GAO: Private Medicare Plans a Bad Deal for Seniors

[Omaha Steve]

http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/02/28/gao-private-medicare-plans-a-bad-deal-for-seniors/

by James Parks, Feb 28, 2008

Supporters of the Bush administration’s Medicare reform have touted private plans as being a big bargain for seniors. But the truth is that the private plans, known as Medicare Advantage, cost seniors more, congressional investigators say.

The New York Times reports today that a study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found many people in private Medicare plans face higher costs for home health care, nursing homes and some hospital stays than the traditional government-run Medicare program. In fact, the report shows the government will spend an estimated $54 billion in extra costs for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries from 2009 through 2012.

About one in five of the 44 million Medicare beneficiaries—9 million people—are in the private Medicare Advantage plans.

Edward Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, says the 3.5 million-member retiree organization has heard “countless stories from seniors about how their Medicare Advantage programs have ultimately cost them more or failed them in their time of need.”

It has already been documented that Medicare Advantage plans cost taxpayers 12 percent more than traditional Medicare and that all Medicare beneficiaries have had to foot the bill, paying an additional $2 on top of their already rising premiums to subsidize these private insurance companies.

Even though private insurers claim they protect Medicare beneficiaries against high out-of-pocket costs by setting annual limits, the GAO found thousands of Medicare Advantage recipients were in plans that are projecting higher costs for home health services and inpatient services. On top of those increases, many of the annual cost limits don’t include some cancer drugs, some mental health services and home health care expenses.

FULL story at link.

[CountAllVotes]

1. Medicare only pays for certain things even w/supplemental coverage

and the rest of what it pays for that is left the supplemental plans pay for. Sometimes if you have a real expensive plan (like abt. $5,000.00 a year per person) you might have a few extra perks (like drug coverage and a few other little things).

A good example would be this: Medicare gets billed for $125.00 by the doctor. They pay 80% of the allowed amount which is likely abt. $45.00 or so. The remaining ~$15.00 is paid by the supplemental plan that costs $5,000.00 a year for. Tell me why is this a great deal other than the fact that you have more of the same type of coverage, nothing extra.

Frankly, I believe that Medicare sucks. I strongly prefer the plan I had before Medicare that would cover simple yet critical things like an annual exam/physical. They do not cover this type of preventive care. This is where many "fall through the crack". They don't go to the doctor, only if sick, so Medicare will most certainly pay for it. By this time, said person is in need of a triple bypass, thus too late for "preventative measures". And how much will that surgery cost that could have perhaps been prevented? :dunce:

The plans don't work they say and/or aren't good enough? I'm with them!!

:kick:

[madfloridian]

2. I think he is referring to the private plans that Bush is pushing.

The ones overwhelming mailboxes of seniors. This is the privatization of Medicare. If everyone would just stand on the traditional plans more money would be there.

Our Democrats need to really speak out and stay on the traditional plan.

[eridani]

3. There would be more money available for regular Medicare--

--if the privateers weren't ripping the system off.

[CountAllVotes]

4. this is a well known insurance company I am dealing with

and the cost for two persons (supplemental coverage) is over $8,000.00 a year and is very similar to what * is pushing for everyone (but who can afford this?). The Medicare cost X2 is also part of the cost in addition to the $8,000.00+, so another $2,500.00 right there (now we are up to over $10,000+ a year for 2 persons).

Of the two persons on this "plan", one rarely uses it. I use the plan and the supplemental and have no co-pay. However, I'd gladly do a co-pay if they had coverage for things outside of Medicare, like an annual exam for one!

I find it most frustrating. I have a couple of other choices besides this plan which are poor at best so I keep this one.

I am quite fortunate (unlike most persons) in that my union negotiates the contract every year and gets a fairly good deal for us. However, I will add, that at times, what the union was able to negotiate ended up costing me $4,000.00 a year to be paid in quarterly payments and forfeiting my entire pension as well to keep the coverage.

Am I satisfied with Medicare?

The answer is no and that is because doctors that are in high demand (aka, doctors that know what they are doing!) rarely if ever take Medicare because they might receive only a small piece of the payment they charge if they take Medicare which is highly unlikely anyway.

I get those flyers in the mail too and also I have the AARP after me seemingly every 2 weeks. I don't support the AARP either. I do support the ACLU however and I still contribute to my union still even though I am a retired annuitant.

Why can't we just have coverage that does in fact cover people when they are sick rather than this half-baked system called "Medicare" which is slowly but surely being chipped away it, covering less and costing more with every year that passes? It is not free that is for sure and every time I hear it referred to as being an "entitlement program" or being on the "gravy train" I get angry. I did not want to enroll in Medicare. However, I had no choice; if eligible I had to enroll otherwise my health coverage would have been canceled.

It is quite obvious who is making money on this scam. It is the insurance companies that is who!

:dem: