November, 15 2020, 11:00pm EDT

New Study--Hospitals Hike Charges by Up to 18 Times Cost
Highlights threat to patients amid Covid-19 pandemic surge.
WASHINGTON
With the Covid-19 pandemic continuing to explode across the country, a new study documents that hospitals jack up charges by as much as 18 times over their costs, a substantial contributor to the growing health care crisis for patients and families.
Overall, the 100 most expensive U.S. hospitals charge from $1,129 to $1,808 for every $100 of their costs. Nationally, U.S. hospitals average $417 for every $100 of their costs, a markup that has more than doubled over the past 20 years. The full study is available here.
"There is no excuse for these scandalous prices. These are not markups for luxury condo views, they are for the most basic necessity of your life: your health," said Jean Ross, RN, president of National Nurses United, which conducted the study. It is based on Medicare cost reports for 4,203 hospitals in fiscal year 2018, the most recent data available.
"Unpayable charges are a calamity for our patients, too many of whom avoid -- at great risk to their health -- the medical care they need due to the high cost, or they become burdened by devastating debt, hounded by bill collectors or driven into bankruptcy," said Ross.
Many patients avoid hospital care due to high costs
Surveys have found that 78 percent of adults have avoided hospital visits and, in 2018, 44 percent skipped medical care due to the cost. About 30 percent said they had to choose between paying for medical bills or basic necessities like food or housing. Last year 137.1 million people in the United States reported struggling with medical debt.
High hospital charges also drive up Covid-19 treatment costs. One study found that average charges for a Covid-19 patient requiring an inpatient stay can range from $42,486 with no or few complications to $74,310 with major complications. A Commonwealth Fund survey found that 68 percent of respondents said that "potential out-of-pocket costs would be very or somewhat important in their decision to seek care if they had symptoms of the coronavirus."
Another open question is the fate of the Affordable Care Act. If the ACA is thrown out by the Supreme Court, the 23 million people in the United States who either buy insurance through the ACA exchanges or are covered by the expansion of Medicaid would lose coverage. Further, as many as 133 million people under age 65 who have preexisting conditions, plus the 11 million people, and counting, infected by Covid-19, would all once again be subject to insurance denial for coverage, and higher out-of-pocket costs.
Other study highlights include:
* Hospital charges play a major role in mounting health care costs, with health expenditures closing in on one-fifth of the gross domestic product (GDP). The United States far exceeds the rest of the world in per capita costs, though lags behind many other wealthy countries in a variety of health outcomes.
* Higher charges generate big profits. Pushed upward by increasing charges, hospital profits have mushroomed by 411 percent since 1999 to a record $88 billion in 2017.
*The rise in charges coincides with growing hospital mergers and acquisitions by large systems. The result is increased market consolidation, which leads to higher profits and increased charges, not savings for patients as hospital systems often claim.
* Of the 100 hospitals with the highest charges over their costs, for-profit corporations own or operate 95 of them, led by HCA Healthcare, the largest hospital system in the United States, which by itself owns or operates 53 of the top 100.
How high hospital charges are passed on to patients
Hospitals sometimes maintain that the charge master price, essentially a list price to bargain over reimbursements from insurers, does not reflect how much insurers actually pay since negotiations between insurers and hospitals are confidential, the report notes.
However, a 2017 study found that for each additional dollar increase in list price, insurers paid an additional 15 cents to hospitals. Hospital executives have conceded that the goal of the charge master is profitability. And when the insurers pay more, their cost is typically passed along to employers, their employees or individual patients in higher premiums, deductibles, and co-pays.
Uninsured patients have the least negotiating power when slammed with the full charge, a major reason why medical bills have sparked a huge leap in medical debt lawsuits. Once the hospitals win a favorable court judgment, they often file liens against patients' homes, or garnish their bank accounts or wages. Increasingly, hospitals sell the debt to bill collectors to hound patients, yet another reason medical debt is a leading cause of personal bankruptcy.
In Maryland, a rare state to make the data publicly accessible, hospitals have filed more than 145,000 medical debt lawsuits over the last 10 years, seeking $268.7 million in payments from patients.
As in so many other areas of society, there is a racial disparity in the impact of the high charges. In 2019, Latinx and Indigenous people were three times, and Black people nearly twice as likely, to be uninsured as white people. Similarly, 19 percent of communities of color, compared to 15 percent for whites, had medical debt in collections.
