Posted on 06/14/2003 12:03:32 AM PDT by Uncle Bill
THE MEDICARE DRUG BILL: An Impending Disaster For All Americans
The Heritage Foundation
By Stuart M. Butler, Ph.D.
June 13, 2003
Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institute - a think tank - whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.
With the support of the Bush Administration, or at least with the White House’s passive acquiesce, Congress appears on course to enacting a huge new entitlement aimed at middle-income Americans. President Bush likely will sign whatever bill emerges. And as President Clinton’s Medicare administrator puts it “In signing it, as he will surely be forced to do, he will preside over the biggest expansion of government health benefits since the Great Society.”
The legislation makes a mockery of sensible budget control or prudent reform. Rather than combining steps to help some seniors with reforms to the unsustainable finances of the Medicare program, Congress’ “reforms” will reduce choice and innovation and impose staggering financial burdens on our children and grandchildren.
No Fixed Budget = Massive Tax Burdens
Congressional proponents of the legislation maintain that the new drug benefit will cost $400 billion over the next 10 years. This of course is merely a guess. Since the program is an entitlement there is no fixed budget. Moreover, the evidence from both the private and public sectors in recent years suggests that future costs are likely to exceed projections. But even if they are accurate it is not the next 10 years that matter. It is the years after that when the full force of the Baby Boom generation hits Medicare and Social Security. Within 15 years Medicare already faces a Niagara Falls of red ink. Adding a drug benefit without serious reforms and constraints on future spending means massive tax burdens on generation to come.
The bill is needed, say leaders of both parties, to help seniors who face heavy prescription drug costs. To be sure, many lower-income elderly do need help. But today about three-quarters of all seniors already have private insurance against onerous costs, and the pricing of that insurance does force seniors to strike a prudent balance between desire and cost.
Unconscionable Approach
It makes sense for our society to provide assistance targeted toward those who still face heavy burdens, chiefly because of their income. But Congress’ approach would institute a government-sponsored drug program for all Medicare recipients, not just those who need help. For several reasons that approach is unconscionable.
First, there will be powerful incentives for current and future middle-income seniors to forego private insurance protection at realistic prices in favor of government-sponsored drug coverage at subsidized prices. Moreover, corporations and other entities facing high retiree health benefits will soon find creative ways to shift retire drug costs to the taxpayer. The result: taxpayer costs will rise further.
Second, proponents are naïve when they claim that seniors will have many choices of coverage under the legislation – private plans as well as traditional Medicare benefits. Hard lessons from the past, combined with likely design requirements in the final bill, suggest that few private plans will join the program. Mass withdrawals of plans from the existing Medicare+Choice program show what happens when Congress imposes regulations and controls in an effort to cut costs. And in an effort to curb a surge in spending, the government will no doubt gradually tighten regulations on any private plans that do join the drug program, leading to fewer and fewer private plans. It remains to be seen how seniors will respond to this. But when Congress last tried to provide a drug benefit that jeopardized coverage many seniors already had – in 1988 – the backlash was so severe that Congress repealed the legislation within a few months.
Third, despite claims that the new program is modeled after Congress’ own health program, which includes drug coverage, nothing could be further from the truth. The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) is open to virtually any private plan or insurer meeting some basic benefit requirements and consumer protections. Premiums for these plans vary and reflect the benefits included in the plans, and federal workers choose from among many competing plans.
No Serious Reforms, Fuels Taxpayer Costs
By contrast, Congress will determine the benefits in the legislation moving through Congress, and the government will decide how many of the lowest bidding preferred provider plans will be permitted to offer coverage to seniors in any area. Moreover, because Congress would take a prominent role in influencing prices and benefits – unlike in the FEHBP – the political dynamics would work in the same way as they do today in Medicare. Politicians would be under relentless pressure to keep prices down for their constituents, while drug companies, doctors and seniors would press for ever-more generous coverage. The result: larger and larger subsidies and costs to future generations. Thus not only does the legislation contain no serious reforms to control costs without undermining quality, it actually fuels taxpayer costs.
President Bush and congressional leaders had an opportunity to combine help for some Americans in genuine need with sensible reforms so that our children and grandchildren might look forward to an affordable and high-quality Medicare program. With the looming political and financial juggernaut of the Baby Boom generation approaching retirement, this legislation probably is the last opportunity for hard decisions. But rather that taking a firm leadership role in the legislative process, President Bush elected instead to send Congress a framework and then invited lawmakers to fill in the details. The result was predictable. The process is fast becoming a political feeding frenzy, in which short-term partisan advantage trumps responsible action. While today’s politicians may reap the benefits, it is future generations who will have to pay for this unforgivable failure of leadership.
[END OF TRANSCRIPT]
Bush Urges Congress To Add Drug Coverage To Medicare
"Republicans and Democrats have distracted us with unending battles between haves and have-nots for decades. Over the same period, they have bankrupted the country,"
Source
Senate Panel Adds Drug Benefits in Medicare Overhaul - June 13, 2003
"An influential Senate committee tonight approved the biggest expansion of Medicare in its 38-year history, with an overwhelming bipartisan vote to add prescription drug benefits....
