Analysts: Seniors� drug costs to rise

Analysts: Seniors� drug costs to rise

Under Medicare bill, prescription premiums, deductibles go up


ASSOCIATED PRESS

msnbc.com...

THE # YOU SAY?

Sell all your oil stocks and invest in Pharmacuticals.

Uhhh...bein's they didn't have any coverage prior to this...

THEY'RE STILLING COMING OUT BETTER EVEN AT THE HIGHEST DEDUCTIBLE!!!

Take your twisted story some place else. Do you realize the cost per month that senior citizens face to try to get medicine? THAT WAS NOT COVERED ON MEDICARE???!!!

Go ask a senior citizen how they feel about the fact that 4 years from now they will have a $465 deductible...

then get back with me...ok?

Do you realize that %25 of all Americans have no health coverage.

When did a certain minority of the population become deserving of demanding all the services?

This is what the republicans do! Can't you see what I've been telling you? They don't care about old people. They're just "antiques." They HATE Americans.

I don't understand. I try...til my mind breaks. These people will rob from us, rob from the elderly, out our secret defenders of this country (CIA), drink champagne as our soldiers die---and not even bother to go to one funeral, steal from the verterans, destroy millions of jobs and not create one, and Americans LOVE thse people!

Well, I will never serve for the princes of darkness--ever.

[Edited on 25-11-2003 by Colonel]

THis is what LIBERALS DO! They ONLY care about oral sex in the offices of POWER (you can't deny historical FACT) and GETTING VOTES to stay in POWER!

God KNOWS they can't run a REAL busines and make money on their own! They LOVE Americans who are STUPID/LAZY enough to be satisfied with the handout OF $1123.00 A MONTH FOR THEIR vote!!!!

WHAT A cheap PRICE IS ALL i GOT TO Say....

P...
m...

Originally posted by Springer
THis is what LIBERALS DO! They ONLY care about oral sex in the offices of POWER (you can't deny historical FACT) and GETTING VOTES to stay in POWER!

God KNOWS they can't run a REAL busines and make money on their own! They LOVE Americans who are STUPID/LAZY enough to be satisfied with the handout OF $1123.00 A MONTH FOR THEIR vote!!!!

WHAT A cheap PRICE IS ALL i GOT TO Say....

P...
m...

See what I'm saying? Its FUNNY to the repugnant. When the elderly have to choose between their perscription drugs and FOOD, its funny to them. ANd its not like they can runto Canada to get it cheaper b/c THAT'S ILLEGAL NOW---but they talk of free trade.

What if to was YOUR mother, father, or grandmother, would it be funny then? Gotta love those Christian repugnants...

[Edited on 25-11-2003 by Colonel]

I don't know too much about the American Health System, only that it is based on insurance and the ability to pay but I remember when I was working in America a girl I was with from the U.K needed a filling and she went to the dentist and was charged $850. It seemed pretty unbelievable to us. I can only imagine what the poor go through to get some basic treatment.
The NHS might be in a bit of a state but I'd take it any day over that.

Originally posted by kegs
I don't know too much about the American Health System, only that it is based on insurance and the ability to pay but I remember when I was working in America a girl I was with from the U.K needed a filling and she went to the dentist and was charged $850. It seemed pretty unbelievable to us. I can only imagine what the poor go through to get some basic treatment.
The NHS might be in a bit of a state but I'd take it any day over that.

America has the WORST health care system on the planet for a first world country. That $850 seems about right.

I can't say it better than Valhall. There wasn't a drug plan, soon there will be. They paid a lot, they will soon pay less. Since seniors might now get drugs they might have otherwise not have been able to afford, this may actually drive down medicare costs as the drugs will be cheaper than surgery and what not.

My fear is it may just become another bloated government entitlement program without a future, like social security.


Colonel is fond of Cuba's healthcare system, aint ya?

I've known people that have had babies in Canada. you must bring your own diapers and other assorted stuff cause the hospital won't provide any of that. In a weird sort of way Americans subsidize their medicine. Since we don't have the prices fixed, like in Canada, we shoulder the cost of drugs.

And, look at the 'private' hospitals in Europe. Socialized medicine is soo wonderful yet there is a need for private health care?

Originally posted by Bob88
I can't say it better than Valhall. There wasn't a drug plan, soon there will be. They paid a lot, they will soon pay less. Since seniors might now get drugs they might have otherwise not have been able to afford, this may actually drive down medicare costs as the drugs will be cheaper than surgery and what not.

This is more of the crap I'm talking about. The article is RIGHT THERE IN THE LINK DETAILING HOW COSTS WOULD RISE and they proceed to LIE AND MAKE STUFF UP!

It just boggles my mind daily.

