May 24, 2012

Senators Want More Aggressive Action to Curb Rampant Medicare Fraud

Coburn, Hatch say convicted felons, doctors with revoked licenses can still bill federal health care program for the elderly

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., during a town hall meeting in Oklahoma City.Sue Ogrocki/AP

Two prominent Republican senators are pushing Medicare’s administrator to block convicted felons and doctors with revoked licenses from successfully billing the federal health care program for the elderly, an issue that was highlighted by iWatch News early this year.

In the letter to Donald Berwick, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, wrote that Medicare contractors are allowing doctors and scam artists to retain Medicare billing privileges even if they have lost their medical licenses or have been convicted of felonies related to tax evasion, health care fraud, and “lewd and lascivious conduct.” Medicare contracts with 11 companies nationwide to administer claims for the program. The letter also includes a list of possibly dubious practitioners and a request that CMS determine if they should be revoked from the program.

“By not taking the appropriate administrative action against providers and suppliers who are convicted or who have pled guilty to financial crimes and other felonies … CMS is abdicating its financial responsibility and placing Medicare beneficiaries at increased risk of poor quality health care,” the senators wrote.

The Medicare program has long been a lucrative target for criminals; Attorney General Eric Holder estimated the program loses $60 billion a year to fraud. Early this year, iWatch News reported that criminals successfully billed Medicare for prescription drugs using the names of deceased physicians, a scam that is difficult to catch due to inadequate CMS oversight of contractors. At that time, CMS was not checking to make sure that prescriptions paid for by the program were written by real doctors. Oversight of contractors was so inadequate that the agency could not identify the top prescribers of oxycodone and Ritalin, two highly addictive drugs that are often trafficked on the streets.

According to this week’s letter by Hatch and Coburn, CMS and its contractors may also have failed to determine the criminal status of Medicare providers or check whether they have valid medical licenses. The Senators faulted “the apparent lack of meaningful coordination and communication” between CMS, the Department of Justice, and the Internal Revenue Service. They also expressed concern that Medicare contractors “may be failing to investigate and … revoke” Medicare billing privileges of physicians whose medical licenses have been suspended or revoked.

The senators requested that Berwick explain how the agency communicates with federal law enforcement agencies to ensure it learns of felony convictions, and describe the process through which the agency removes doctors from the program when they are convicted or plead guilty to health care fraud. The senators also asked the agency to explain how it verifies that its contractors are on the lookout for doctors whose licenses are revoked.

Ellen Griffith, a CMS spokeswoman, declined to comment because the agency has not yet had a chance to review the letter. 

Reprinted by Permission © 2012, The Center for Public Integrity®. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Staff Writer

Before he joined the Center’s staff in 2008, Joe Eaton was a staff writer at Washington City Paper and a reporter at The Roanoke Times. He has written for Salon.com, USA Today, and The (Baltimore) Sun. Eaton graduated from the University of Michigan with a bachelor’s degree in English and earned a master’s degree in journalism from the University of Maryland.

202-466-1300

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.