Privatization of Medicare: Thoughts?

In a NYT article today:
"WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Tuesday will unveil a proposed budget for 2016 that partly privatizes Medicare..."

What are the opinions out there as to how that would have an effect on Licensed, Independent Medicare Agents such as myself?

PLEASE KEEP YOUR REPLIES NON-PARTISAN AND REMEMBER THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.

Thanks,
Robin
 
Some would argue otherwise, but both Part D and MA plans are privatized. Instead of the Paul Ryan voucher, seniors have an option of original Medicare or MA.

The end result is the same.

Original Medicare is too entrenched to be dramatically changed. Just won't happen, at least not anytime soon. People actually appreciate the "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor" approach.

Most folks going on Medicare for the first time have had group coverage through an employer. Every few years the plans change and everyone grumbles.

Original Medicare changes too but not as dramatically.

If all they have are variations of MA plans (which most really don't understand) it won't go over.
 
Thanks Somarco/Guru/ Georgia Medicare Plans

I like what you had to say and agree. This just came across my desk (email inbox actually). As a related subject matter regarding the health and wellbeing of Medicare, I found it to be a positive and interesting article:

"House-Senate lawmakers unveil bipartisan “doc fix” bill"

By William Douglas McClatchy Washington Bureau March 19, 2015

House and Senate leaders Thursday unveiled a bipartisan bill to end recurring pay cuts that doctors face under Medicare.

With participating physicians facing a 21 percent pay cut on April 1, lawmakers released a bill to replace Medicare’s "Sustainable Growth Rate" formula and end the so-called "doc fix" - temporary patches that Congress has approved 17 times to prevent slashing pay to doctors.

The language in the bill is similar to one introduced last year: It would repeal the SGR while instituting an 0.5 percent payment increases for five years while Medicare transitions doctors to a new system that emphasizes quality care over volume of care.

The bill also requires doctors to receive at least 25 percent of their Medicare revenue through the so-called Alternative Payment Models by 2019-2020.

"Finally, after unparalleled progress in recent years, both sides of the aisle have begun to understand that the long-term solvency of our Medicare system depends on taking this fight head-on together," said Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas.

The bill has bipartisan support but - with the April 1 deadline looming - it still has some significant hurdles to overcome. The measure is expected to cost more than $200 billion over 10 years. But lawmakers thus far have only figured out how to pay for $70 billion, which has raised concerns among conservative Republicans.

Senate Democrats are concerned about a provision in the bill that extends the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for two years. CHIP is set to expire in September and Senate Democrats want it extended for four years.

"Introduction of this policy appears to be more about pushing an overall package I haven’t seen, rather than about the physician payment reforms my colleagues and I worked so hard to develop," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. "A bill of this magnitude, on such a tight deadline, requires significant give and take to a balanced agreement that can pass both chambers."

Wyden wasn’t among the House and Senate committee chairs and ranking Democrats who signed onto the bill. But House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., were upbeat about the bill’s prospects Thursday.

"I'm not going to say we've got it all resolved yet, but I'm optimistic that we will get it resolved," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters Thursday.

Pelosi said revamping the physician payment system is "something that has to happen."

"I think we’re on a path where everybody understands the seriousness of…addressing the SGR, the so-called doc-fix, so that seniors can have access to their doctors under Medicare," she said. "That’s important and we understand that has to happen."

Email: [email protected]; Twitter: @williamgdouglas

Read more here: wwwmcclatchydccom/2015/03/19/260393/house-senate-lawmakers-unveil.html#storylink=cpy]House-Senate lawmakers unveil bipartisan “doc fix” bill | Washington Watch | McClatchy DC[/url]
 
It has bi-partisan support but it is a proposal drafted by people, 90% of whom have never had a real job, had to buy their own health insurance and have never signed a payroll check.

They have no clue what it is like for retirees, 70% of whom are living on SS checks and the kindness of families, just to get by.

This proposal is DOA but if it does pass they will have to repeal it and start over again in a year.
 
In a NYT article today:
"WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Tuesday will unveil a proposed budget for 2016 that partly privatizes Medicare..."

What are the opinions out there as to how that would have an effect on Licensed, Independent Medicare Agents such as myself?

PLEASE KEEP YOUR REPLIES NON-PARTISAN AND REMEMBER THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.

Thanks,
Robin

The MMA of 2003 did exacly that for the part D and the enhancement of part C.
Took a couple of years of beauracracy inorder to launch after passage but that got us where we are now.

With part C and D being provided by private companies. They sold a bill of goods to congress that private companies could manage the system better than medicare and provide more services.

Turns out they can't. Costs taxpayers about 15% more for an MA plan than for original medicare.

I guess congress forgot to account the companies making a profit?
 
In a NYT article today:
"WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Tuesday will unveil a proposed budget for 2016 that partly privatizes Medicare..."

What are the opinions out there as to how that would have an effect on Licensed, Independent Medicare Agents such as myself?

PLEASE KEEP YOUR REPLIES NON-PARTISAN AND REMEMBER THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.

Thanks,
Robin

Its called Medicare Advantage.:1confused:
 
The "Doc Fix" in my opinion is very important. Even in a densely populated area as NYC and the other 4 Boroughs, the doctor networks have been shrinking to such a degree that it affects the popularity of the MAPD plans. If the MDs get paid more, the networks may actually expand (wishful thinking perhaps).
 
"The Senate must act ... to stop a looming 21% cut in Medicare reimbursements that will force reductions in access to health care for America's seniors, military personnel and their families," said Robert Wah, a doctor and president of the group . "The time is now to finally lay this destructive issue to rest and act immediately to build a stable and sustainable Medicare program that our nation's patients and physicians need and deserve."

But another group, the Physicians for a National Health Care Program, said the bill would undermine traditional Medicare coverage and move toward privatization of the program. The group's leaders said the bill would increase burdensome paperwork for doctors, discouraging them from taking Medicare patients. They said it also would undermine popular support for Medicare by increasing premiums for higher-income senior citizens.

"In the fervor to finally rid us of the flawed ... model of setting Medicare payment rates, Congress is about to pass legislation that includes ill-advised, misguided and detrimental policies that could cause irreparable harm to our traditional Medicare program," said Don McCanne, a doctor and senior health policy fellow for the non-profit group.

House passes bipartisan 'doc fix' Medicare bill

Still has to pass the Senate.

My personal opinion is this "fix" will be unacceptable to those who actually rely on Medicare.
 
The "Doc Fix" in my opinion is very important. Even in a densely populated area as NYC and the other 4 Boroughs, the doctor networks have been shrinking to such a degree that it affects the popularity of the MAPD plans. If the MDs get paid more, the networks may actually expand (wishful thinking perhaps).

And if/when the physicians are paid more (i.e. - MAPD carriers having to reimburse more) who do you think will actually pay that? The consumer, in the form of higher premiums, copays, etc. And let's not forget the taxpayers as well.
 
Back
Top