WTF is wrong with Democrats that want to cut Social Security and/or Medicare?

[ProSense]

278. Howard Dean: "You Can't Convince People That A Dem Is Going To Cut Medicare"

Howard Dean: "You Can't Convince People That A Dem Is Going To Cut Medicare"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021120987

Oh, and this:

"We have already cut Medicare.We cut 600 plus billions out of Medicare Advantage.Medicare Advantage is a program used by middle and lower middle income seniors."

A Serious Drug Problem

By PAUL KRUGMAN

There was a brief flurry of outrage when Congress passed the 2003 Medicare bill. The news media reported on the scandalous vote in the House of Representatives: Republican leaders violated parliamentary procedure, twisted arms and perhaps engaged in bribery to persuade skeptical lawmakers to change their votes in a session literally held in the dead of night.

Later, the media reported on another scandal: it turned out that the administration had deceived Congress about the bill's likely cost.

But the real scandal is what's in the legislation. It's an object lesson in how special interests hold America's health care system hostage.

The new Medicare law subsidizes private health plans, which have repeatedly failed to deliver promised cost savings. It creates an unnecessary layer of middlemen by requiring that the drug benefit be administered by private insurers. The biggest giveaway is to Big Pharma: the law specifically prohibits Medicare from using its purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices.

Outside the United States, almost every government bargains over drug prices. And it works: the Congressional Budget Office says that foreign drug prices are 35 to 55 percent below U.S. levels. Even within the United States, Veterans Affairs is able to negotiate discounts of 50 percent or more, far larger than those the Medicare actuary expects the elderly to receive under the new plan.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/06/opinion/06krugman.html

Impact of the doughnut hole on Medicare beneficiaries

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimates that more than a quarter of Part D participants stop following their prescribed regimen of drugs when they hit the doughnut hole.[2]

Every Part D plan sponsor must offer at least one basic Part D plan. They may also offer enhanced plans that provide additional benefits. For 2008, the percentage of stand-alone Part D (PDP) plans offering some form of coverage within the doughnut hole rose to 29 percent, up from 15% in 2006. The percentage of Medicare Advantage/Part D plans (MA-PD) plans offering some form of coverage in the coverage gap is 51%, up from 28% in 2006. The most common forms of gap coverage cover generic drugs only.[3]

Among Medicare Part D enrollees in 2007 who were not eligible for the low-income subsidies, 26% had spending high enough to reach the coverage gap. Fifteen percent of those reaching the coverage gap (4% overall) had spending high enough to reach the catastrophic coverage level. Enrollees reaching the coverage gap stayed in the gap for just over four months on average.[4]

According to a study done in 2007, premiums for plans offering gap coverage are roughly double those of defined standard plans. The average monthly premium for stand-alone Part D plans (PDPs) with basic benefits that do not offer gap coverage are $30.14. The average monthly premium for plans that do offer some gap coverage are average $63.29. In 2007, eight percent of beneficiaries enrolled in a PDP chose one with some gap coverage. Among beneficiaries in MA-PD plans, enrollment in plans offering gap coverage was 33% (up from 27% in 2006).[3]

The 2010 Health Reform bill (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) began to address the coverage gap by creating discounts on brand name and generic drugs purchased within the gap range. Between now and 2020, the gap will gradually be closed to a point where it is completely eliminated.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Part_D_coverage_gap#Impact_of_the_doughnut_hole_on_Medicare_beneficiaries