- 11,280
Drug coverage had to be a separate plan in TX since 1990..91. Only standardized plans could be sold.
Plans I & J had Rx coverage included on the standardized plans. Plan H may also have had rx coverage too.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Drug coverage had to be a separate plan in TX since 1990..91. Only standardized plans could be sold.
Anyone care to give a bit of a history lesson on what what life was like for seniors before part D came about? (2006)
I wasn't in the business back then. I remember hearing stories about seniors having to go to Canada to get affordable drugs but that's about it.
Was it worth the expense (deficit) to get it implemented?
Are seniors really better off?
Plans I & J had Rx coverage included on the standardized plans. Plan H may also have had rx coverage too.
I used to work for a plan that offered a whopping $700 worth of rx a year while our nearest competitor only offered $500!! Our formulary was crap though. Some high rx users would switch plans after so many months to get the NEW Rx benefit of the new plan. Medical groups were the same, so they weren't switching any providers, just receiving a new set of benefits. Seniors ARE better off, but like someone said before, we ARE paying for it through our taxes since Georgie Boy decided not to fund it.
Forbes has this to say about it, and we know which side of the aisle they're on:
And not only is Medicare Part D saving Americans money, the program has consistently come in under budget. Costs are now 45% below the program’s initial 10-year projection – the program will cost $340 billion less than original estimates. Even more impressive, Medicare Part D is helping to save costs in other ways: the Congressional Budget Office found every one percent increase in prescriptions filled has led to a .20 percent decrease in Medicare spending.
Medicare Part D Continues To Improve Access To Drugs - Forbes
There is no doubt that Part-D is great for the beneficiaries. They can get medication at a copay rather than paying full price.
What I don't see in the article is how much we're still paying for the benefit. The prediction might have been (for example) $2,000 per senior but now we're only paying $1,000. You can spin that as a 50% decrease in cost or a realistic $1,000 expense to taxpayers. And of course, my example is nothing close to reality but just a "for instance."
The other factor is that the most popular medication - Lipitor - went generic about a year ago. I suspect the end of patent protection for a variety of high priced medication has cause some of this decrease.
If you eliminate the cost to taxpayers it's a great program. As is obamacrap if you forget that it's amazingly expensive to those of us who still pay taxes. There are always two sides to the equation.
Rick
Anyone care to give a bit of a history lesson on what what life was like for seniors before part D came about? (2006)
I wasn't in the business back then. I remember hearing stories about seniors having to go to Canada to get affordable drugs but that's about it.
Was it worth the expense (deficit) to get it implemented?
Are seniors really better off?
Back in the late 90's early 2000's I was running Med supp leads. I can't tell you how many times I couldn't sell a supp due to their monthly drug cost of $500 to $800!! Believe me when I tell you I know what cat food looks like. Those folks faced very difficult choices. Pres. Bush knew this thats why he signed it into law.
I would just like to say this, prior to part D there was NO such thing as a $4.00 generic prescription!
----------
Yep, what you said. That is something I always remind people about. It was a good thing that George Bush did.