The budget drafted by Paul Ryan (R-WI) calls for Medicare to be privatized -- true, as he says, it won't affect anyone currently 55 or older; and it will happen gradually; but that's what it is.
Beginning in 2022, by a combination of subsidies and competing insurance plans, Medicare will be phased out as we know it in favor of private plans, similar to the Medicare Advantage plans that are optional now and that, incidentally, cost the taxpayers 13% more than the regular Medicare. How is that going to save money over our current single-payer plan with the lowest administrative costs in the industry (Medicare)?
Ryan claims that competition among plans will keep costs down, but HERE's THE HOOK: the federal subsidy will gradually decline and be eliminated. That means seniors will progressively have to pay more of it themselves. So, sure, the cost to the government will go down; but it's been estimated that it will eventually cost each individual senior about $6,000 more per year than if we kept our single payer plan.
So it does nothing to reduce health care costs; it just shifts the burden to individual seniors. Want to predict the polls on that one?
In contrast to this plan, which claims to reduce the cost of Medicare by reducing how much of it the government pays for, Obama's plan reduces the cost of Medicare by actually reducing the cost of medical care.
One way is by freeing up the bargaining power of Medicare for lower prescription drug costs in Medicare Part D. Making that illegal was Bush's payback to BigPharma. But it must be eliminated, and will be in Obama's plan.
The best comparison is with the VA, a single payer, drug-price-negotiating, large consumer -- and they pay about 40% less than the private plans in Medicare D currently pay for drugs.
Now, why was this such a mistake for the Repubs? Remember what even the Tea Party crowd insists: get rid of "socialized" government. "BUT DON'T YOU TOUCH MY MEDICARE !!!"
And Obama seems ready to make a campaign issue of it. In his budget speech he said:
There's nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. And I don't think there's anything courageous about asking for sacrifices from those who can least afford it and don't have any clout on Capital Hill.So much for Paul Ryan's moment of media stardom, with pundits falling all over themselves to call him "courageous" and his plan "serious." Well, Obama made mince meat of that in two sentences.
The 2012 fight is on . . .
Ralph
I feel the movement too, bit I'm laying low. I don't want to jinx it...
ReplyDeleteThe Congressional Budget Office (non-partisan, despite what the Repubs say when it doesn't agree with them) has weighed in on their plan to shift Medicare to vouchers to purchase private insurance.
ReplyDeleteThe CBO says that health care costs under the GOP plan would be "almost 40% higher" -- during the first year -- than under a continuation of the present plan.
In addition, the vouchers would not be geared to increasing costs, so that they would gradually cover less and less of the premiums for the private policies.