AARP's flip-flop?
AARP announced Friday a total reversal from its previous partnership with the GOP on the Medicare Part D benefit. Where the group once supported the pharmaceutical companies' inalienable rights to demand their highest prices, AARP is now calling for the government to negotiate.
In 2003, AARP was so confident in the new program that they went so far as to sponsor their own Medicare Part D Plan. What's more, AARP's own study revealed on January 4th (only 27 days ago) that prices in the new prescription drug benefit were lower than buying drugs from Canada. That declaration essentially obliterated efforts to legalize reimportation, paving the way for the realization of pharma's ultimate goals: ensure top prices for its products and kill efforts to reimport its products from abroad.
After spending the last five years in partnership with the GOP, AARP is wising up. The organization expected its complacency with Medicare Part D to pay off, ensuring open GOP ears to whisper AARP's legislative priorities in. But after Bush's bungled Social Security privatization attempt, AARP realized not only did their assistance in 2003 mean nothing, now they were chained to a boat that was sinking fast.
So in their last legislative agenda planning meeting, AARP leaders decided to do an about face: renew calls to reimport drugs from Canada and push for the government's right to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies.
While Democrats may feel heartened to have AARP back home, they should be wary -- as Barbara Dreyfuss exposed in this American Prospect article, AARP was nothing more than an ally of convenience:
Of course, AARP was never considered militant. It was founded as an insurance business in 1958, and the organization...opposed the creation of Medicare...It never developed an activist orientation, and for many years its focus was on selling insurance...But its leadership in Washington, and around the country, consisted mostly of Democrats committed to maintaining Medicare as a strong government-run program. AARP helped pass a major expansion of Medicare in 1988. With Democrats controlling the House for 40 years, AARP's lobbying efforts in defense of Medicare were never really tested because the only argument that ever took place among Democrats revolved around how much to expand the government-run program.So as AARP flip-flops back to senior's best interest, Democratic suspicion is well-founded. While AARP's reversal adds weight to calls to fix Medicare Part D, their continued push to reimport drugs from Canada is obstructionist for the program's long-term viability. If seniors believe they can continue buying their drugs from abroad, they won't sign up for the new benefit. As Leif and I noted, Medicare Part D will crash and burn if it fails to meet enrollment goals.
Its great that the AARP begin to move towards reforming this law by supporting price negotiation. Did anyone see the recent poll by Ipos-AP? It found that over 59% of respondents reported no significant cost savings from the program. That is an astonishing failure for a program that is costing over $700 billion over ten years (numbers that will probably be revised upwards yet again before I even finish writing this). But the AARP really needs to push not only for price negotiation, but also for a standard Medicare run benefit. There is a report done by Dean Baker at the Center for Economic and Policy Research (http://www.cepr.net/publications/efficient_medicare_2006_01.pdf) that shows how much a medicare run program with negotiation can save and its truely astonishing. I hope any AARP members reading this can help pressure the AARP to support the democratic alternative (HR 752) to have both price negotiation and a Medicare run program.
January 31, 2006 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like the old story of the scorpion and the frog. Finally, the AARP realized the GOP's true nature. How long will it take for the rest of the frogs to wise up?
January 31, 2006 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
AARP is run by a marketing executive, produces a commerical insurance product and always will act in its own self interest.
It is a matter of time before AARP looks into promoting for its members, health savings accounts (HSA) currently not permitted to those over 65.
These HSAs are seen by the financial community and insurers as the new IRA, 401(k) or retirement savings vehicle about to bring billions of dollars into play as the U.S. switches to consumer driven delivery of medical care.
Blue Cross Association Bank, United Healthcare Bank and many others would love to have AARP's member list and their business, should Medicare be transitioned into HSAs.
January 31, 2006 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Congressional pissing contest over allowing the government to negotiate prices for pharmaceuticals puts the lie to repugs always trumpeting a competitive marketplace. These guys are about wealth accumulation, control of every nickel they see and screwing the middle class, the poor and the elderly. And forget it if you aren't a republican suck up. In that case you don't even exist.
thepeoplechoose
January 31, 2006 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is hardly a first for for AARP. Back in 89-90 They were 100% behind Bush I's "catastrophic care" program for Medicare recipients until people realized it was a Potemkin Village of a plan (it did not previde nursing home coverage which is what really wanted) and the politicians were forced to repeal it.
