Posted on 03/14/2009 11:28:04 AM PDT by AH_LiveRight
One of the first political battles over health care this year will be fought on familiar ground.
The Obama administration has proposed cutting what the government pays private insurers to cover about one in five Medicare beneficiaries and using the savings to help finance comprehensive health coverage.
The plan, some say, could lead to fewer options and higher costs for some seniors.
The private Medicare Advantage plans have been a favorite target of Democrats, who point out that the government pays the plans an average of $1,000, or 14 percent, more per beneficiary a year than it would for someone in traditional Medicare.
Republican lawmakers have been strong advocates of the Advantage plans. They support a bigger role for private insurers in Medicare and are likely to resist any effort to trim the government's payments to the companies
"If the Obama administration proposal goes through, you'll probably see fewer Medicare Advantage plans, higher out-of-pocket costs and less coverage," said Terry Warner, president of TexMeds Inc. in Richardson.
"I expect huge changes."
The Advantage plans have proved an attractive alternative to recession-racked seniors. Enrollment increased 14 percent last year
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
throw the old folks under the bus
pay USG healthcare for kids from families making up to $100K
priorities!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
AARP is powerful and they BETTER make some noise, or we’re allllll in trouble...
They don’t want anyone paying for health insurance for the elderly. To them that means that one person can buy the insurance while another can’t. The left wants everyone to be equally miserable.
Under Obama’s plan:
•Insurers that run the Advantage plans would be required to competitively bid to offer services in different parts of the country.
•The White House estimates the bidding would save the government $177 billion over 10 years. That money could be used to help pay for other health care reforms.
SOURCE: Dallas Morning News research”
Liars figure, and figures lie. The most prevalent use of statistics and mathematics today is to deceive. This administration believes that we are all quite stupid.
Of course, Part B is subsidized, but costs $93.50 per month.
Start with that expense, for nearly everyone. (It is means tested.)
Now, a supplement at age 65 is about $100 to $125.00 a month.
On top of that, an RX plan will be roughly $25.50 or more a month.
When that same person hits 70 or 75, however, the Supplement Plan premium usually is around $150 to $200 a month or more.
This is SURE to tick off Seniors, for this reason: Medicare Supplement Plan premiums are allowed to rise with age or claims experience -—
However, privitized “Medicare Advantage Plans” can take over the roles of Part A, Part B and Part D Drug Plans.
Medicare Advantage is also known as “Part C”.
Many of these plans have no premium at all.
Those that DO have premiums, have the same low premium, regardless of age.
So, this Obama idea hits the oldest the hardest.
As far as “claims” or “expense” is concerned -— Libs like to look at actual dollar claims, ONLY -— Obama and other Democrats rarely consider the administrative cost, the human resources necessary to handle claims processing and customer service, which is transfered from the government, or government contractors, to these PRIVATE Medicare Advantage Plans.
One other thing: Say what you will about Part D drug coverage -— the Medicare Advantage idea HAS been a partial success, in showing what privatization can do.
MAPD is a Medicare Advantage WITH Prescription Drug coverage.
Almost all of the Part D companies also have Part C or Medicare Advantage.
Part C and Part D are NOT really regulated by the State Insurance Departments, they are regulated by CMS, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The applications look nearly identical, accross companies and accross plans.
It is my guess that attacking Part C, Medicare Adantage, will have the effect of forcing companies out of the Part C and Part D game. They will drop BOTH!
Part D drug coverage has NOT been a big money maker for the Insurance Companies involved.
I understand the controversy in Republican ranks over Part D, and I must admit, as an agent, that Part D and Part C have been a royal headache, lately.
However, trust me, a full government takeover of Part C and Part D is NOT what we want!
By the way, our government just decided to cut commissions to agents who sell Part C and Part D. This was RETROACTIVE, back to policies that were sold under the last Annual Enrollment Period.
I know an agent that saw a $16,000 negative balance, in his commission run, due to this government medaling!
By Jeffrey Young
Posted: 03/12/09 12:47 PM [ET]
Incoming AARP CEO A. Barry Rand contributed $8,900 to President Obama's campaign committees, federal records show.
Rand, a retired senior executive at Xerox Corp., Avis Group and Equitant Inc. and the current chairman of Howard University's board of trustees, gave the maximum $4,600 to Obama's election campaign and an additional $4,300 to the Obama Victory Fund, a joint fundraising entity of Obama and the Democratic National Committee. Source: The Hill
AARP has an agreement with United Health, for both Medicare Advantage and Medicare Supplement. They also have a Prescription plan.
I am guessing that AARP will be very loud on this!
And, if they are not, well, AARP will be in trouble with its own members!
Who did AARP support in the election?
AARP is in his back pocket. The folly is that AARP is a senior advocate group.
AARP is leftists fooling seniors into thinking they care.
We might actually prefer that AARP stays out out of the fray. Their literature is pro universal health care.
It’s time to tell the government to stay out of our healthcare!
AARP is a waste of time.
Spot on. Thank you for the details. This forum provides some of the finest insights from the best folks around. I have experience dealing with the VA, Mailhandlers, and TriCare regarding my father. I have told folks for years that if we get government subsidized healthcare, it will look exactly like VA. Not like what our "elected representatives" and their designated flunkies have.
My bet is that the AARP will go along with Zero. I’m basing this on their response to my letter to them about this article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs
Their response was that the concerns raised in the article were “alarmist”. They will willfully turn a blind eye because Zero has a D behind his name.
The elderly where I live all voted for THE ONE.
[. . .cutting what the government pays private insurers. . .using the savings to help finance comprehensive health coverage. . .]
This is like cutting off his arm so he can use it to scratch his back.
AARP is a big proponent of dumping Medicare Advantage plans entirely. They have a conflict of interest because of the fees paid to AARP by United Health Insurance who peddles Supplemental Medicare insurance policies under the AARP banner. AARP is NOT the friend of seniors. It is a socialist organization.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.