Medicare reform — Republican style

Any policy discussion about reforming Medicare usually revolves around competing ideas to spend less money, promote more competition, and/or offer fewer benefits. But the Republicans’ 2003 Medicare expansion bill did something a little different — and it’s a terrific case study for how the GOP approaches policy

Kevin Drum summarized the background nicely: “As part of the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill, Republicans expanded the Medicare+Choice program into something called Medicare Advantage. This was all part of an effort to get the free market involved in Medicare, but since it turned out the free market wasn’t very interested, Republicans did what they usually do in such circumstances: they turned on the corporate welfare spigot. In this case, it took the form of bribing insurance companies to participate by paying them more for the same services than Medicare pays directly to doctors under traditional Medicare.”

In this case, the Republican plan led to paying more money for less care.

[F]ederal officials said that the fastest-growing type of Medicare Advantage plan generally does not coordinate care, does not save money for Medicare and has been at the center of marketing abuses.

These “private fee-for-service plans” allow patients to go to any doctor or hospital that will provide care on terms set by the insurer. In most cases, no one manages the care. And some patients have found that they have less access to care, because their doctors refuse to take patients in private fee-for-service plans.

Moreover, those plans may be more expensive than traditional Medicare for some patients, because the co-payments for some services may be higher. The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission says that the cost to the government is also higher because it pays the private fee-for-service plans, on average, 19 percent more than the cost of traditional Medicare.

Richard S. Foster, chief actuary for the Medicare program, said “the additional payments to Medicare Advantage plans, above and beyond the costs” of traditional Medicare, were causing higher premiums for all beneficiaries and speeding the depletion of the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund for Medicare.

It’d be funny if it weren’t so ridiculous.

The NYT article goes on to document painful evidence of insurance companies using improper hard-sell tactics — and in some instances, outright fraud — to persuade Medicare recipients to sign up for private health plans. It’s clearly a national problem in need of an immediate response.

But it’s hard to get over how the system was intentionally created in the first place. Congressional Republicans and Bush administration officials started with a challenge (the high expense for patients on Medicare) and managed to make it considerably worse (paying more for less.)

Private insurance carriers charge more than Medicare to provide medical services because, duh, they’re a middleman and they have to make a profit. But private carriers, by movement conservative definition, must be better than any government program, so we have to find a way to get them involved. How? By paying them 19% more! So they can provide poorer service! And rip off vulnerable elderly patients! And deplete the Medicare trust fund even faster than before!

Some of the same lawmakers who voted for this are now running for president, so they can bring their policy wisdom to the rest of the health care system. Scary, isn’t it?

I thought that the “inefficient bureaucracy and red tape” that “infected” my homeland’s (Canada) health system was supposed to be eliminated under the joys of the free market economy.

It appears the only thing “invisible hand” does is give everyone the “invisible” middle finger.

  • Once again, it seems clear that for the Bushistas and their constituency the biggest problem with big government is that the idea of all that money moving around without any of it landing in their pockets.

    “Privatization” seems to me to be a term for making sure someone makes a profit from the government’s taxing authority. At one point, they made the case that “improved efficiency” would allow for both savings to the Treasury and a profit, but it’s pretty clear that the important part for them was the profit, and who cares about the rest of it?

  • I never did understand how Corporations always (in every case, no matter what, 100%) were better than government programs. At some point a corporation must turn a profit. That profit comes by collecting more for goods and services that the goods and services cost the business. By definition a for profit corporation cannot pass the lowest cost options on to consumers.

  • I’m sure this will be defined as a conspiracy theory but it seems they are intentionally bankrupting or making these programs overly expensive so they can say “see we can’t afford them and we must give up on them altogether”

  • Republican approach to entitlement programs: 1 for you, 3 for me — and a tax break on the side.

  • Not only do the Medicare Advantage plans cost more per patient to provide the care, they attempt to cherry pick the healthiest Medicare patients to try to maximize their profits.

    The plans are creating all sorts of headaches. Many patients get signed up in them without realizing what they are signing. There’s one plan that started in January, and as of early May I still have not received a single payment from them. They use nonstandardized claims submissions, and each time I call for an explanation I get a totally different answer as to how the claims should be submitted.

    Many patients wind up with higher out of pocket expenses than they expect. I had one patient complain to the person who sold him the insurance that his copays are higher. He was told that this shouldn’t matter as his doctor didn’t have to charge him the copay. (While exceptions can be made for financial hardship. routinely failing to collect Medicare copays is in violation of Medicare rules.)

    I have one patient trapped in a sort of hospital limbo. He was placed in a facility post hospital discharge where Medicare pays for an additional month to attempt to wean him off the ventilator. When the month ended, they couldn’t place him in a long term vent facility since he lost his Medicaid when he got signed up for a Medicare Advantage plan. Not it looks like it could be a matter of several weeks for him to get back on Medicaid.

  • The Republicans have done a good job of convincing this nation to have faith in the markets to solve all of their problems. The problem is they are wrong. Markets can do some things very well and very efficiently. Fairness, compassion and humanity — the glue that holds societies together — are some of the things the market doesn’t do or get.

    What Democrats need to get across to the voting public is that government, when not run by Republicans, is the better mechanism to solve societal problems than the motivating forces of greed and money.

  • Im not against Republicans or Dems but has anyone noticed that when Dems are in office the economy booms!!!!

  • Comments are closed.