Convincing the public
I wish it wasn't like this. I wish Bush didn't go around the country distorting the new drug benefit, but he is, and your dependable Drug Bill Debacle bloggers just can't let that stand. And our Democratic leadership shouldn't either.
In today's edition, we have Bush:
When you have that big a shift, you can imagine there's going to be glitches
Taking a page out of the history book, we have the original rollout of Medicare:
Under the headline "medicare takes over easily," a Post writer described the program's first day as "a smooth transition, undramatic as a bed change." Three weeks later, the Times affirmed that "medicare's start has been smooth."
But, by far, the vast majority of people are signing up to a program that's making a big difference in their lives
As of January 13th, only about 3.6 million seniors had voluntarily signed up for the new Medicare Part D drug benefit.
Bush's message is quite clever. Most people agree and understand that big changes can cause problems. It's up to Democrats, who will be hosting hundreds of town hall meetings this month to get the real message across. They should bring overheads or print fliers with the original articles from the 60's on Medicare's rollout, and be sure to emphasize that a Democrat, Lyndon Johnson, was the president overseeing this.
Next, they need to explain why only 3.6 million people have voluntarily signed up, and why that's different than the administration's numbers (the others were either automatically enrolled or had Medicare Advantage plans). Use that to convince people why changes need to be made, because the program will fail without enough enrollees.
Good point about the fliers and LBJ.
Regarding enrollment problems, quite frankly this is a case where I believe "starve the beast" is justified.
February 16, 2006 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
. . . the program will fail without enough enrollees.
Fail? Won't it simply be more expensive than originally and subsequently estimated?
And I think I'm sympathetic to Adrock's Leninist solution (We need universal health care; not bandaid solutions that act as wedge issues between generations).
February 16, 2006 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
One of Bush's boasts is that the cost is going down. He is referring to the monthly premiums being lower than the $37 originally forecasted.
What has really happened is that the plans have lots of flexibility in drug prices and copayments. You need to know whether the overall costs have gone down as a result of people picking the lower monthly premiums.
This is just another example of misleading the public.
As far as the implementation problems are concerned, remember two things. First, these people assume that government is going to fail and then proceed to make that a self-fulfilling prophecy so they can say, "I told you so!" Second, this bunch has shown itself to be totally incompetent at the simplest governmental management tasks. It's no wonder that the kickoff was a total SNAFU.
jimbonita
Time for a change - Vote Democratic!
February 16, 2006 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Re: Bush DISTORTIONS.
The standard for truthfulness from officials in this administration is inverse to the common notion of a 'standard' and 'truthfulness'. After this eight year stint, any expectation of acceptable performance by government will have devastated public participation in the political process. We'll have a net result of people ignoring the government and officials doing whatever they please with no accountability whatsoever. And finding someone who cares will be a herculean task.
thepeoplechoose
February 17, 2006 3:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ellen,
The program will actually fail. It's because of a prinicpal called "adverse selection" wherein only the sick people and people with high medical costs sign up for a insurance. Because insurance, in order to stay afloat, needs a substantial number of healthy people to offset the costs of sick people, if only sick people sign up companies are forced to raise premiums. Eventually you get to a point where companies raise premiums high enough that enrollees can't afford them, and then they drop out. As more and more people drop out, premiums get higher and higher, insurance plans drop out as well, and the program fails.
February 17, 2006 7:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
But not if the government increases its contribution per beneficiary.
The government's estimated total contribution is currently to anticipated to be $724 billion for the period 2006-2011. Indeed, if participation rates were lower than expected but Congress were to hold these estimated expenses constant, the cost to Part D participants would actually drop.
I haven't been able to figure out how costs are assigned between the government and Part D participants. Does anyone know? Kate?
February 17, 2006 8:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kate, you're making some excellent points here. One question.
As I understand it, this program was supposed to be a solution because letting market-driven forces hold sway is always the best idea, right? Has anyone methodically examined this assumption as it applies to this program or something similar? Here's a conclusion with regard to the efficacy of competitiveness among HMOs that seems to be suggestive (sort of). I'd be interested in learning of other studies that might be more germane:
February 17, 2006 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
David Rabbin
Kate,
I love your words and I feel you are really trying to open some eyes. May I add the following from a personal side? Forgive me but sometimes my eyes fail me so I do lots of typo's!
I know your correct the methods that the adminstration takes and that the GOP and its supporters use is based upon log in counts of enrolled persons! All of the Medicare disabled on Medicare and/or Medicaid were automaticly signed up for one program or the other and without advising patinet as to why one product or the other was chosen for them or asking even if it fit their specific needs! This method used by the government was like trying to correct a cost problem for the healthcare by attempting to wash dishes. Only problem was and is they only washed the outside of a cup making it appear to be clean or correct. But I note when your forced to drink from such a cup it leaves a bad taste in your mouth. Something that Bush and congress can't taste or know of becuse they drink their wine from crystal glass!
This goes for most all things we see done today but the cost of health care has risen so far out of all pockets that even the big industry that supported Bush and his kind are losing too! (look at Ford and GM) The the tears that the middle class and the poorest of Americans are beginning to shed are only the beginning for as the cut backs in needed programs continue that means less for those who need it the most! The management style of administration comes out of text book one of Industrial management for an MBA! Only problem with the text is it is based upon variables and if all variable are not met such as losses caused due to cut backs the over health of the nation being managed goes bankrupt because cash flow decreased and cost rose faster than the earnings of the middle and lower economic classes! And from that the profits of the rich will also end! It's like trickl down economics in revese what starts at the top never gets to the bottom and whats at the bottom can't trickle up! And in the end all both the rich and the poor lose!
Example for me I need to have a heart cath test done cost 40,000.00! My share under Medicare will be between 9,500.00 and 14,000.00 depending on what's need and done. I live on a fixed income from SS disability of less than 13,000.00 annually when I take out costs I pay for all basic living needs finding another 9,500.00 will be next to impossible! What do I do? die of heart attack and what do I do when I reach the donute hole in what is already approaching! And what I do becasue some new prescriptions I'm now on are in my part D drug program but the formular puts some in different formulary tiers which means I pay more not only for the script but with new products being prescribed that maynot even be in a formulary in any tier what do I do? You see tier systems were designed not to help the patient but to help in cost for insurace companies. In the past some drugs did cost more but I wasn't needing to file bankrucy to buy them and when I couldn't State or drug companies stepped in and took care of it. Now with this new program eveyone has stepped back and left many to their sickness.
How much will this new program save the patinet? Some it will help but not all and save some it will but some will pay more!
In the end the presentation of the cup looks clean and white but inside it for some will have a bitter taste and could take life rather than save life
By the way my references to the dirty cup is taken from a quote of Christ found in the Bible. I feel the reality of liberals is that they need to pay more attention to that and from that you will find your just as good as anyone on the right who proclaims your not of your creator! For we all are children of the same God! And let God judge you not someone who is not God!
February 17, 2006 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, Rabbin, and assume you haven't been voting for Bush and his Repugs these past five, ten, or twenty years. As you are doubtless aware, Part D was enacted by the Repugs solely to remove a Democratic election issue. It was not intended to help anyone, and as you've pointed out, it may have made your situation worse. To be expected when the Repugs are in charge.
But I can't give you the benefit of the doubt with respect to your slurring "liberals." Next time try quoting "camels" and "needles" and recall that Jesus healed the sick. He didn't enact doughnut holes and welfare for drug companies.
February 17, 2006 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink