

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.
"They want to remove the guarantee of Medicare," one advocate said of the Trump administration's floated plan to automatically enroll seniors in Medicare Advantage.
The Trump administration is considering enacting a policy that would automatically funnel seniors into for-profit Medicare Advantage plans—which critics say would set Medicare on the path to full-scale privatization.
Chris Klomp, the Trump administration's director of Medicare and deputy administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), told STAT last month that enrolling seniors in Medicare Advantage (MA) plans by default "is something that we're thinking through." MA plans are funded by the federal government and run by private insurance companies such as UnitedHealthcare and Humana, both of which have been accused of improperly denying necessary care to patients and overcharging taxpayers.
The default enrollment scheme was floated in the far-right Project 2025 agenda that President Donald Trump has repeatedly tried to disavow. Currently, older Americans who have received Social Security benefits for at least four months before they turn 65 are automatically enrolled in traditional Medicare, and they can choose to enroll in an MA plan as an alternative.
"Another bad idea straight from Project 2025," Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said in response to Klomp's comments on the proposed default enrollment change. "Medicare Advantage is private, for-profit insurance that overcharges American taxpayers by billions every year and regularly denies seniors the care they need."
"Making Medicare Advantage the default option hurts patients and taxpayers," Pocan added, "but it will make insurance execs a lot of money."
"With Mehmet Oz running the agency, they can move incredibly quickly to make that happen, and they are."
Klomp said no plans have been finalized, but defenders of traditional Medicare warned that CMS—headed by Mehmet Oz, who during his 2022 US Senate run backed a plan entitled "Medicare Advantage for All"—could try to swiftly ram the change through without public input.
"With Mehmet Oz running the agency, they can move incredibly quickly to make that happen, and they are," Alex Lawson, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works, told Common Dreams on Friday. "They will not explain it to the people, because the people hate the idea. Instead, they say 'change the default option' and other policy jargon to try and hide the fact of what they are doing, privatizing Medicare."
"They want to remove the guarantee of Medicare," warned Lawson, "and replace it with the same private insurance giants that make billions denying healthcare, especially to those who need it the most."
Experts say making Medicare Advantage plans the default enrollment option for seniors would likely decrease traditional Medicare enrollment dramatically.
Given massive overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans—potentially $1.2 trillion over the next decade, according to one independent estimate—a large increase in MA enrollment would be sure to drive up costs and monthly premiums across the board. A report released last month by the congressional Joint Economic Committee estimated that MA overpayments led to premium hikes of $212 per Medicare Part B enrollee last year.
"Since 2016, MA overpayments have added an estimated $82 billion to Part B premiums," the congressional report found. "[Traditional Medicare] beneficiaries, who are not enrolled in MA, bore roughly $6 billion of that burden."
Under one scheme floated last year by Rep. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), eligible Medicare recipients would be automatically enrolled in the "MA plan with the lowest premium available," unless they actively decide to opt out. Once enrolled in an MA plan, individuals would be unable to switch plans for three years.
Wendell Potter, a former health insurance executive who now champions Medicare for All, warned Friday that under Schweikert's plan, "seniors would be locked in a plan that the government chose for them, that has a limited network of doctors and hospitals, that makes them pay the entire bill for services they might receive outside of that network, and that denies coverage for medically necessary care far more than traditional Medicare—for three years."
In addition to weighing the default enrollment change, the Trump administration has recently delivered smaller-scale but significant victories to MA insurers, including by boosting federal payment rates—bowing to a massive industry lobbying blitz—and easing rules around the marketing of MA plans.
David Lipschutz, co-director of law and policy at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, said Thursday that the latter move represents "a rollback of consumer protections, which gives in to pressures from the insurance industry and those who sell their products."
The exchange on the Senate floor came after the Finance Committee chair blocked passage of the Vermont Independent's bill.
U.S. Senate Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo on Tuesday blocked passage of Sen. Bernie Sanders' legislation to expand Medicare to cover dental, hearing, and vision care for tens of millions of American seniors, but the bill's sponsor got the panel leader to publicly agree to further discuss the issue.
Sanders (I-Vt.) took to the Senate floor Tuesday afternoon to ask for unanimous consent to pass the Medicare Dental, Hearing, and Vision Expansion Act, which is spearheaded in the House of Representatives by Congressman Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas).
"In the richest country in the history of the world, it is unacceptable that millions of seniors are unable to read because they can't afford eyeglasses, can't have conversations with their grandchildren because they can't afford hearing aids, and have trouble eating because they can't afford dentures," Sanders said in a statement.
"That should not be happening in the United States of America in the year 2025," he continued. "The time is long overdue for Congress to expand Medicare to include comprehensive coverage for the dental, vision, and hearing care that our seniors desperately need."
After Crapo (R-Idaho) rose to stop the bill from advancing, he and Sanders had a brief exchange in which the Republican agreed to working on achieving the "outcome" of the federal healthcare program covering dental, vision, and hearing.
In Sanders' remarks on the Senate floor about his bill, he sounded the alarm about efforts by President Donald Trump, billionaire Elon Musk, and congressional Republicans to cut government healthcare programs and Social Security.
"Yeah, we have more nuclear weapons than any other country, we have more billionaires than any other country, but we also have one of the highest rates of senior poverty of any country on Earth. We might want to get our priorities right," said Sanders, who has long fought for achieving universal healthcare in the United States via his Medicare for All legislation.
"While my Republican colleagues would like to make massive cuts to Medicaid in order to provide more tax breaks to billionaires, some of us have a better idea," he said. "We think that it makes more sense to substantially improve the lives of our nation's seniors by expanding Medicare to cover dental, vision, and hearing benefits."
To pay for his expansion plan, Sanders calls for ensuring that Medicare pays no more for prescription drugs than the Department of Veterans Affairs and addressing the tens of billions of dollars that privately administered Medicare Advantage plans overcharge the federal government annually.
In a statement about the bill, Doggett highlighted that "this expanded care could help prevent cognitive impairment and dementia, worsened chronic disease, and imbalance leading to falls with deadly consequences. This is an essential step to fulfilling the original promise of Medicare—to assure dignity and health for all."
Welcoming their renewed push for Medicare expansion, Public Citizen healthcare advocate Eagan Kemp declared that "at the same time Trump and his cronies in Congress try to rip healthcare away from millions and push for further privatization of Medicare, Sen. Sanders and Rep. Doggett are showing what one of our top priorities in healthcare should be—improving traditional Medicare."
"The introduction of this legislation is an important step to ensure Medicare enrollees can access the care they need, and we hope that Congress will act quickly to pass these commonsense reforms," Kemp added. "Healthcare is a human right."
Earlier Tuesday, in anticipation of Crapo's committee holding a confirmation hearing for Dr. Mehmet Oz, the former television host Trump has nominated to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, Public Citizen released a research brief about the hundreds of millions of dollars Medicare Advantage companies have spent on lobbying.
"If Oz is confirmed as the CMS administrator," Kemp warned, "attacks on traditional Medicare are likely to move into overdrive."
"Oz's deep ties to the private healthcare industry make his nomination to lead our nation's current healthcare system totally egregious," said Public Citizen healthcare advocate Eagan Kemp.
The watchdog group Public Citizen said Thursday that lawmakers should reject President-elect Donald Trump's nomination of Medicare privatization advocate Mehmet Oz to lead a key health agency and instead move toward a publicly run single-payer system that would cover all Americans at a lower cost than the status quo.
In a new brief, Public Citizen warned that Medicare privatization efforts—particularly via an expansion of Medicare Advantage plans run by for-profit insurance companies—would likely "move into overdrive" if the Senate confirms Oz as administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
Ahead of his 2022 Senate bid, Oz backed a plan he described as "Medicare Advantage for All," under which privately run plans would cover non-seniors and "all Americans who are not on Medicaid"—effectively eliminating traditional Medicare.
Public Citizen warned such a plan "would mean huge corporate profits while patients continue to struggle to get the healthcare they need," noting that Medicare Advantage plans are notorious for denying necessary care and overbilling the federal government to the tune of tens of billions of dollars per year.
"Policymakers should pass Medicare for All to guarantee care for everyone in the U.S., bring down costs for working families, and generate savings for the country as a whole."
"Further privatizing Medicare would increase healthcare costs systemwide by adding further administrative bloat to our healthcare system," the new brief argues. "Our healthcare system is already made up of thousands of health insurance plans offered by numerous insurers as well as state and federal programs that all play some role in paying for healthcare."
"By spending healthcare resources on corporate profit or administrative waste, privatized Medicare would mean Americans pay even more for healthcare than they already do," the brief adds. "We already spend far more than comparably wealthy countries, over $12,500 per capita, compared with peer nations that are spending around half, per capita."
Oz's plan would also benefit companies in which he has invested tens of millions of dollars, according to financial disclosures.
"Dr. Oz owned between $280,000 and $600,000 in shares in UnitedHealth Group, a major Medicare Advantage insurer, and between $50,000 and $100,000 in shares of CVS Health," Public Citizen noted Thursday, citing the filings.
Eagan Kemp, a healthcare advocate at Public Citizen, said in a statement that Oz's "Medicare Advantage for All" proposal "is dangerous to all patients, especially seniors and people with disabilities, many of whom have not received the care they need under Medicare Advantage."
"Healthcare is a right, not a commodity," said Kemp. "Oz's deep ties to the private healthcare industry make his nomination to lead our nation's current healthcare system totally egregious. Congress should reject Oz's nomination and any proposal to further privatize Medicare."
"Instead," he added, "policymakers should pass Medicare for All to guarantee care for everyone in the U.S., bring down costs for working families, and generate savings for the country as a whole."
Public Citizen's brief came as Oz's nomination faced increasingly close scrutiny from congressional Democrats, who have raised similar concerns about the former television personality's promotion of Medicare Advantage and ties to the private insurance industry.
"As CMS administrator, you would be tasked with overseeing Medicare and ensuring that the tens of millions of seniors that rely on the program receive the care they deserve, including cracking down on abuses by private insurers in Medicare Advantage," a group of Democratic lawmakers led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in a letter to Oz last week. "The consequences of failure on your part would be grave. Billions of federal healthcare dollars—and millions of lives—are at stake."
"Given your financial ties to private insurers, combined with your view that the traditional Medicare program is 'highly dysfunctional' and your advocacy for eliminating it entirely," the lawmakers added, "it is not clear that you are qualified for this critical job."