Hospital partnerships with other health care industry sectors, such as physician staffing firms, often result in "out-of-network" surprise medical bills and supplemental charges such as "trauma" or "facility" fees, which intensify the crisis for patients. Studies show that up to four of every 10 ER trips result in surprise medical bills, in some cases with hospitals sharing the higher profits. Similarly, hospitals have increased the practice of big hikes in routine, supplemental fees, an 87 percent jump over six years in trauma fees.
While some hospitals claim they will lower those charges for these patients, or mitigate the burden through charity care, hospitals have steadily reduced the amounts of financial assistance and charity care offered to patients around the country.
How to rein in high hospital charges
Medicare is the most effective system at limiting price gouging through its bulk purchasing power to set the price it will pay. "The most viable solution to slowing the growth in hospital charges and the continued inflation of hospital prices, is to bring all health care purchasers together, under a public, nationwide single-payer plan," the report notes.
"Nurses know that the best way to rein in these outrageous charges that create such grievous harm for our patients is with Medicare for All, as other countries have proven," said Ross.
"Medicare for All will not only guarantee health care coverage for every person in the United States, it will end medical bankruptcies, medical debt lawsuits, and the health insecurity faced by millions who make painful choices every day about whether to seek the care they desperately need," Ross said.
National Nurses United, with close to 185,000 members in every state, is the largest union and professional association of registered nurses in US history.
(240) 235-2000LATEST NEWS
'We Will Not Accept This Intimidation,' Mamdani Says of Trump Threat to Arrest Him
"That Trump included praise for Eric Adams in his authoritarian threats is unsurprising, but highlights the urgency of bringing an end to this mayor's time in City Hall," said the New York City mayoral candidate.
Jul 01, 2025
Democratic New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani made clear on Tuesday that he would not be intimidated by Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to arrest him.
A journalist who falsely described Mamdani—a democratic socialist—as a "communist" asked Trump about the candidate's pledge not to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), whose agents are working to carry out the president's promised mass deportations.
"Well then, we'll have to arrest him," said Trump, a former New Yorker who has taken aim at Mamdani since his victory in last Tuesday's Democratic primary. "Look, we don't need a communist in this country."
Mamdani, who currently serves in the New York State Assembly, was born in Uganda to Indian parents and moved to NYC as a child. He was naturalized as a U.S. citizen in 2018. Throughout his campaign, the 33-year-old has faced numerous Islamophobic attacks, and after his primary win, Congressman Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) urged the Trump administration to target him with "denaturalization proceedings," in line with a broader effort at the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Trump said Tuesday that his administration would be watching Mamdani "very carefully." The president, a well-documented liar, added that "a lot of people are saying he's here illegally—you know, we're gonna look at everything... and ideally he's gonna turn out to be much less than a communist, but right now he's a communist, that's not a socialist."
Trump also blasted Congressman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), a supporter of Mamdani, and praised the city's current mayor, Eric Adams, who is seeking another term as an Independent. After Trump returned to office in January, the DOJ instructed prosecutors to drop federal corruption charges against Adams, triggering widespread outrage over the attempted "illegal quid pro quo," as some critics called it.
Responding to Trump's remarks in a lengthy statement, Mamdani said Tuesday that "the president of the United States just threatened to have me arrested, stripped of my citizenship, put in a detention camp, and deported. Not because I have broken any law, but because I will refuse to let ICE terrorize our city."
"His statements don't just represent an attack on our democracy but an attempt to send a message to every New Yorker who refuses to hide in the shadows: If you speak up, they will come for you," Mamdani continued. "We will not accept this intimidation."
"That Trump included praise for Eric Adams in his authoritarian threats is unsurprising, but highlights the urgency of bringing an end to this mayor's time in City Hall," he asserted, directing attention to the GOP budget bill advanced by the U.S. Senate on Tuesday.
Mamdani said that "at this very moment, when MAGA Republicans are attempting to destroy the social safety net, kick millions of New Yorkers off of healthcare, and enrich their billionaire donors at the expense of working families, it is a scandal that Eric Adams echoes this president's division, distraction, and hatred. Voters will resoundingly reject it in November."