And if they were ssssoooo concerned about cheaper drugs for the elderly, why did they outlaw the elderly from obtaining those same drugs in Canada at a cheaper rate in the same bill?

Can ya smell the lie?

[Edited on 25-11-2003 by Colonel]

The only ones who take private health care in Britain are the rich. The National Health Service in Britain was working fine until, you guessed it, 18 years of conservative rule during which they jumped right into bed with America�s new predatory form of capitalism, ripped up every social idea that made our country what it was, the health service, the post office, the railways etc (believe it or not Britain used to be a Socialist minded country)
And deliberately #ed up everything that had ever needed public funding so it could never go back there again. (With the line: �oh well now it�s #ed we�ll need to get in a private company to fix it now, won�t we?�)

Thanks for that by the way. J/k
(kinda)

They didn't have prescription drug benefit, now they will. And, it's totally ignorant to think the people are going to save money buy buying drugs in Canada. Yeah, maybe in the short term some people will cut costs. But, those drugs prices will go up and/or they will go up here to recover what they are losing out on. Or, should we ruin the drug companies and make them sell for cheaper and lose out on any innovation which is fueled by their profits.

Maybe if the frockin lawyers would quit it with their lawsuits that keep doctors from being able to afford insurance, thus running them out of business, we might be able to turn the health care system around.

Kegs, nothing personal, but socialism was debunked long ago. Look at France, with their socialism, and what their long terms economic forecasts are going to look like. In 2050 France could very well be a third world economy. You just can�t keep giving handouts after handouts and expect to work 30 hours a week with all that vacation time, especially with the economic threats such as China and the US. I think Europe really needs to overhaul their hand outs, aka socialism.

Bob, no offence either, but that�s bollocks. All that the tourists know about how Britain was and what they produced in the 20th century was in a socialist framework. The fastest growing political party in the U.K is the Scottish Socialist Party which has went from nothing to eight (Around eight, might be wrong on the number) seats in the Scottish parliament in nine years. Our current government is meant to be Socialist. The French created the most sophisticated transport system and much else under socialism for starters.

You just can�t keep giving handouts after handouts and expect to work 30 hours a week with all that vacation time,

That's the real point with economic systems isn't it?
Is your system made for the people or for the profit?
France's is clearly far more for the people than America�s, or even currently Britains.

People are worked to the bone, they have no time for their families, they work in jobs they hate for # pay for crazy hours for people who don�t care. They don�t want to go home early for fear of looking weak and being sacked or losing a promotion. Meanwhile their spouse and family suffer. There was a study out this week that said Britons work �20 billion of unpaid overtime every week, and we have the longest working hours in Europe. It is things like this that lead on to the breakdown of the family and society., but of course we should keep working our fingers to the bone so our CEO can afford a new yacht and pension package, and the constant scaremongering that without it our economy will collapse.
Why is it that my grandfather earned 30% more (by inflation) than I do for the same job? Why is it that they say we need to work harder so that our collective work leads to a more productive society when the opposite is always proved true? Why is it that they say technology and our greater workforce would lead us all to easier lives when we are now working more than ever and they�ve just raised the retirement age to 70?

Someone is fooling someone. And I know who.

As for being a third world economy in 50 years, Christ knows where you got that from seeing as they�re the second biggest economy in Europe but America could be one in 5.

Why do you think France, like many other European countries, import so many foreign works? They must do so in order to have more workers pay into these lavish retirement plans. Look at the protests over proposed cuts in those plans. You just can't keep that kind of stuff up for long. In most of Europe there is small economic growth, high unemployment, and high taxes, huge budget deficits. You can not grow an economy under those circumstances, kegs. Spare me the ills of society. You think it's bad now? Just wait another 20-30 years. France and Germany will have poor economies, replaced with India, China, Brazil and others.

**Colonel**

You're pissin' up a rope here. Let's step through the logic. And, yes, I can speak with first-hand knowledge because my parents are 80 and 76 and have been on medicare for SEVERAL years now.

They DID NOT HAVE A PRESCRIPTION PLAN. The only thing that has saved my parents here recently (other than the money I give them) is that dad started getting his prescription supplemented through the VA. My parents drug bill (and they are relatively healthy mind you) runs in the HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS **PER MONTH**.

Now they will have a prescription drug plan THAT IS OPTIONAL...they don't have participate...HELLO! Even if the premiums are at their highest, and the deductible at it's highest...SENIORS LIKE MY PARENTS WILL COME OUT AHEAD. And if they don't feel they are going to come out ahead...THEY CAN OPT OUT.

Liberal bull#, colonel. I want to hear you justify why the Dam-ocrats were fighting so hard to keep any assistance in this area from the Senior citizens...

hmm? Sorry you lost, but eat your sour grapes some where else.

