Privatizing Medicare

By Trudy Lieberman

This article appeared in the July 7, 2003 edition of The Nation.

June 19, 2003

The Medicare bills passed by the Senate Finance Committee on June 12 and the House Ways and Means Committee on June 17 move the thirty-eight-year-old social insurance program one step closer to privatization. The committees outlined the acceptable framework for a drug benefit sorely needed by the 40 million seniors and disabled people covered by Medicare. Considering that the median income for beneficiaries is only $14,300, and a quarter of them spend more than $100 a month on prescriptions, the need for government help is obvious.

But all the talk of a drug benefit obscures the real reason Republicans are pushing hard for their brand of reform, which calls for privately run managed-care plans to provide the benefit. Adding government-subsidized drug coverage to Medicare doesn't require managed care. Congress could simply add a Part C drug benefit and be done with it. But many lawmakers have another agenda--to get the government out of the Medicare business. To do that, they would herd beneficiaries into managed care, either HMOs or the less tightly controlled PPOs (preferred provider organizations), which would provide all benefits instead of the federal government. The government would give plans a sum of money, as it does now, to pay for care, but over time it could give less and less. Beneficiaries would have to make up the difference, which could be huge, since costs are not likely to go down. Eventually there would be no Medicare, with its social insurance cross-subsidies that make it possible to insure huge numbers of people 65 or older, who are more likely to be ill. Everyone would get benefits in the private market.

Until June 12 the Bush Administration had hoped to entice beneficiaries into HMOs and PPOs by offering drug benefits only to those willing to leave traditional Medicare. But Bush changed his mind, and under the Senate Finance Committee plan, even those who stay in Medicare will get some drug coverage. That was enough to persuade some Democrats, including Ted Kennedy, to sign on. The House bill also gives a benefit to those remaining on Medicare but would not require the government to step in with a benefit if the private plans don't provide the coverage.

Subscriber Login

4 ISSUES FREE

Subscribe Now!

The only way to read this article and the full contents of each week's issue of The Nation online is by subscribing to the magazine. Subscribe now and read this article -- and every article published since for the past five years -- right now.

There's no obligation -- try The Nation for four weeks free.

.

About Trudy Lieberman

Trudy Lieberman, a regular Nation contributor, directs the health and medicine reporting program at CUNY's Graduate School of Journalism. She also covers health reform for the Columbia Journalism Review's cjr.org. more...
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» Editor's Cut

Around the Nation | The week we went Rouge. Plus, Moyers on Afghanistan.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
46 Comments

» The Beat

Health Care Bill Advances, as Harry Reid Trumps Sarah Palin | The death panelist-in-chief rallied her followers to "KILL THE BILL." But 60 senators decided to follow the real leader.
John Nichols
55 Comments

» The Notion

Palin as the Church Lady | Going Rogue book tour brings passive-aggressive rightwing Christianity to the fore.
Leslie Savan
144 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | The "Second Amendment" sale; the raving paranoids of the right.
Eric Alterman

» The Dreyfuss Report

Chongqing: Socialism in One City | China is managing the most important event in the world: the urbanization of half a billion people. Fast.
Robert Dreyfuss
218 Comments

» Act Now!

Toward Copenhagen | A guide to joining the movement against climate change.
Peter Rothberg
75 Comments