Medicare D is a Success - Good News

Here is something, part of an article written by Michael Barone, that most people will find interesting as we all will be depending on Medicare D in the near future. It is doing much better than expected and has an 80% approval rating from seniors.

The Democrats don't like this program as it is showing to be a success, and what's worse, it was a Bush program - Yikes! The liberals want a larger government hand in this as they think the average senior is too stupid to be able to figure out what is the best plan for them selves.

Another problem is the liberals want to pharmaceutical companies to sell the drugs for nothing - the Democrats think the companies are ripping off the public just like Walmart and any other company that is a success. Liberals hate success - it makes them look bad. Capitalism and the free markets don't work. Their usefulness is at an end - more government,socialism, will solve all problems.

What the real plan of the Democrats is to have more control of our lives. Bigger government for everyone and everything.

Medicare Part D (excerpt)

Sunday's Washington Post had an excellent front-page story on Medicare Part D, the new Medicare prescription drug benefit. Part D, which took effect at the beginning of this year, seems to have been a success. Some 22.5 million seniors have enrolled, and the cost–$26 billion–has turned out to be lower than projected. And "Medicare has received new bids indicating that its average per-person subsidy could drop by 15 percent in 2007, to $79.90 a month." Polls indicate that about 80 percent of enrollees are satisfied with the program.
Democrats have been proposing, as one of their first acts in the majority, to repeal the provision that prevents

Medicare from negotiating directly with drug companies on prescription prices. They want direct negotiations, as in the Veterans Affairs program. VA drug prices are in fact lower, but the VA formularies include many fewer drugs and thus less choice for doctors and patients.

The problem is that repealing the prohibition on direct negotiations can't force the Bush administration into direct negotiations. Under Part D, seniors can choose from insurance policies offering a variety of options; the insurers negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies or with prescription benefit managers who operate as middlemen.

It was an article of faith with Democratic politicians and political consultants that seniors would be dissatisfied with Part D. They would find the array of choices too complicated and hard to figure out. They would be angry at the "doughnut hole"–the fact that out-of-pocket drug costs from $2,250 to $3,600 are not covered. But it turns out that seniors, even if not as Internet-savvy as the rest of the population, were able to deal with the array of choices and were able to find plans they liked. There are even insurance policies available that cover the doughnut hole.

Choice and competition turn out to work better, and more inexpensively, than centralized command and control. Don't take my word for it; the Post quotes a leading Democratic policy analyst:
Urban Institute President Robert D. Reischauer, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, called that a remarkable record for a new federal program.

Initially, he said, people were worried no private plans would participate.
"Then too many plans came forward," Reischauer said. "Then people said it's going to cost a fortune. And the price came in lower than anybody thought. Then people like me said they're low-balling the prices the first year and they'll jack up the rates down the line. And, lo and behold, the prices fell again. And the reaction was, 'We've got to have the government negotiate lower prices.' At some point you have to ask: What are we looking for here?" - - - -