January 31, 2006 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Everybody who plays ball with right wing conservative Republicans gets burned. AARP is only the latest, in a long and growing list. African-American advocates of No Child Left Behind, Log Cabin Republicans, politically conservative Jews, Hispanics, etc. What they gain is the knowledge that they and their principles are ultimately expendable for the sake of a robust and deregulated Ownership Society, in which everything is for sale.
January 31, 2006 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
While Senator Kennedy switched his position after the bill was re-wrote in conference and opposed its passage, the AARP remained in support. This is even more infuriating beacuse before the conference met, AARP’s CEO William Novelli meekly wrote a letter to Congress on July 13, 2003 stating that if “the final conference agreement does more harm than good, based on the concerns enumerated in this letter, we will not hesitate to oppose it.” In direct contrast to the concerns listed in his letter, the final Republican Congress conference report:
- included premium support that coerces seniors into HMOs and raises premiums for traditional Medicare,
- weakened the Senate fallback provision which guarantees a Medicare option for Seniors,
- included income-related premium for Part-B, including assets testing for low-income assistance,
- widened the coverage gap when compared to the Senate bill,
- still caused millions to lose retiree coverage,
- did nothing to address the concerns about cost growth over time,
- weakened prescription drug cost containment and eviscerated reimportation,
- and overpayed HMOs & PPOs at the expense of worse drug coverage and increased premiums & cost sharing.
Despite the final Prescription Drug Program directly contrasting almost every single one of AARP’s expressed concerns and 65% of its membership was in opposition to the bill, the AARP still supported it (ugh).Even after the passage of the bill, the Republicans still tried to bully the AARP for additional support. They wanted AARP to do a major PR campaign and a wealth of grassroots work to help sell senior citizens on the merits of the bill and counter criticisms from Democrats who opposed the measure. Despite the AARP’s extensive efforts in pushing for and promoting the prescription drug benefit, Republicans wanted them to spend upwards of $25 million, telling them not to ask us for anything more this year until they did more outreach.
Ouch! I have to agree with the previous writer that the AARP certainly got burned working with the Republicans on this one.
January 31, 2006 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
<span>From what I’ve read, it seems as though AARP supported the bill because they believed the US was in dire need of prescription drug legislation<span>. </span>Although the benefits are not as good as they need to be, I think the legislation was a step in the right direction – we need to have affordable prescription drugs. Also, didn’t AARP oppose SS privatization? A direct contradiction to what Bush was proposing and aggressively pushing for. </span>
<span>It will be interesting to see how Bush addresses Medicare tonight<span>.</span> </span>
January 31, 2006 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
in connection with the aarp's disgraceful support of the phony prescription drug law, i thought it might be of interest to post a letter i wrote to its head, william novelli, in late 2004, after he sent out letters asking for contributions from members to change the law his organization had supported.
***
Dear Mr. Novelli,
I find your hypocrisy stunning.
First you and AARP support the Bush administration's awful Medicare prescription drug bill, which prevents the Federal government from negotiating with the drug companies to lower drug costs, and lets them charge whatever they please - a part of the bill that even Secy. Thompson said he didn't like.
And now you have the chutzpah to ask AARP members for money for a campaign to get the drug companies to lower prescription drug costs! You should have thought of that before you endorsed the administration's bill. It was your support that enabled it to become law. AARP should have insisted on government-negotiated prices in exchange for its support for the law. But you did no such thing.
You want a contribution. I am contributing my torn up AARP card to you. My wife and I have been members for more than 15 years. But we're both fed up with this nonsense. We are not going to renew our membership.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
***
flipflop or not, novelli should still be ashamed of himself. and we sure haven't rejoined.
February 1, 2006 2:59 AM | Reply | Permalink