November 26, 2006
DID THEY NOT REALIZE THIS BEFORE THE ELECTION?:
Success of Drug Plan Challenges Democrats: Medicare Benefit's Cost Beat Estimates (Lori Montgomery and Christopher Lee, 11/26/06, Washington Post)
Drug-company lobbyists, Bush administration officials and many congressional Republicans are preparing to block any effort to increase federal control over drug prices, saying the Medicare benefit is working well. They contend that instead of saving money, government negotiations could raise drug prices for all consumers while limiting choices for people on Medicare."This is going to be much more of a morass than people think," said Marilyn Moon, director of the health program at the American Institutes for Research and a former trustee of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Negotiating drug prices is "a feel-good kind of answer, but it's not one that is easy to imagine how you put into practice."
The Medicare drug benefit, one of the Bush administration's signature domestic programs, was created in 2003 and took effect in January. It has enrolled 22.5 million seniors, some of whom had no previous drug coverage.
Polls indicate that more than 80 percent of enrollees are satisfied, even though nearly half chose plans with no coverage in the doughnut hole, a gap that opens when a senior's drug costs reach $2,250 and closes when out-of-pocket expenses reach $3,600. By the latest estimates, 3 million to 4 million seniors will hit the doughnut hole this year and pay full price for drugs while also paying drug-plan premiums.
The cost of the program has been lower than expected, about $26 billion in 2006, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The cost was projected to rise to $45 billion next year, but Medicare has received new bids indicating that its average per-person subsidy could drop by 15 percent in 2007, to $79.90 a month.
Urban Institute President Robert D. Reischauer, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, called that a remarkable record for a new federal program.
Initially, he said, people were worried no private plans would participate. "Then too many plans came forward," Reischauer said. "Then people said it's going to cost a fortune. And the price came in lower than anybody thought. Then people like me said they're low-balling the prices the first year and they'll jack up the rates down the line. And, lo and behold, the prices fell again. And the reaction was, 'We've got to have the government negotiate lower prices.' At some point you have to ask: What are we looking for here?"
There are going to be plenty of "challenges" when you win an election based on completely undoing the most successful presidency since Coolidge's. Posted by Orrin Judd at November 26, 2006 10:47 AM
Whe I first heard of Dubya some 7-8 years ago, my first thought was "Who is this guy, and why in heck should a conservative like me vote for him?"
I'm still puzzled by him, but now agree that he is all-in-all pretty darned conservative. Not in his policies per-se but in the overall effect of the policies that he pushes. He drives me crazy because I'd really like to hear Phil Gramm's words come from his mouth--but Gramm didn't and couldn't get elected.
Thankfully, I have discovered Sun-Tzu and have come to realize that the object of a fight is not to destroy your opponent but rather is to advance your position. Something that I hope that the Kos-kids, et. al., will never learn.
Posted by: ray at November 26, 2006 11:09 AMWhat OJ, are you crazy? Tell him Bruno! The British have "Gunpowder Treason"; we have Miers and the port deal! And Immigrants!.........
Posted by: Robert Mitchell Jr. at November 26, 2006 11:37 AMSomething that I hope that the Kos-kids, et. al., will never learn.
Something the Stupid Party will never learn, either, alas. Worse, they'll give up those advances when they don't look like they are hurting their opponents enough.
But with performances like Rangel's today, I'm beginning to wonder if this might be a case of pre-mature victory. The Dems would be much better off if their dinosaurs had died off (or been hunted to extinction) these last twelve years, to be replaced by new faces without three (or four) decades of their own, personal Dem policies to defend. If they'd lost this year, a purge would have been in order, with the Kos-kiddies leading the charge. Now they are stuck with trying to keep these old codgers on message for at least the rest of the decade. Is it too much to hope that the evidence they learned nothing from their decade in the minority? (And better yet, you've got a bunch of septuagenarians as the public face for the "young, hip, trendy" Progressives favorite's political party. They deserve each other.)
Posted by: Raoul Orega at November 27, 2006 12:21 AM