VSP recently announced the appointment of what appears to be a chief lobbyist dedicated to convincing Congress that VSP and other stand-alone vision plans are good for the country. In my opinion, VSP is good for only one thing...VSP. The logical place for Vision Care Services is within our medical insurance system; not as a stand-alone benefit provided by commercial firms whose only motivation is profit. The American Consumer doesn't need "insurance" for eyewear any more than we need insurance for the oil changes for our car. The American Consumer is NOT benefiting because the costs associated with eroding margins on materials are simply being shifted to medical services or worse, are actually driving down the quality of vision care.
It's time for the likes of VSP to pack up their bags. They squeeze Providers to provide their product...it's that simple.
I find it fascinating that VSP has the cajones to make statements like:
"VSP has a long and proven track record of promoting healthy outcomes for both patients and the companies they work for"
What about VSP's Provider's? VSP was founded for private practice optometry. Our studies indicate that, thanks to the likes of VSP, Providers are operating on ever-slimmer margins. Indeed, the difference between Gross Charges and Collected Revenue has declined by double digit percentages in just the past five years. With these eroding margins, Providers are being squeezed for the capital necessary to invest in ever-evolving technology, the best employees, updated facilities and increased service levels. The result...the patient loses.
VSP was founded to serve its Providers and help Providers serve patients. Now, Providers are simply a pawn in their game...to make as much money as they can.
The squeeze continues. Many Providers are gasping for economic air. When are they going to revolt?
_________________
VSP Vision Care Appoints Cecil Swamidoss to Director of Federal Policy
RANCHO CORDOVA, Calif. and WASHINGTON—VSP Vision Care announced that it has appointed Cecil Swamidoss as director of federal policy. Based in Washington, D.C., Swamidoss will help develop and implement VSP's Federal lobbying efforts to ensure the company's 55 million members will retain access to stand-alone vision care services under the new national healthcare reform legislation.
Swamidoss has more than 10 years of Federal legislative experience having worked in Senators Herb Kohl (D-WI), John Breaux (D-LA), and Chuck Grassley's (R-IA) offices as Senior Counsel and/or assistant dealing with national health care policy issues, Swamidoss has some of the most extensive health care regulatory and legislative experience in the nation including developing policies around the marketing and sales of Medicare Advantage plans, as well as the development of the Physician Sunshine Act, the Patient Safety and Abuse Prevention Act and Medicare Modernization Act, VSP’s announcement said. Most recently, Swamidoss served as vice president of Dutko Worldwide.
"Cecil brings a unique understanding of how to work with both Republicans and Democrats in government," said Thomas Fessler, Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel of VSP Global. "Eyecare is an important component in health care reform. Cecil will focus on supporting good policy that is in the best interest of the nation's overall eye health and wellness needs."
Over the past few years, VSP has increased its focus and attention on Federal health care policy initiatives, having worked closely with Alston & Bird, a D.C. lobbying firm. VSP is bringing Swamidoss on to drive its Washington, D.C.-focused efforts.
"VSP has a long and proven track record of promoting healthy outcomes for both patients and the companies they work for. This is an important story to tell, and one that legislators in Washington, D.C. need to hear," added Swamidoss. "While the healthcare reform package has been passed and signed into law, there are still opportunities to protect the one-in-six Americans VSP covers with stand-alone vision care benefits. It's in the country's best interests that not-for-profit health insurers like VSP are included in the qualified exchanges."
Swamidoss received a Master of Public Health (M.P.H.) from George Washington University, and a law degree (J.D.) from Case Western Reserve University School of Law. He received his Bachelor's degree from University of Michigan.
VSP's own website tells patients "we have been a tax-paying not-for-profit company since 2003" How's that for deceptive wording. Their top 8 executives rake in millions in pay and bonus while the providers take it in the shorts. The IRS got it right when the pulled VSP's tax exempt status.
They have now cut back reimburesments so much that doctors cheer if they break even. Reimbursements are so low that there is nothing left to provide frame cases, warranties, or long-term eyewear services for VSP patients ("sorry sir you'll just have to stay with that bent frame"). And now VSP has shifted even more cost to doctors by making the doctor's office fill patient addresses for VSP rather that VSP doing it themselves.
Why dont doctors quit? We all know the answer. VSP is huge and controls most of the patient flow in many parts of the country.
When bloated insurance companies control medicine, including eyecare, the patient / doctor relationship is destroyed and everyone loses.
Posted by: eyeknow | October 30, 2011 at 10:17 PM
I think that vision care can be included into medical plans in a particular instance. Of course, the value of VSP still exists because they have the mechanism in place for accreditation and claims processing.
Vision care can be construed as preventative and can be seen as improving life. In the current Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the Obama health care plan), there are provisions that preventative care be included for all medical plan members. Maybe this is the avenue we, in eye care, must proceed.
Richard Hom OD, MPA
Public Policy, Medical Eye Care and E-Health
Posted by: GrandRounds4ODs | January 21, 2011 at 02:40 PM
A quote from VSP: "It's in the country's best interests that not-for-profit health insurers like VSP are included in the qualified exchanges." VSP a 'non-profit'? GIVE ME A BREAK! ! (Yes, I was yelling.) If VSP IS a non-profit, it is in name only or through legal shenanigans. VSP makes more off VSP docs than the docs do. One reason I do not take ANY vision/eyeglass plans, period. How can all parties win with that type of business model? Regardless of the argument, it IS impossible.
Posted by: Jim Dillard, OD | January 20, 2011 at 05:52 PM
The notion of including all of optometric care within a medical insurance plan has been popularized widely. However, the practicality is a problem. Like dental care, vision care is not an "uncertain risk". Medical care, however, is. Therefore, in order for vision care to be included as a medical need a redefinition of what optometric care is.
Could medical eye care be carved out of routine vision care? That, I suppose, is the issue here. VSP seems willing to include medical eye and retail vision within its scope. What you're proposing is a break up of that relationship. The "uncertain" risk will not permit all of vision care to be included in a medical plan.
In summary, evangelizing your position is not necessarily supportable by the current infrastructure in place.
Posted by: GrandRounds4ODs | January 20, 2011 at 02:30 PM