores EHR Election Election 2014 Exchange Governance Grace Period H.R.2. Health Exchange Health Laws Healthcare Laws HIE HIT HIV Hizon HOD House House of Delegates ICD-10 IEHP Languages Lee Legislation Mahdi Meaningful Use Medical Medi-Cal Medicare MICRA Mode of Practice No on 46 NoOn46 opiods Opioids Outstanding Contribution Patients Paul Green Practice Management Prop 46 Prop 56 Proposition 46 Public Health Alert Rajaratnam Rancho Springs Rating RCMA Repeal Risk Management Riverside Community Hospital Riverside County Schedualing Senate SGR Southwest Healthcare Stage 2 Strategic Priorities Survey Termination Trial Lawyers Uppal Vaccines Volunteer White Wilson Creek Winery 2014 2014 Election 2014 laws 2015-2017 2016 2016 Election 2018 46 AB 3087 AB 880 ABX2-15 ACA Advocacy Affordable Care Act AHCA AMA Anthem Blue Cross Assembly Assembly Bill Attestation Awards Big Tobacco Blue Shield of California Burnout CA CA Senate Cal INDEX California California Laws California Legislation California Society of Plastic Surgeons Californian Physicians Cameron Kaiser CCI CDC CEO Clearinghouses CMA CMS Coalition for Patient Access and Quality Care Committee Congress controlled substances Coroner Council on Graduate Medical Education Covered CA Covered Califonria Covered California CPT modifer CSPS CURES Cuts Deadlines deductible Delegates Delivery Models DHCS donate Drugs Dual Elligibles Ebola EHR eligibility Employment Law End-Of-Life Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans enrollment Exchange FAQ Federal Federal Legislation Feinstein Funding Future Gary Honts Grace Period Health Care Reform Health Reform Healthcare Rates Healthcare Reform Hernandez HIPAA ICD-10 IEHIE IEHP Imagine Plastic Surgery Increase Installation insurance JFK Memorial Hospital Kaiser Permanente Laws Legislation Legislative Alert Loma Linda long term disability LTSS MA Mahdi Managed Care marketing Meaningful Use Measles Medicaid Medi-Cal Medical Board medical practices Medicare member benefit MICRA Molina National Prescription Drug Take-Back Day Nomination Nominations Nondiscrimination Posting norcal Noridian Obamacare Insurance October 22 On-Call opiod opiod advocacy opiod crisis opiod enforcement opiod epidemic opioid opioid abuse Outstanding Palmetto GBA Patient Patient Care patients Payment Models PHA Physician Aid-in-Dying Physician Burnout Physician Recruitment Plastic Surgery POLST Practice Management practice managment Practice Mangement prescribing opiods prescription drugs President Priorities privacy Professional Liability Prop 46 Prop 56 Proposition 46 Proposition 56 Public Health Public Health Alert RCH RCMA RCMA Member Red Tape Reputation Retreat Risk Management Riverside County RIVPAC SB 491 SB 492 SB 493 SB 62 Scope of Practice Sequestration SGR social media State Capitol Stress Survey Telemedicine Tenet Thakur Law Firm Transforming Your Practice UC Riverside Vantage Virtual We Care for California Workers' Comp
Home   |   Physicians   |   Resources   |   Benefits   |   Events   |   About   |   Patients   |   Join
Copyright (c) 2019 Riverside County Medical Association