Uncle Damon or Uncle Sam?

Maybe a better title would be: "Would you rather have STRS be the watchdog for your healthcare services or would you rather have traditional Medicare be the watchdog for your healthcare services?" If Congress takes the "monetary incentive" out of the Medicare Advantage program, STRS will be left "holding the bag"....and so will you! Who do you think the unscrupulous hospitals and medical service providers will fear the most...Uncle Damon or Uncle Sam? My bet is with Uncle Sam. I'll take federal oversight any day! John

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Medicare Advantage a boondoggle

August 1, 2007
WILL PARRY AND PAT SCOTT
GUEST COLUMNIST

When President Bush tried to privatize Social Security in 2005, we were proud that Washington Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell and others in our congressional delegation stood with the American people in overwhelmingly rejecting a policy that put the financial interest of Wall Street over the people's interest on Main Street.

Now Medicare is headed down a similar path, and Congress again needs to take a stand to ensure that our public health care dollars go toward people's health care, not into health industry CEOs' wallets.

Like all privatization schemes, so-called Medicare Advantage was developed under the false promise that private insurers could provide the same services as Medicare at lower cost. The reverse has been true. Costs have gone up, and, in many cases, available services have disappeared.

According to an analysis by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, private Medicare Advantage plans cost taxpayers an average of 12 percent more than normal Medicare. In Washington, the average overpayment is 21.5 percent.

That overpayment isn't surprising -- it's exactly the kind of expensive waste that comes from funneling valuable public resources into the pockets of insurance industry CEOs -- but its scale is a cause for serious concern. The CBO report estimated that overpayments will total $54 billion over five years, and $160 billion over the next decade.

And the extra cost doesn't even necessarily mean extra benefits. The higher prices in the private plans come with promises of improved flexibility and benefits, but some beneficiaries discover after signing up that they're actually getting less than traditional Medicare offers.

Everyone agrees that Medicare Advantage is more boondoggle than benefit.

Constituency groups that advocate for the rights of Medicare beneficiaries, including the Medicare Rights Center, the Alliance for Retired Americans, the Retired Public Employees Council of Washington, Washington CAN! and AARP, have all called for leveling payments between traditional Medicare and the Medicare Advantage program, ensuring that private plans are no longer paid billions more than the cost of covering the same beneficiaries under traditional Medicare.

An American Medical Association statement to Congress on Medicare Advantage's "Private Fee-For-Service" plans noted that "it is difficult to detect any meaningful benefits either to patients or to rural communities derived from these enormous government subsidies. In fact, there is mounting evidence that PFFS plans are luring their enrollees with false promises, skimping on benefits and reimbursement rates, and using their government subsidies primarily to increase profits for their shareholders."

It's not too late to change course, and reversing the privatization of Medicare would free up precious public resources to expand access to health care for kids and seniors.

Congress is now considering significant increases in funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which could go a long way in covering most of the 9 million uninsured children in this country. In addition, Congress is considering improving and expanding Medicare Savings Programs -- programs that help low-income Medicare beneficiaries pay their Medicare premiums and cost sharing.

It's a question of priorities: subsidies for insurance companies or health care for kids and seniors.