The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: discredited

Right-Wing Health Reform Opponents Discredited By New Medicare Report

Despite desperate predictions that the approximately $500 billion (over 10 years) cut in subsidies to Medicare Advantage private insurers to help pay for healthcare reform would destroy the program and cause painful premium hikes for seniors, a new report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services shows the opposite has proven to be true:

On average, Medicare Advantage premiums will be 4 percent lower in 2012 than in 2011, and plans project enrollment to increase by 10 percent, the Department for Health and Human Services (HHS) announced today. Of people with Medicare, 99.7 percent continue to enjoy access to a Medicare Advantage plan, and benefits remain consistent with those offered in 2011.

This follows an earlier announcement that average prescription drug plan premiums will remain virtually unchanged in 2012:

“Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, Medicare is stronger than ever,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “On average, Medicare Advantage premiums will go down next year and seniors will enjoy more free benefits and cheaper prescription drugs.”

CMS was able to use authority provided by the Affordable Care Act to protect beneficiaries from significant increases in costs or cuts in benefits in 2012, leading to average premium declines for the second year in a row: 2012 premiums are projected to be 11.5 percent below 2010 premiums.

In 2012, all beneficiaries will have access to Medicare-covered preventive services without paying a co-pay or deductible, including an Annual Wellness Visit with their physicians. Those who reach the donut hole will enjoy deep discounts on brand name drugs and expanded coverage for generic drugs under provisions of the Affordable Care Act.

That Democrats, creators and protectors of the welfare state, were raiding Medicare to pay for healthcare for undeserving “others” was a cornerstone of Republican messaging as they tried to stop reform in 2009 and 2010. Reports like this make that case a tougher sell.

John Rother, former director of policy and strategy at AARP and now president and CEO of The National Coalition on Health Care, agrees with Sebelius that the March 2010 healthcare law deserves some of the credit for these positive numbers.

“The Affordable Care Act started the process of moving toward equalization in terms of how much we pay Medicare Advantage and how much traditional Medicare costs. I think she’s right in saying that the effort to make health plans operate with a little less extra money is showing it’s quite feasible and that in fact there’s little evidence to show health plans are losing members or cutting benefits or any of the other things they [Republicans] claimed would happen during the fight over healthcare reform.”

Bipartisan Sanity — And U.S. History — Discredit Anti-Government Ranting

Pandering to the anti-government ideology of the Tea Party, Washington politicians may disparage the federal role in disaster relief — with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) going so far as to suggest, in the aftermath of Hurricane Irene, that there should be none whatsoever. But why listen to an extremist Congressman who has never been responsible for anything bigger than his own ambitions, when governors of both parties, who must oversee the welfare of millions of people in their states, are now praising the federal response to the storm?

None other than that current icon of conservatism, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, spoke to ABC News as the hurricane battered his state’s coastal region, explaining that federal assistance as the storm approached had been “great” — and that he would soon be calling Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, who oversees the Federal Emergency Management Agency “to ask for some more help.” The same sentiments were voiced by the chief executives of both parties in state capitals up and down the East Coast, all of whom understand that the worst consequences of disaster often arrive days after the sensational media coverage has ended.

Compassionate or callous, these governors know that they could scarcely overcome the emergencies and disasters that so often beset us without the skills, resources, and sheer power of the United States government. Although would-be president Paul recently implied that federal disaster assistance dates only back to the late ’70s, the truth is that mutual aid to stricken communities, channeled through government, has characterized American society since the dawn of the republic.

The first national response to a local disaster was a bill known as the Congressional Act of 1803 — during the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. Passed following a terrible fire in Portsmouth, N.H., the act provided recovery assistance to the affected citizens and their town. Again and again during the century that followed, Congress passed similar legislation when disaster struck, until progressive administrations in the 20th century began to create the means for a rapid, reliable response that went beyond the ad hoc distribution of federal funds.

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, that effort gained momentum during the New Deal, when President Roosevelt used disaster reconstruction projects to help employ millions of jobless Americans in rebuilding roads, bridges, schools, and other public facilities that had been washed away by floods or destroyed by tornadoes.

In 1979, President Carter created FEMA, answering the plea of governors who could no longer cope with the patchwork of federal agencies — from the Defense Department to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to the Federal Insurance Administration and the National Weather Service — whose responsibilities included some aspect of emergency services or disaster relief. Carter had served as governor of Georgia himself before his elevation to the White House, so he understood their complaints and knew why they needed a coordinated federal response in times of serious trouble. By bringing the various agencies together under a single authority, he began to make that possible.

But it wasn’t until President Clinton appointed James Lee Witt, an official who had broad experience handling disaster preparedness and relief in Arkansas, that FEMA began to function in a modern and effective way. Clinton remains proud of Witt’s tenure to this day because FEMA showed how efficient and humane government can be at its best — which only happens, of course, under an administration that respects and seeks to fulfill that mission. What became obvious when Hurricane Katrina struck under the following administration was the opposite maxim: that a president with no respect for government’s fundamental purpose will botch the job at great cost in lives and dollars. When someone like Ron Paul denigrates FEMA’s reputation, as he did the other day, he is talking about how his own party ran the agency. President Bush slashed FEMA’s preparedness programs, pulled it out of the cabinet, and placed it under the control of political appointees in the Department of Homeland Security. They notoriously had no idea how to confront disasters whether manmade or natural, except to make them worse.

Despite his seeming diffidence, President Obama plainly understands what government must be able to do in these circumstances. He first proved that when he appointed Craig Fugate, an administrator with deep experience as Florida’s director of emergency management, to run FEMA in 2009, rather than a hapless political crony. As the hurricane struck the Ameican coastline, Obama remained in constant communication with governors in the stricken states. When he visited FEMA headquarters over the weekend. He warned that the hurricane would continue to inflict damage on the states with flooding, power outages, and damage to property and infrastructure that will take many months to repair. And he personally commended the exhausted FEMA personnel, telling them that every state and local official with whom he had spoken during the emergency had assured him that the agency’s performance was “outstanding.”

Those public servants deserved his congratulations, even if the hurricane did not turn out to be the advertised Armageddon. The open question is whether FEMA, which is swiftly running out of money, can obtain the resources necessary to function adequately when the next ruinous disaster occurs. Chances are that the budget-cutting termites who control Congress — who are promoting the disintegration of infrastructure, science, and the nation’s legacy — will instead inflict still more destruction from within.