Monday, October 22, 2012 —
I’m only a couple of years away from being eligible for Medicare, the federal government program to help senior citizens pay their medical bills. So as someone who will soon be using Medicare, I’m keenly interested in its future.
Unfortunately, according to most experts, Medicare’s future is in doubt. The reasons are simple. The number of seniors is growing rapidly, they are living longer and medical care costs have been rising faster than incomes.
The result: government spending for Medicare has been jumping off the charts and soon could comprise an unsustainable chunk of the federal budget. Therefore, all plans to slow the growth of government spending and borrowing have to address Medicare. The big question, of course, is how?
With the selection of Rep. Paul Ryan as a vice-presidential candidate, alternative approaches to restraining the rise in Medicare spending are now front and center in today’s political campaigns.
Ryan has developed a detailed plan for Medicare that is in sharp contrast to ideas outlined by President Obama and his administration.
Both approaches, the Ryan plan and the Obama plan, actually have the same goal of limiting the annual growth in Medicare spending to the growth rate in the total economy plus 0.5 percent. This is an ambitious goal, because it would cut Medicare’s growth rate of the past 20 years in half.
But the plans differ dramatically on how to accomplish this goal. The differences focus on the degree to which economics can or cannot be applied to our health care system.
The Ryan plan ultimately relies on the mainstay of economics, competition, to moderate the growth of Medicare. Following his ideas, Medicare recipients could choose among several private insurance plans for coverage of their medical costs. The government would financially assist seniors in the purchase of their plan.
The amount of subsidy would depend on the cost of the insurance plan chosen by the Medicare recipient. The government would establish a benchmark plan with certain features and reasonable costs. Seniors choosing a more costly plan would receive a smaller subsidy and likely have to pay more out of pocket, while seniors choosing a less costly plan would receive a larger subsidy and maybe even a cash rebate.
Additionally, all financial assistance would be calibrated to the medical condition of the senior, meaning the sickest seniors would receive higher subsidies.
The Ryan plan is placing a big bet that competition, one of the key features of economics, will keep Medicare costs in line.
For example, if insurance company A charges more for its policy than insurance company B does for the identical policy, then one of two things will happen. Either everyone will buy from B and A will go out of business, or A will reduce its price to be more in line with B.
So the essential idea of the Ryan plan is that seniors will now have a financial incentive to shop for the best insurance policy that meets their needs at the lowest cost, just like seniors and all consumers do with most products and services.
But not everyone thinks competitive economics works in the health care field, and this viewpoint is the basis of the administration’s proposal on controlling Medicare costs.
There are two potential issues that some analysts see in applying the traditional competitive model to health care. One issue is based on lack of information. Properly functioning competitive markets rely on consumers having enough knowledge and skill to evaluate alternative products and their prices and select the best one for their situation.
However, critics of applying the competitive model to health care say medical issues and medical insurance policies are simply too complicated for the average consumer to evaluate effectively.
Secondly, many say that health care — because it deals with life and death — should not be treated like other products and services and put in the hands of companies whose objective is to maximize profits.
Therefore, say these critics of the competitive plan, government needs to use its power to protect seniors by issuing regulations and promoting incentives to move the heath care system toward greater efficiency and improved outcomes.
Of course, supporters of the competitive approach have retorts to their critics, including that third parties as well as competing companies can provide the necessary information to seniors for competition to succeed.
But the larger point is that we now have a big debate about the best approach to Medicare. It’s one we all need to follow, because this is one of the biggest “you decides” we face today. As a senior citizen, I know I will be watching.
Opinion & Letters to the Editor
Related Photos
-
Dr. Michael Walden
Discussion
What’s the best approach to Medicare?
- Opinion & Letters to the Editor
-
-
We are Uniquely Made
Earlier this week the seniors at our school had one final hurdle to jump before graduation. They had to present their senior projects before panels of community members. Each room had four adults: the moderator and the three judges. You can be sure the students were quite nervous, but they usually do a great job. If they have practiced and prepared then they should experience success.
-
Ronald McDonald House of benefit to us all
On Tuesday, Stanly County Managers Association members heard a presentation concerning the Ronald McDonald House in Charlotte.
-
Celebrating small businesses and continuing new ways of communicating
Some stories are worth mentioning again.
-
Editorial: Seizure of AP phone records insult to independent press
This amounts to spying on an American news organization -- common practice in dictatorships but scary conduct in a democratic system that prizes the public value of an independent watchdog press.
-
Google shuts down SMS search, angers people who had forgotten it existed
Instead of texting back search results, Google responds with a short message noting that the service "has been shutdown" (sic) and that you can continue to search the Web by visiting google.com (duh).
-
Walking by Faith
Last week I wrote about waiting on the Lord. I really needed to hear from the Lord, but all I was receiving was “wait.” I really don’t like to wait, but it is important to give God the opportunity to work things out before we proceed. After we wait on God, the next thing we are going to be asked to do is to walk by faith. That means that God is only going to reveal one step at a time, which is almost as much fun as “wait.”
-
Jettie Parker
Jettie Frick Parker, 89, of Albemarle died at 2 a.m. Friday, May 3, 2013, in Trinity Place, Albemarle.
-
Always Learning
I am teaching a class this semester that I haven’t taught in over a dozen years. Although I have taught it before, it still has a feeling of being new. The curriculum has been updated, and I must spend a good bit of time reviewing and preparing for the lesson each day. It doesn’t surprise me that often that I will come across something I didn’t know. The other day I made a big fuss about learning something new. The kids had a good time with that; their teacher learned something new.
-
West of Memphis: My Favorite Documentary Gets a New Partner
I saw “Paradise Lost: The Child Murders of Robin Hood Hills” when it played in theaters in 1996. At some point during the viewing, it became my favorite documentary. A position it has held for nearly 20 years. I own a copy of it, along with the two sequels “(Paradise Lost 2: Revelations” and “Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory).” Many know part of the story told in the films; it is a story that everyone should witness.
-
Childhood bullying linked to adult psychological disorders
A significant study from Duke provides the best evidence we’ve had thus far that bullying in childhood is linked to a higher risk of psychological disorders in adulthood. The results came as a surprise to the research team.
- More Opinion & Letters to the Editor Headlines
-