In addition to Mamdani and Adams, the general election candidates are Republican Curtis Sliwa, Independent Jim Walden, and disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is now running as an Independent after losing the Democratic primary. According to results released Tuesday, Mamdani got 56% of the vote compared to Cuomo's 44%.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senators Demand Answers About 'Reckless' Trump Admin Use of AI Social Security Chatbot
Artificial intelligence systems, the four senators argue, "represent a troubling pattern that if continued, would significantly impede Americans' ability" to access their benefits.
Jul 01, 2025
Four U.S. senators—three Democrats and Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders—demanded answers Tuesday from the Trump administration about its "reckless rollout" of artificial intelligence chatbot technology into phone systems "that have blocked people from accessing their earned Social Security benefits."
"These AI programs, which the agency deployed with little consultation with Congress, advocates, or other key stakeholders, appear to have been developed in haste and represent a troubling pattern that if continued, would significantly impede Americans' ability to access their Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits," the senators said in a letter to Social Security Administration (SSA) Commissioner Frank Bisignano.
While Sanders, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (Ore.), and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) acknowledged that "AI can be a helpful tool to simplify some workloads," they contended that artificial intelligence "is not a panacea for all challenges facing SSA."
The letter continues:
SSA is entrusted with ensuring accurate and timely payment of mtore than $1 trillion in Social Security and SSI benefit payments to over 73 million seniors, individuals with disabilities, and their families each year. Considering the agency's important mission, it is critical that SSA is responsibly deploying any technology system, including AI. For example, whether incorporating newer technology like generative AI to improve customer experience and increase efficiency or leveraging predictive AI to provide disability examiners support in the disability determination process, it is critical that SSA meaningfully engage stakeholders, including its customers and employees, the advocacy community, and members of Congress, throughout the entire process to avoid harm to claimants and beneficiaries.
"The agency's hasty AI rollouts on its national 1-800 number phone system and the phone system for its 1,200 field offices, which resulted in significant impediments for Americans simply trying to access their earned benefits, demonstrate our concern," the senators wrote. "In April, SSA announced it would be deploying an anti-fraud AI algorithm to verify the identity of callers seeking to file for benefits on its national 1-800 number, arguing—without providing any evidence—that its telephone service was rife with fraud."
"However," the lawmakers noted, "the proposal was scrapped shortly after implementation after the system found it identified two claims out of over 110,000 as potentially fraudulent. Moreover, the new program slowed claim processing by 25% and led to a 'degradation of public service.'"
The senators are asking Bisignano to:
- Provide a detailed description of the new AI-based chatbot, including how it determines whether it has successfully answered a caller's questions before hanging up;
- Describe which metrics is SSA using to determine whether this AI-based chatbot is successful at improving service delivery at the national 1-800 number;
- Explain the metrics SSA used to evaluate the successes or challenges of this AI-based chatbot before rolling it out nationwide to field offices;
- Disclose which stakeholders, especially those who represent beneficiaries and employees, were consulted pre- and post-deployment of this AI-based chatbot;
- Explain whether SSA is planning to procure, develop, or implement any new AI systems this year; and
- If the answer to the above question is yes, list and provide a detailed description of these AI systems.
The AI rollout is part of Bisignano's "technology agenda" to boost productivity at SSA amid staffing and other cuts implemented by the Trump administration and its Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. In February, SSA announced its intent to fire 7,000 workers, or about 12% of its historically low staff.
Many SSA staffers also resigned, including nearly half of the agency's senior executives. This has adversely affected SSA beneficiaries. An analysis published last week by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities revealed that one SSA staff member must now serve 1,480 beneficiaries—over three times as many as in 1967.
Last week, Warren sent a letter to Bisignano—who one advocacy group described as "a Wall Street CEO with a long history of slashing the companies he runs to the bone"—accusing him of misleading the public about longer beneficiary wait times resulting from the Trump administration and DOGE taking a "chainsaw to Social Security."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House to Take Up GOP Megabill Serving 'Oil Company CEOs, Hedge Fund Donors, and Climate Deniers'
"Senate Republicans advanced the most anti-environment, anti-job, and anti-American bill in history," said one campaigner.
