from kaisernetwork.org Daily Reports.
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=11915
OPINION
Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report Rounds Up Opinion Pieces on Medicare
Packages
The House Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees last week
approved a $350 billion, 10-year House Republican Medicare package that
in part would give seniors a prescription drug benefit. The bill would
permit Medicare beneficiaries to purchase drug coverage directly from
private insurance companies. Seniors would pay a $250 annual deductible
and a $35 monthly premium. Low-income seniors would be exempt from the
premiums and deductible. The government would cover 80% of seniors'
annual prescription drug costs up to $1,000, 50% up to $2,000 and no
costs between $2,000 and $3,700 or $3,800, amounts approved by the Energy
and Commerce and Ways and Means committees, respectively. After those
amounts, a catastrophic benefit would begin (Kaiser Daily Health Policy
Report, 6/24). The following is a summary of editorials and opinion
pieces reacting to the action:
Dallas Morning News: The House should approve the Republican
prescription drug plan, the editorial states, because it will allow the
marketplace to help improve Medicare. "Introducing the principles of
choice and competition can result in more options for seniors and lower
Medicare costs over the long run," the editorial states, concluding,
"Medicare needs help [and] the marketplace approach can render some of
the aid" (Dallas Morning News, 6/25).
Des Moines Register: Some senior citizens in this country "choose
between food and [prescription] drugs," the editorial states, adding,
"This is a reality. And a Medicare drug benefit has to address it." A
prescription drug benefit also should "create downward pressure on drug
prices," the Register says, noting that the House plan "fails in that
respect." The editorial concludes, "If the government is going to
allocate billions to prescription-drug coverage for seniors under
Medicare, the plan has to provide real help for real people ... and
include some protections for taxpayers, too" (Des Moines Register, 6/25).
Detroit News: The current Medicare prescription drug benefit proposals
before Congress would "worsen [the program's] existing financial
difficulties without reforming the program," the editorial states.
Instead, the "best way" to give seniors drug coverage would be similar to
the way the federal government offers insurance to its employees, an idea
proposed by President Bush during his campaign. Under such a structure,
seniors would receive a "fixed" amount of money to choose coverage from a
"menu of insurance options," allowing seniors to "use their Medicare
dollars to purchase health care that best suits their needs without
further burdening taxpayers." For instance, seniors could choose a
catastrophic insurance plan and save the remaining money for medications
or could spend the entire amount on a more comprehensive health plan with
drug coverage. The editorial concludes, "Medicare needs to be modernized
to better meet the needs of seniors. To do this without burning American
taxpayers will require both parties to focus on fundamental Medicare
reform. Both parties need to go back to the drawing board" (Detroit
News, 6/24).
New York Times: The Senate Democrats' prescription drug benefit proposal
is "by far [a] better version" than the plan offered by House
Republicans, a New York Times editorial states (New York Times, 6/22).
Under the Senate Democrats' plan, which add a drug benefit directly to
Medicare and would cost between $400 billion and $500 billion over 10
years, beneficiaries would pay a $25 monthly premium with no deductible,
a $10 copayment for generic drugs and a $40 copayment for brand- name
drugs, and Medicare would cover their annual prescription drug costs that
exceed $4,000. The plan also calls for reduced premiums and copayments
for low-income beneficiaries (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 6/18).
The Times notes that under the House Republicans' version, which relies
on private insurance companies to offer prescription drug policies, "it's
unclear that enough insurance companies would be willing to participate
and provide the economies that come from competition." The Senate
version, which is "clearly more generous to beneficiaries," will have
trouble passing the "chamber's procedural obstacles," the Times predicts.
Still, the editorial concludes, "[I]f the public were given a choice
between a good prescription drug plan for the elderly and less taxes for
the country's richest citizens, there's little doubt which they would
choose. But the upcoming debate is time for another reminder" (New York
Times, 6/22).
St. Petersburg Times: The House Republicans' proposal would be a "risky
experiment, at best," according to the editorial, offering "a confusing
mishmash of coverages and based on a concept of drug-only insurance that
doesn't exist in the real world." In addition, there is no indication
that "any [insurance] company is willing to take on [the] financial risk"
associated with the Republican plan that provides benefits through
private insurers. The editorial concludes, "It could turn out to be more
of a political hoax than a workable program" (St. Petersburg Times,
6/21).
Washington Times: Although it is "true that drug spending has been
increasing, ... this is not because drug companies are gouging granny,"
columnist Rich Lowry says in a Washington Times opinion piece. He
concedes that it is "silly" that Medicare does not have a prescription
drug benefit, but adds the problem is that Medicare, "as currently
constituted, is broken." Lowry says, "Simply adding a drug benefit to a
unreformed Medicare -- as Democrats would in their proposal -- will
therefore inevitably mean drug price controls. This will be a disaster."
He concludes, "So, the health of everyone might suffer because the
Democrats want to pander to the elderly. Would that someone in
Washington have the courage to say to comfortable seniors, 'Granny, pay
for your own damn drugs'" (Lowry, Washington Times, 6/25).
---------------------------
Daily Health Policy report
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/healthpolicyreport
-- Kaisernetwork.org, is a free service of the Kaiser Family Foundation
[log in to unmask]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
