Tuesday, May 27, 2008
CORRUPTING MEDICARE
There has long been a myth about government and private enterprise. This myth no doubt originated with private businesses which wanted to do work then done by government employees. These business firms needed a leg up from the media and the public, because their argument was weak.
So they started the myth that private business is more efficient than government agencies. It has been perpetuated by some of these same interests and by the political party that represents them. Unfortunately, some governmental agencies provided some bad examples as well.
Having had 25 years managing a public institution, I must say that the most efficient entities which whom we dealt were those of the State of Oklahoma. For a long while federal agencies were second, and private contractors and vendors were third. Later the scales tipped to give private business an edge over federal agencies, and state agencies suffered with political tampering.
We dealt with some very reliable and efficient private businesses, but we also dealt with some bad ones. The profit motive often undermines both quality and reliability. Vigilance is necessary. Crazy as it may seem, the unreliable private contractor often has the law on his side when it comes to enforcing performance. Their lobbyists have shaped amendments to law.
The reasons why a private business might be more efficient would be: (1) absence of regulations and red tape; (2) paying their workers lower rates and/or fewer benefits; (3) better management; (4) absence of worker protections (health, job security, etc.) ; or (5) special technical expertise.
Even with such advantages, it has not proven to work out just that way. A well-run state agency, or a well-run federal agency, may be more efficient. Sometimes out-sourcing of specific tasks or operations may prove effective.
Congresses of the first Bush term sought to “improve” the Medicare program. They offered a confusing prescription drug benefit to seniors in order to get a movement started to privatize the program. At the same time the pharmaceutical companies, always a lucrative source of political contributions, was handed a giveaway of billions of Medicare dollars.
The prescription program brought dozens of insurance companies into play with different benefits, confusing seniors. The law prohibits bidding or negotiating prices, unheard of in legal circles. It prohibits re-importation of the same drugs in the same packages at cheaper prices prevalent abroad.
Another Bush privatization initiative has been launched – the Medicare Advantage program. Read carefully, or you will not believe this program.
It authorizes private insurance companies to enroll Medicare people, paying them an incentive to do so. Those “incentives” have been turned into lucrative signing bonuses for unscrupulous salespersons. They prey upon seniors, lying to pick up quick bonuses. Seniors are promised lower premiums and deductibles, but give up freedom of providers.
It is estimated this highly touted private program will cost the Medicare fund an extra $50 billion from 2009 to 2012. Medicare now pays these companies 13% more for the same medical procedures as under regular Medicare. Further, the subsidies cost an added 17% over the regular costs of administering traditional Medicare.
All of us who are on regular Medicare are seeing our premiums increase, and our fund robbed to support this deviant, more expensive privatized program. The federal government has legalized exploitation of seniors for benefit of private business.
It is a tragedy when a good government program, which meets the needs of the people, is politicized and privatized for the benefit of big business.
Even more reprehensible will be the blame game that will be played out, calling Medicare inefficient and terming it to be socialized medicine. As the Medicare fund gets into more trouble, we will hear all these things from the hypocrites who have tried to sabotage the program with privatization.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
So they started the myth that private business is more efficient than government agencies. It has been perpetuated by some of these same interests and by the political party that represents them. Unfortunately, some governmental agencies provided some bad examples as well.
Having had 25 years managing a public institution, I must say that the most efficient entities which whom we dealt were those of the State of Oklahoma. For a long while federal agencies were second, and private contractors and vendors were third. Later the scales tipped to give private business an edge over federal agencies, and state agencies suffered with political tampering.
We dealt with some very reliable and efficient private businesses, but we also dealt with some bad ones. The profit motive often undermines both quality and reliability. Vigilance is necessary. Crazy as it may seem, the unreliable private contractor often has the law on his side when it comes to enforcing performance. Their lobbyists have shaped amendments to law.
The reasons why a private business might be more efficient would be: (1) absence of regulations and red tape; (2) paying their workers lower rates and/or fewer benefits; (3) better management; (4) absence of worker protections (health, job security, etc.) ; or (5) special technical expertise.
Even with such advantages, it has not proven to work out just that way. A well-run state agency, or a well-run federal agency, may be more efficient. Sometimes out-sourcing of specific tasks or operations may prove effective.
Congresses of the first Bush term sought to “improve” the Medicare program. They offered a confusing prescription drug benefit to seniors in order to get a movement started to privatize the program. At the same time the pharmaceutical companies, always a lucrative source of political contributions, was handed a giveaway of billions of Medicare dollars.
The prescription program brought dozens of insurance companies into play with different benefits, confusing seniors. The law prohibits bidding or negotiating prices, unheard of in legal circles. It prohibits re-importation of the same drugs in the same packages at cheaper prices prevalent abroad.
Another Bush privatization initiative has been launched – the Medicare Advantage program. Read carefully, or you will not believe this program.
It authorizes private insurance companies to enroll Medicare people, paying them an incentive to do so. Those “incentives” have been turned into lucrative signing bonuses for unscrupulous salespersons. They prey upon seniors, lying to pick up quick bonuses. Seniors are promised lower premiums and deductibles, but give up freedom of providers.
It is estimated this highly touted private program will cost the Medicare fund an extra $50 billion from 2009 to 2012. Medicare now pays these companies 13% more for the same medical procedures as under regular Medicare. Further, the subsidies cost an added 17% over the regular costs of administering traditional Medicare.
All of us who are on regular Medicare are seeing our premiums increase, and our fund robbed to support this deviant, more expensive privatized program. The federal government has legalized exploitation of seniors for benefit of private business.
It is a tragedy when a good government program, which meets the needs of the people, is politicized and privatized for the benefit of big business.
Even more reprehensible will be the blame game that will be played out, calling Medicare inefficient and terming it to be socialized medicine. As the Medicare fund gets into more trouble, we will hear all these things from the hypocrites who have tried to sabotage the program with privatization.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