Jul 01, 2025
After U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday sent President Donald Trump's so-called "Big Beautiful Bill" back to the House of Representatives, defenders of the planet sounded the alarm on several provisions that remain in the massive budget reconciliation package.
"This is a vote that will live in infamy," said Greenpeace USA deputy climate program director John Noël after Vice President JD Vance broke a tie to advance the legislation. "This bill is what happens when a major political party, in the grips of a personality cult, teams up with oil company CEOs, hedge fund donors, and climate deniers. All you need to do is look at who benefits from actively undercutting the clean energy industry that is creating tens of thousands of jobs across political geographies."
"The megabill isn't about reform—it's about rewarding the superrich and doling out fossil fuel industry handouts, all while dismantling the social safety nets on which millions depend for stability," Noël added. "It is a bet against the future."
Although Sen. Mike Lee's (R-Utah) provision to force the sale of public lands as well as a proposed excise tax on wind and solar projects were removed, other controversial policies survived, including required onshore and offshore fossil fuel lease sales, mandates for timber harvesting, the recision of various Inflation Reduction Act funding, an end to a moratorium on new coal leasing, and attacks on clean energy.
"Make no mistake, while the Senate did not include a punitive new excise tax on wind and solar projects, the bill is still devastating for the clean energy transition," warned Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) president Gretchen Goldman. "The bill would spike energy costs, threaten energy reliability, and strand hundreds of billions of dollars in clean energy and transportation investments along with the tens of thousands of domestic jobs that come with them. The provisions attacking clean energy and clean transportation are not about the budget, but rather Congress using the budget bill to boost fossil fuels by crushing these booming new industries."
Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous declared that "today, Senate Republicans advanced the most anti-environment, anti-job, and anti-American bill in history."
"This shortsighted plan will put lives at risk, endanger our growing economy, and raise electricity rates on families and small businesses," he said. "The proposal expands drilling on public lands and in the Arctic, guts cost-cutting clean energy investments and the thousands of stable jobs they've created, and includes massive giveaways to corporate polluters and the very wealthiest Americans."
Jealous celebrated that public outrage led to the federal land sales and excise tax provisions getting axed, but added that "even with those important changes, a terrible bill is still a terrible bill, and this proposal fails the American people in every measure."
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, also highlighted how the legislation—if signed into law—will benefit rich individuals and corporations while causing working-class Americans to lose their jobs and pay higher energy bills.
"The Senate has turned its back on our clean energy future, raising our utility bills while mortgaging our health and environment to deliver massive tax breaks for billionaires," Alt said. She warned of job losses and increased climate pollution, meaning "kids will struggle with asthma and other respiratory problems. And, more people will suffer from devastating extreme weather catastrophes."
Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, similarly said that "with spiking power demand and rising bills, we need more clean, affordable American energy, but Senate Republicans just voted to kill jobs and deliver the largest utility bill increase in U.S. history."
"Every senator who voted for this bill chose tax cuts for the wealthiest over the rest of our health, pocketbooks, public lands and waters, and a safe climate," Bapna argued. "This is like Robin Hood in reverse. The very rich will get richer and the rest of us will have to pay the price."
After 27 hours, Republicans passed their Big Ugly Bill—a catastrophic assault on health care, food, and climate.They chose Trump and billionaires over families and our future.This fight isn't over. Now it’s the House’s turn to stop it.We can't agonize—we must organize.
[image or embed]
— Senator Ed Markey (@markey.senate.gov) July 1, 2025 at 1:22 PM
The bill not only "will race us toward climate catastrophe" while giving tax breaks to the wealthy, said Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog Public Citizen, it also "steals assistance from vulnerable Americans, the bill would supercharge Trump's barbaric mass deportation policy, and throw an extra $150 billion at Pentagon contractors."
"Any member of Congress with a conscience knows that this bill must not become law," she added. "It's time for the House to stand up to President Trump and vote against it."
The GOP-controlled House had already passed a version of the megabill before every Senate Republican but Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Rand Paul (Ky.), and Thom Tillis (N.C.) advanced the latest edition on Tuesday. Now, the lower chamber's leaders plan to take up the new version in hopes of sending it to Trump's desk by his July 4 deadline.
"House members got it wrong the first time but have another chance now to do their jobs," said Goldman of UCS. "They must reject this bill, voting with their constituents in mind, not simply to avoid the ire of the president."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular