

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

The report, released by the Kaiser Family Foundation on Monday, estimates that "Nearly six in 10 Medicare beneficiaries nationally could face higher premiums for Medicare benefits, assuming current plan preferences, including more than half of beneficiaries enrolled in traditional Medicare and almost nine in 10 Medicare Advantage enrollees."
The study found that some geographic areas would see larger cost increases than other, both across regions and within states. "At least nine in 10 Medicare beneficiaries in Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts and New Jersey would face higher premiums in their current plan," said the report.
The Associated Press adds:
Like the Romney-Ryan plan, government health insurance payments for individual seniors would be tied to the cost of the second-lowest private insurance plan in their geographical area, or traditional Medicare, whichever is less expensive. Seniors could pick a private plan or a new public program modeled on traditional Medicare. But if their pick costs more than the government payment, they would have to pay the difference themselves.
Not surpisingly, the Romney campaign downplayed and criticized the report while the Obama campaign posted a link to the study on their website.
Kaiser's top Medicare expert, Tricia Neuman, told the AP the organization has been working on the report since the early part of the year, well before Romney picked Ryan as his running mate and cemented his support for the congressman's Medicare overhaul.
Regardless of the political disputes, as the report concludes, if Medicare was privatized there would be "increase costs and financial risks for beneficiaries over time."
# # #
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

The report, released by the Kaiser Family Foundation on Monday, estimates that "Nearly six in 10 Medicare beneficiaries nationally could face higher premiums for Medicare benefits, assuming current plan preferences, including more than half of beneficiaries enrolled in traditional Medicare and almost nine in 10 Medicare Advantage enrollees."
The study found that some geographic areas would see larger cost increases than other, both across regions and within states. "At least nine in 10 Medicare beneficiaries in Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts and New Jersey would face higher premiums in their current plan," said the report.
The Associated Press adds:
Like the Romney-Ryan plan, government health insurance payments for individual seniors would be tied to the cost of the second-lowest private insurance plan in their geographical area, or traditional Medicare, whichever is less expensive. Seniors could pick a private plan or a new public program modeled on traditional Medicare. But if their pick costs more than the government payment, they would have to pay the difference themselves.
Not surpisingly, the Romney campaign downplayed and criticized the report while the Obama campaign posted a link to the study on their website.
Kaiser's top Medicare expert, Tricia Neuman, told the AP the organization has been working on the report since the early part of the year, well before Romney picked Ryan as his running mate and cemented his support for the congressman's Medicare overhaul.
Regardless of the political disputes, as the report concludes, if Medicare was privatized there would be "increase costs and financial risks for beneficiaries over time."
# # #

The report, released by the Kaiser Family Foundation on Monday, estimates that "Nearly six in 10 Medicare beneficiaries nationally could face higher premiums for Medicare benefits, assuming current plan preferences, including more than half of beneficiaries enrolled in traditional Medicare and almost nine in 10 Medicare Advantage enrollees."
The study found that some geographic areas would see larger cost increases than other, both across regions and within states. "At least nine in 10 Medicare beneficiaries in Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts and New Jersey would face higher premiums in their current plan," said the report.
The Associated Press adds:
Like the Romney-Ryan plan, government health insurance payments for individual seniors would be tied to the cost of the second-lowest private insurance plan in their geographical area, or traditional Medicare, whichever is less expensive. Seniors could pick a private plan or a new public program modeled on traditional Medicare. But if their pick costs more than the government payment, they would have to pay the difference themselves.
Not surpisingly, the Romney campaign downplayed and criticized the report while the Obama campaign posted a link to the study on their website.
Kaiser's top Medicare expert, Tricia Neuman, told the AP the organization has been working on the report since the early part of the year, well before Romney picked Ryan as his running mate and cemented his support for the congressman's Medicare overhaul.
Regardless of the political disputes, as the report concludes, if Medicare was privatized there would be "increase costs and financial risks for beneficiaries over time."
# # #