|
Breaking News
from America's Progressive Community...
1999
Releases
February
January
archives/1998
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
Making news?
E-mail us!
editor@newscenter.org
NewsCenter
is a news service - providing breaking news and views for
progressive-thinking Americans.
The press releases posted here
have been provided to NewsCenter
by the one of the many progressive organizations we have selected to
participate. If you would like more information about this press
release, you should contact the organization directly. |
|
|
|
|
| WASHINGTON
- February 5 - Consumer advocacy group Public Citizen today denounced a draft
report from the chair of the Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare,
Sen. John Breaux (D-La.), saying it would benefit the healthy and wealthy at the
expense of those who can afford it least.
The Commission is due to deliver its report at the end of the
month, but Sen. Breaux presented a skeletal draft of a possible majority
Commission report January 26, 1999.
"The Breaux proposal is too silent on many tough issues
for it to find common ground among 11 of the 17 Commissioners - the
supermajority needed to report to Congress," said Public Citizen President
Joan Claybrook. "But even in its skeletal form, the proposal is
sufficiently clear to be opposed."
The consumer advocacy group outlined the reasons it opposed the
proposal:
1. Eliminates the Medicare entitlement. Right now, Medicare
guarantees beneficiaries access to a defined set of health benefits with an
established cost-sharing ratio between the government and beneficiaries. If
healthcare costs go up, so does what the government pays. Under the Breaux plan
beneficiaries would be entitled to a defined contribution only. The trial
balloon is "soft" on the question of how specific the benefits package
for private plans would be - Breaux is looking for a compromise that brings in
both the Commission's "leave it completely up to the market" and
"define the benefits" wings. But even if a benefit package were
specified, it would be difficult if not impossible to force profit-motivated
managed care providers to comply with it.
2. Turns Medicare into a voucher program. Under the
Breaux plan there would be two delivery systems: fee-for-service
("traditional Medicare"), with HCFA granted some additional authority
to control costs, and the "premium support" or "voucher"
system. The government would make a defined contribution toward the cost of an
individual's healthcare. It could be used as a voucher to pay part of the
premium of a private health plan. But "traditional Medicare"
spending per person would also be capped at the private voucher amount. If
health care costs per person exceeded what the voucher would buy - e.g., because
sicker individuals with more costly healthcare needs enrolled in
"traditional Medicare" in disproportionate numbers - those individuals
would be liable for a larger and larger share of cost than is now the
case.
3. Turns Medicare over to the market.
However the details
of the Breaux plan are filled in, its fundamental philosophy is to turn Medicare
into a healthcare delivery system in which market competition among largely
for-profit managed care plans determines cost, quality and access to care. The
market has a track record in Medicare, and it is not
good:
- 100 HMOs, 87% of them for-profit, dumped over 400,000
Medicare beneficiaries at the end of last year because they decided the business
was not profitable. This may be fully acceptable market behavior, but is it what
we want for Medicare?
- The Medicare population is sharply skewed: 5% of
beneficiaries account for 50% of expenditures; 10% account for over 75% of the
program's cost. Although HCFA has recently proposed adjusting the rates paid
private plans to account for higher risk patients this type of regulation is
strongly opposed by many private market advocates. With such a strong incentive
to attract and keep only the healthier, lower cost beneficiaries, for-profit
managed care firms will engage in significant cherry picking. Traditional
Medicare would be left with the sickest patients - who would now also be
required to pay a greater share of their healthcare costs as the
"voucher" rate caps what the government pays.
4. Raises the eligibility age from 65 to 67. This would
throw several million more people into the ranks of the uninsured - and save
very little money, since under current law working people between the ages of 65
and 70 who have employer-paid insurance get their primary coverage from their
employer anyway.
The Breaux plan does not address the main problems facing
Medicare:
* Failure to cover prescription drugs. Both the Medicare
program and Medicare beneficiaries who lack outpatient prescription drug
coverage pay full sticker price for prescription drugs - twice as much as the
Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs, and about twice as much as the same
drugs cost in Canada and Mexico. The pharmaceutical industry has long blocked
adding a drug benefit to Medicare because it opposes government price controls,
which are crucial to such a benefit. The Breaux proposal punts: it mentions
drugs only under "Areas that Need Resolution." Co-chair Bill Thomas
(R-Calif.) and other pro-drug industry Commissioners have stated publicly that
they will block any effort to make prescription drugs a covered benefit in the
"traditional Medicare" program - they would be available only through
private HMOs.
* Failure to reduce beneficiary out of pocket expenditures.
The average Medicare beneficiary pays over $2,000 a year - about 20% of
average beneficiary income - for out of pocket healthcare expenses. The Breaux
proposal would probably increase these amounts:
- by ending "first dollar coverage" for co-payments
through Medigap or employer-paid supplemental insurance;
- by combining the Parts A & B deductibles to create one
annual deductible - pegged at "perhaps $350" in the Breaux proposal -
a dollar amount high enough to constitute a barrier to care for
some.
* Failure to address the financial challenges facing
Medicare. President Clinton's proposal to use 16% of the surplus, $650
billion over 15 years, to keep the Part A trust fund solvent until 2020, is a
positive proposal. But a number of Commissioners, including the co-chairs, have
criticized the President's action - they have called it an "obstacle"
to their efforts to use "Medicare is going broke" as a rationale for
destroying the program in order to save it. The Department of Health and Human
Services Inspector General estimates that waste, fraud and abuse costs the
Medicare program more than $20 billion a year. The Commission has
no proposals on curtailing fraud and abuse.
The Breaux proposal undermines Medicare as a social insurance
program. Medicare is based on a social compact between the young and the
old, between the sick and the healthy, and between the less well off
economically and those with higher incomes. The Breaux proposal would erode this
social compact and individualize risks and benefits. The healthier and wealthier
would do well; those with greater medical needs and lower incomes would
not.
### |