Meeting the prescription cost challenge

Washington Times ^ | Wednesday, July 3, 2002 | Kevin Brady

[JohnHuang2]

All this amid a contentious election year where control of both chambers of Congress is at risk.

The Republican plan establishes a choice of guaranteed drug insurance plans under Medicare available to all seniors.

It is anchored by an across-the-board 30 percent savings in prescription prices using group buying power to lower costs.

[JohnHuang2]

Wednesday, July 3, 2002

Quote of the Day by facedown

[ImphClinton]

The plan covers 80 percent of the first $1,000 in medicine and 50 percent of the next $1,000. That will be welcome news for the average senior who consumes more than 18 prescriptions a year.

So let me get this right the greater the need the lesser the help. Seems backwards to me pay 0 on the first $250 then 50% on the next $1000 then 80% on the next 2500 then 100% on the rest would make more sense.

Are we saying that very sick people do not need the help or what??? How can a senior making $13,000 / year afford to pay $2150 to get his drugs per year???

[Future Useless Eater]

Seems backwards to me pay 0 on the first $250....

no, you dont have it right.
The consumer pays the first $250 (100% of it) Thats what a deductible is. It encourages consumers to avoid unnecessary meds.

Then the plan kicks in and covers MOST healthy consumer's needs. It pays 80% of the next 1000.

The plan then starts to discourage healthy people and hypocondriacs from over-medicating themselves by cutting back to 50% on the next $1000, and 0% on the next increment.

For the extremely sick (catastrophic coverage), it then kicks in again at 100%.

This is a good system. I have a medical plan structured like this at work already, and believe me, you REALLY DO try to reduce costs to avoid the $band$ where you have to pay your own portion.

I ALWAYS ASK for example, how much doctor visits and prescriptions are, and I try to conserve.
Last year, under a traditional HMO, I never knew how much medical bills really cost, and I didnt care.

[Future Useless Eater]

For other seniors who choose coverage, the premiums are a reasonable $33 a month with an annual deductible

There need to be some strong safeguards against abuse, like an extremely limited open-enrollment period, or no pre-existing conditions covered.

However you can bet the Dem's will chip away at every safeguard, and give away the store bit by bit before each election till the safeguards are all gone.

[Sabertooth]

Last week, Congress took the first concrete steps in two years to provide seniors the right to choose a prescription drug plan under Medicare that is best for them. The Republican plan that passed on a bipartisan vote comes the closest to meeting the following challenges:

Blah, blah, blah...

The GOP bit the big one on prescription drugs and we're going to pay dearly for this mess. Rather than poining out that there is no Constitutional authority for such a program, and preparing Americans for the weaning of the Great Society, we're now in a bidding war with the Democrats over who can pander most to seniors.

Brilliant, RINOs, just brilliant. If this "compassionate conservative" bleeding of the taxpayers goes through, kiss the budget goodbye.

The Republicans are conceding every premise of the argument to the Democrats, and soon we'll only be arguing over where to tie the tourniquet.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

.

[redrock]

One day..( and I hope it happens SOON)..some of the Republicans in government will remember that they are supposed to 'conservative'.

..but I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for this 'miracle' to happen.

The Government has NO right to get into the prescription drug business.

redrock

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

This high cost of prescriptions is a major problem for seniors. It is the BIG issue with older (most likely to show up at the polls) voters and has the potential to put control of the House and Senate solidly in Democrat hands if not properly addressed. That is how politically hot the issue has become. I share your concern about adding to the "entitlement" burden of our government but this issue must be addressed because prescription costs are very high. I personally think NAFTA could be used for medicine as it is for toasters. Prescription medicines are 80% cheaper in Mexico. Let's ship the cheaper medicines into the USA by the truckload, TOO.

Much of the high cost of developing new drugs is because of FDA interference in their development. One way to reduce the cost of medicine is to reduce the government's meddling. I think that is a good idea worth pursuing aggressively.

[ImphClinton]

My Point is a persom making only $13,000 / year could not afford to pay $2500 / year. Instead they go without necessary medicines and then end up in the hospital or perferbly dead (then there is no cost).

I am sorry but for these truly poor people their costs should be covered at least 80% for the first $3000, 100% thereafter. That $600 / year is not going to be very easy to come up with for them and is a strong discourgement for them to not buy un-necessary drugs.

Then too shouldn't doctors who perscribe un-necessary drugs be the ones we punnish, not the seniors.