I've looked over both sides, and see too many Trojan Horses hiding in the bill. After all, the Pharma/Insurance big dogs did not throw a $1M a table fund raiser for the GOP prior to the midtterm elections for nothing....here's the pay back.
It contains several Trojan horse provisions that are clearly intended to undermine Medicare over time � it will allow private insurers to cherry-pick healthy clients in selected cities, and it will heavily subsidize private plans competing with traditional Medicare. Meanwhile, the bill prohibits Medicare from using its bargaining power to cut drug prices; drug company stocks have soared since the bill's details became public.

Here's a letter I was able to find....for the second time...seems the original I had bookmarked is in 404 land.....happens pretty frequently with the good info, you know? Wonder why?


Dear Member of Congress:

We are writing as members of the Consortium for Citizens
with Disabilities (CCD), a Washington-based coalition of
national disability organizations that advocates on behalf
of the 54 million people with disabilities and chronic
conditions in the United States. After careful
deliberation of the publicly available information on the
Medicare conference report, we are very disappointed that
the conference committee has produced a bill that we simply
cannot support.

This Congress, in our view, has missed an historic
opportunity to finally provide prescription drug coverage
to millions of senior citizens and people with disabilities
who receive their health care through either the Medicare
program alone or in coordination with the Medicaid program.
We strongly support the creation of a prescription drug
benefit that meets the needs of Medicare beneficiaries and
"dual eligibles." Regrettably, Congress has chosen to
couple a marginal drug benefit with a series of fundamental
structural changes to the program that will undoubtedly
have a severe negative impact on people with disabilities.

Over 13 million Medicare beneficiaries have a disability or
chronic health condition. The poorest and most vulnerable
are dual eligibles, who (more than other Medicare
beneficiaries) rely extensively on prescription drug
coverage in addition to services and devices to meet their
basic health care needs. Our inability to support this
bill stems from our overall concern that over the next
decade, it shifts resources from a successful government
program to the private, for-profit sector. This bill will
also shift resources away from people requiring complex or
frequent care, such as people with disabilities and chronic
conditions, to a relatively healthy Medicare population.

Many provisions in the bill segment the Medicare risk pool
in a manner that will result in higher costs and
compromised care for people with disabilities and chronic
conditions. Taken together, a number of provisions in this
bill serve to undermine the entitlement to Medicare that
has served this country so well for the past four decades.

Specifically, the CCD has the following concerns that
impact people with disabilities and chronic conditions:

* The Medicare Drug Benefit does not provide adequate
coverage for people with disabilities. The benefit, as a
whole, is substantially less generous than all other
Medicare benefits and the vast majority of private and
government-sponsored plans that cover prescription
drugs. Additionally, the bill has a considerable "gap" in
coverage starting at $2,200 in annual drug costs until an
individual has spent $3,600 in out-of-pocket drug
expenses.

* Drug Formularies: Too few consumer protections are
provided to ensure that people will have access to all
medically necessary medications. Retreating from the
standards established in the Medicaid statute for
formularies will be harmful for people with serious and
chronic health conditions and disabilities.

* Medicaid "Wrap": Millions of "dual eligibles" with
disabilities and chronic health conditions, who now depend
on Medicaid to pay for the prescription drugs they need to
maintain their basic health, will lose access to
medications. By permitting the development of Medicare
formularies that will restrict access to needed drugs and
prohibiting Medicaid from serving as a secondary payer for
medications not on the formulary, the agreement could force
people with disabilities (e.g. epilepsy or mental illness)
to forego medications they need leading to less effective
or no treatment. This could result in injury or
debilitating side effects which require hospitalization or
other costly medical interventions.

* Health Savings Accounts, also known as Medical Savings
Accounts (MSAs), would undermine the health care system and
be especially harmful to people with disabilities and
others who rely on insurance to finance a high level of
services. Health Savings Accounts provide the incentive
to healthier and higher income people to leave the
traditional insurance market. This could de-pool the
current insurance system that seeks to spread the
unpredictable risks for financing care for a relatively
small number of people with disabilities and chronic
conditions across society. Both people with disabilities
and non-disabled people lose by weakening the insurance
system.

* Medicare Competitive Bidding for Durable Medical
Equipment will cause a long-term reduction in quality and
access to high quality assistive devices and services for
people with disabilities. In addition, competitive bidding
limits beneficiary choice of provider.

* Premium Support Demonstration: The prospect of Medicare
fee-for-service competing directly with managed care health
plans poses too many risks for private plans to "cherry
pick" healthier beneficiaries and increase costs for people
with disabilities who remain in Medicare fee-for-service.