The bill would increase federal spending by $400 billion.."
Bush Urges Congress to Deliver on Prescription Drugs for Medicare
.jpg)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/danger.html
"The current system is financially unsustainable."
THE BUSH/GOP SMALL LIMITED GOVERNMENT SPENDING PRINCIPLES
Is the Tax Cut for Real?
"The Bush administration inherited a federal budget of $1.86 trillion, and now proposes to spend $2.3 trillion in 2004, for a whopping 23.6 percent increase in federal spending in this short period. The Bush presidency has far outspent Clinton's in every category. As Cato's Chris Edwards says, "[B]ased on his first three budgets, President Bush is the biggest spending president in decades." To close the gap between spending and revenue, said a report commissioned by the US Treasury, would require an "immediate and permanent 66 percent across-the-board income tax increase."
President George W. Bush - Biography
SOURCE: http://www.whitehouse.gov/president/gwbbio.html
"George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States. Formerly the 46th Governor of the State of Texas, President Bush has earned a reputation as a compassionate conservative who shapes policy based on the principles of limited government,..."
HOW CONSERVATIVE IS PRESIDENT BUSH?
Is the United States flat-out broke? Feds deny report
"the government's debt is actually "a mind-numbing $43 trillion,"
HOW BIG IS THE GOVERNMENT'S DEBT?
Increased Spending, Deficit Produce Political Danger for GOP
Honey, don't you think
it's great how President Bush
and Congress have spending and fiscal
responsibility under control. Yes, did you see
Laura kiss the President today?
But beyond all that lies an even touchier issue, one that officials don't like to even discuss — the role of immigrants in the county's crisis. Although no one is sure how many of the uninsured are recent immigrants, everyone says many are. Some of those are illegal."
Why health care is so costly (Schlafly - Illegal Aliens)U.S. Social Security for Mexicans? - Phyllis Schlafly
"Payroll taxes to fund Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) have increased 36 times (26 increases in the applicable tax base and 10 increases in the tax rate). Nevertheless, Medicare is now facing bankruptcy. Government has no remedies except higher taxes, price controls, adding more costly benefits and even rationing."
Phyllis Schlafly
No it doesn't.
Agreed. Thanks for at least reading it. I was wondering if anyone would notice that. He just slipped that in. ((((Loud clapping)))). So many want so bad for their version of socialism and big government to work. It never has, it never will.
Isn't all this limited government by George W. Bush and the Republican Congress exciting?
This reminds me of an old friend who died last year of cancer at age 76. I visited him at home about a month before he passed away. He was on the couch and couldn't really walk without assistance but his mind and eyes were sharp. Fortunately, he had some sort of insurance and had his younger brother present to look after him.
He was telling me about all the drugs and chemo-therapy he had to take and go through. Then he told his brother to grab him that bottle of pills that were supposed to help him eat or assist his sense of taste. He held the bottle in his hand for me to see and said, "See this bottle of pills, it's supposed to help me eat and I can't eat sh*t. It cost $500.00 for a one month supply."
He knew what the value of 500 dollars was from long ago; he probably could have bought a small farm way back then for it.
My observation of this is that whenever the gummint sticks its nose into things, prices and costs skyrocket. Thanks for listening to my little rant.
Bush 41 presides over biggest tax increase in history.
In '92, "Conservatives" abandon Bush 41 and either didn't vote for him or voted for Perot as an alternative.
In '92, Clinton gets elected and shows us what a real tax increase looks like, and gets reelected.
"Conservatives" blame Bush 41 for their stupidity.
Thanks, "Conservatives", for screwing us in '92.
That is the key. Everything they touch turns to unaccountable sewer water. It smells the same, no matter what political party ditch it flows from. And was predicted over and over by our wise founding fathers.
"Nothing is more permanent as a temporary government program."
Milton Friedman
Best regards, UB.
I too have older parents who are in their upper 70's and need to have help with their pills.....luckly, a few years ago they got connected up with the VA since they are both veterans and it really helps a lot...
don't lecture me about health care and the elderly....I am an RN and have been for almost 30 yrs....
I know exactly what some elderly people are up against....those who did not get wonderful pensions (like my folks) and those that can not get supplemental insurance..
So some elderly need help with prescriptions?...Fine...lets help them....
but most do not...
I should not have to pay for rich people, for those living off the younger, working generations like they were kings and queens, and I should not have to pay to keep people alive or pay for their presciptions when they continue to smoke, drink, overeat, refuse to take what medications are prescribed, or indulge in too much over the counter self-medicating ( laxative abuse among the elderly is a huge problem and leads to many other problems...
One thing that this free drug bill will do will make all prescriptions hugely expensive for the rest of us..
I will gladly help my folks, but with one eye I am looking out for my kids...
legacies should be spent keeping those people alive, if that 's what they desire...
I can tell you stories of how older children screw the system in reguards to their elder parents....just so there will be money left over for THEM....
are you one of those?
George W. Bush and the GOP. Repealing Medicare by spending $400 Billion on Medicare one bill at a time. Think big. Think strategy. Don't be a malcontent. Vote Bush. The collapse depends on it.
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.