Healthcare Redux

So after taking some time away from the Great Healthcare Battle, we find ourselves in deeper trouble than we ever imagined. Roland Burris, shunned by many after the Rod Blagojevich nomination (and scandal) to replace President Obama's vacant Senate seat, has joined Dennis Kucinich in his clear support for a public option. Kucinich has been HONEST in describing the goal of a one payer system, a complete overhauled government controlled healthcare reformation.

Meanwhile, the corruption and backdoor deals continue.

First we learned how the Obama administration had garnered the $80 billion support from "Big Pharma" for a promise to NOT lower the Medicare prescription fee schedule. So, the drug companies will provide support because their profit margins are guaranteed.

Then we learned that half a trillion, yes $500 billion, will be cut from Medicare, most specifically, targeting the secondary insurance Medicare Advantage. Was it a surprise to hear AARP supporting the bill that will reduce benefits for their own membership? No surprises here as Medigap is AARP's version of Medicare Advantage so AARP's profits and interests will be protected.

The Max Baucus bill became under attack while denying the taxation and penalties drive the cost savings. The Baucus bill became high profile because it cost LESS than the $1 trillion price tag bouncing around. Soon we learned that the taxes and penalties would take effect IMMEDIATELY while the plan would not start until 2013.

Seven years of coverage on ten years of funds - of course it would be less!

Over the weekend further examination revealed that four states (Rhode Island, Oregon, Michigan and Nevada) have some special benefits carved out for their state budgets. There is a five year umbrella protecting those states from increased costs to their Medicaid programs.

Harry Reid's own state, Nevada, headlines the states that get a free pass on the backs of the other 46 states.

Furthermore, Chuck Shumer added language to protect New York's "Cadillac plans" from rate hikes as well. The current bill taxes these expensive plans to fund the healthcare reform's expanded coverages.

So the ABC's of Healthcare has resulted in the same ole CDE's: corruption, deceit and earmarks.

Earmarks? Yeah, didn't I mention any of those.

Let's continue with Harry Reid who wants to ensure that the Nevada Cancer Institute, a cancer treatment center with no particular national reputation, reaps "a big gain in federal reimbursements as part of the health-care overhaul."

Blanche Lincoln, considered a swing vote in the Senate, proposes Medicare coverages for home infused therapy "championed by a medical entrepreneur in her state."

Read the above comments in its entirety here from the NY TIMES!!!

Hope and Change hasn't reached the Senate. Evidently as the same ole players are pilfering through our money - this time in healthcare reform.

The "Modest" Cuts of Medicare Advantage - just special interests AGAIN

Since 2007, during his campaign, President Obama has been railing AGAINST Medicare Advantage. This Medicare supplement was created for seniors to have better benefits and more choices through private options. Currently, 20%, 1 in 5, of all Medicare recipients have Med. Adv. will incredible positive results¹: patients stay in the hospital 18 days less than Medicare patients, 27% fewer visits to the ER, and a 42% lower re-admission rate to the hospital.

The enhanced benefits focus on reduce out-of-pocket costs, coverages for prescriptions, wellness programs, disease management and care coordination programs. All of the preachings on preventative care, reduction of costs to the individual and quality seem to been missed by the Democrats promoting the current bills.

We don't know what the final bill will entail, but the House Bill (HR 3200) cuts $172 billion and the Max Baucus Senate bill cuts $113 billion from Medicare Advantage.

"If you like your insurance, you can keep it" -- unless you have Medicare Advantage. The NY Times is practicing more irresponsible journalism:

"Although Republican rhetoric has triggered fears that Medicare Advantage enrollees might lose their coverage entirely if private plans drop out of the system, the real effect of the bill would likely be modest on average." while stating the truth elsewhere: "The value of an enrollee's added benefits would shrink by more than half from current levels but would not disappear; they would still be worth about $500 a year in 2019.

Your benefits WILL shrink to half and that's descibed by the NY Times as "MODEST on the average."

Humana launched a major campaign to inform patients and encourage them to speak out against this reform. Medicare responded with an intense investigation² into the claim "millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable" -- the exact thing that the NY Times has confirmed, but described as modest.

So why is AARP so supportive of this reform? Maybe this is because AARP offers Medigap - a competitor to Medicare Advantage(MA).

When you have MA you don't need Medigap. Preventative care, eye exams and hearing aids are all extra benefits through MA so Medigap (i.e. AARP) is losing revenue. Irony compounds irony as the majority of MA recipients are poor blacks and hispanics - the same folks Democrats and the President claim to protect.

Special interest politics...hmmf, are any of us surprised?

I'm not.





1. http://www.ahipresearch.org/pdfs/CAvsNV.pdf

2. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125349705522626821.html

http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2009/10/03/obamacare_cut_the_elderly_and_give_to_aarp

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=1524