* Means Testing the Part B Premium undermines the basic
premise of Medicare as an insurance program, causing a
disproportionate share of wealthier (and healthier)
beneficiaries to leave the program over time, thereby
diluting the risk pool further and raising costs for people
with disabilities.
* Cost Containment: Requiring Congressional intervention
if general revenue contributions exceed 45% of program
spending is an unprecedented tactic designed to strengthen
the hand of those in the future who seek to dilute the
entitlement nature of the program and favor a premium
support model.

* The Asset Test in the conference report could block
almost four million Medicare beneficiaries with incomes of
less than 135% of poverty from getting help with their
prescription drug premiums, deductibles, and co-payments.
This test is unnecessary and comes at a cost of imposing
significant administrative burdens on states to implement
such a test. It would also require state officials to ask
intrusive questions about the possessions of Medicare
beneficiaries and make complex decisions about the value of
an individual's possessions. It is unlikely that this test
would be implemented evenly or fairly across states.

As you consider how you will vote on this important
conference report, thank you for consideration of our views
and concerns.

Sincerely,

Advancing Independence
American Network of Community Options and Resources
American Association of People with Disabilities
American Association on Mental Retardation
American Association on Health and Disability
Association of Academic Physiatrists
Association of Tech Act Projects
Association of University Centers on Disabilities
Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
Brain Injury Association of America
Council of Parent Attorney and Advocates
Disability Service Providers of America
Easter Seals
Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Association
Epilepsy Foundation
Family Voices
Federation of Families for Children's Mental Health
National Association of Councils on Developmental
Disabilities
National Association of Disability Representatives
National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems
National Association of Rehabilitation Research and
Training Centers
National Mental Health Association
National Organization of Social Security Claimants'
Representatives
National Association of Social Workers
National Respite Coalition
NISH
Paralyzed Veterans of America
The Arc of the United States
United Cerebral Palsy
World Institute on Disability



Believe me, I am pro business. I just have trouble with the way things are privatized and how the 'devil in the details' slips by on a sound byte with these folks.

...The folks who put out Consumer Reports:

Proposed Drug Benefit Means Consumers Could Pay More
Out-of-Pocket; Threatens Medicare�s Viablity
In-depth Analysis Shows Only Enough Set Aside to Cover 22% of Anticipated Costs

(Washington, D.C.) � An indepth analysis performed by Consumers Union of the proposed Medicare prescription drug benefit reveals a plan that not only falls embarrassingly short of giving seniors a real drug benefit, it likely will threaten Medicare�s viability.

The analysis of the conference committee proposal found:

∙ The funds set aside for this �benefit� -- $400 billion over 10 years -- covers just 22 percent of the anticipated drug costs, leaving consumers to foot the rest of the bill.
Medicare is being moved down the road to privatization by requiring competition between private health plans and Medicare in up to six metro areas without requiring private plans to demonstrate cost savings that result from efficiency. Rather, the proposal provides additional subsidies to these private plans and allows them to benefit financially by cherry-picking the healthiest members.

∙ Private Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) get to pick what drugs are covered under the plan, with no transparency, methodology or public accountability. This means patients who are sensitive to the choice of drug will be out of luck if their needed drug is not on the plan. It also means drug coverage will vary between different parts of the country.

∙ And most important, a provision that actually prohibits the government from negotiating deep prescription drug discounts for consumers, meaning the average Medicare beneficiary will pay more out-of-pocket for drugs in 2007 when the benefit begins, then what they currently pay now without the �benefit.� Consider this: the average Medicare recipient in 2003 who spends $2,318 a year for drugs without prescription drug coverage will pay $2,911 out-of-pocket in four years under the plan if drug costs continue their historical increase.

www.consumersunion.org...

The addition of a drug benefit was the key to several plans under review.......that this one was chosen, which is a privitization pre step, should give everyone a moment to pause.

Bout Time comin' in with the heavy ammo! Hell, 'bout time!

The kids are losing out.....many are "Left Behind".
America has succeeded in reducing poverty among the elderly, and that�s a great achievement. But we have not reduced child poverty. In fact, the poverty rate among America's children has risen from 15 percent in 1970 to around 18 percent today�giving America the highest rate of childhood poverty among all advanced countries.

..........and the funding for the "No Child Left Behind" hubris? Where? You see it anyplace?
Me neither

While this bill may help people, more than if they had nothing, I feel like it is just a means of quieting down the outcry for prescription coverage. It is a facade which ignores the real situation of the people who need help.

I worked in a pharmacy for 6 years and it used to break my heart to see these 80 year old people coming in to spend upwards of $500 a month, some of them spend over $1000 a month, just to pay for prescriptions so they could live. I have seen people choose between buying food or their prescriptions. Usually, the prescriptions won.
Pharmaceutical companies are the reason that alternative treatments for diseases and health problems in general are suppressed or discredited. They are slaves to money and are corrupt (as is usually the case when money is the sole motivation).