Monday, December 10, 2012

Medicare is unsustainable in current form

Fiscal cliff negotiations are a good place to start
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth
Entitlement reform is a major sticking point in fiscal cliff negotiations. Republican House Speaker John Boehner has proposed cutting $900 billion in entitlement spending over the next decade, and President Barack Obama’s plan doesn’t include entitlement reform.
My colleague Rex Nutting wrote earlier this week that “rushing into entitlement ‘reform’ would be particularly foolish,” although America needs to keep health care costs down by changing the way doctors and hospitals are paid, just as Obamacare is going to do.
Medicare is clearly unsustainable. Rather than Obamacare, which is criticized for its system of rationing care, and paying doctors on the basis of outcomes, we need to inject more choice into Medicare, turning it into a system of competitive managed care.
Medicare is the toughest nut to crack. Social Security trust fund deficits can be solved by gradually raising the retirement age for future generations, means-testing benefits, and changing the growth path of benefits from an index based on wage growth to one based on price growth.
As for Medicaid, several states, such as Indiana and Rhode Island, have successfully reduced its growth through personal accounts and competition.
But Medicare presents the most daunting challenges. The Office of the Actuary of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has estimated that without the projected Medicare spending cuts under the Affordable Care Act — cuts that may never, if history is any guide, occur — Medicare expenditures as a percent of GDP would grow from 3.7% today to 7.7% in 2050, to 10% in 2080. With the cuts, Medicare spending would be 6.7% of GDP in 2080.
Despite its shaky financial future, Medicare has become an easy target for politicians to plunder revenue for other purposes. On Jan. 1, under the Affordable Care Act, Medicare taxes will rise on income and capital, reducing incentives to work and to invest. Singles with earnings over $200,000 and joint filers who earn more than $250,000 will see Medicare taxes increase to 2.35% from 1.45%, and they will pay a new 3.8% tax on unearned income.
These receipts won’t be used to shore up Medicare, but will pay for subsidies for health insurance for those below 400 percent of the poverty line. In addition, $500 billion over the next decade will be “saved” from Medicare and spent on the new program. When Congress robs Peter to pay Paul, Peter is often Medicare.
Meanwhile, Medicare reimbursements are lower than in most insurance plans, and Medicare patients complain that many doctors refuse to take them. In some areas, Medicare patients face shortages of doctors and long waits for appointments.
A doctor in suburban Maryland told me that Medicare’s reimbursement covers only a small fraction of his fee. With prospective cuts in reimbursement rates, it will not be worth taking Medicare patients. In addition, many private insurance companies calculate reimbursement rates from Medicare’s rates, so these will decline also.
Plus, the doctor told me, if, following new Medicare guidelines, he is paid on the outcome of his treatment, then his incentive is to focus on healthy patients and exclude sick ones. Another measure is the number of patients seen, but seeing more patients leaves him less time for existing patients and their problems. If he should make a medical error caused by rushing too many patients into one day, Medicare gives him no protection against lawsuits.
A better way to combine fiscal responsibility with health care reform is to empower seniors to choose from private plans competing for their business. It works with the prescription drug benefit and it could work for all of Medicare. Outside Medicare, competition has lowered prices for Lasik eye surgery and cosmetic procedures.
One way to inject competition into Medicare is premium support, an idea dating back to the 1997 National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare, chaired by two retired members of Congress, Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA) and Senator John Breaux (D-LA).
Thomas and Breaux have retired from Congress, but the Medicare Commission’s premium support idea is now found in the House 2013 budget. Read it here on page 96 of the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget Fiscal Year 2013.

No comments:

Post a Comment