Medicare Part D Horror Stories
Monday, January 30, 2006
Disenrollment Redux
Today the (L.A.) Times tells a few not-really-new things. (But it's called news anyway). Today, there's a piece about an outreach effort "Offering a Cure for Medicare Confusion" (01/30/04) for the poorer hispanic comunity, held at Olvera St., over the weekend. It was funded by a grant from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, which was good of them seeing as how Pharma is one of the main (monetary) beneficiaries of Part D. As for explaining to seniors who are confused, I would maintain again, that it helps to tell them, right up front something like, "I know, I know, I know, this was supposed to be a "benefit" for you (which implies that your drugs would cost you less this year, or more/better drugs would be available), but actually the new benefit is not for you, it is for the drug companies and insurance companies. As for you, you now have to pay more, often considerably more, to get the same drugs (if you're lucky). Sorry about that, but by the way, did you vote for G. Bush, or other Republicans recently?"
To be fair, Dianne Feinstein apparently also voted to pass Part D, and we all recall, I hope, that AARP reluctantly supported it. But I'm wondering who, if anyone, really understood Part D even then. Until it was actually implemented, did anyone, anyone at all, try to explain it to the public? My guess is that the lobbyists who wrote this law are the only ones who really understood what was going on.
Meanwhile, in the business section, we have "Seniors See Foreign Drugs as Benefit Over Medicare" (01/30/04).
Gosh, it seems that "the administration" somehow forgot to make the program mandatory. The next thing you know, though, they'll be requiring us to buy Chevrolets, too! Or maybe they'll just incentivize it by giving out lottery chances to win the Chevrolets when you sign up for insurance.
Meanwhile. here's the link to the company mentioned in the article, Canada's Rx North. ¶ 10:01 AM 0 comments
To be fair, Dianne Feinstein apparently also voted to pass Part D, and we all recall, I hope, that AARP reluctantly supported it. But I'm wondering who, if anyone, really understood Part D even then. Until it was actually implemented, did anyone, anyone at all, try to explain it to the public? My guess is that the lobbyists who wrote this law are the only ones who really understood what was going on.
Meanwhile, in the business section, we have "Seniors See Foreign Drugs as Benefit Over Medicare" (01/30/04).
"When the administration estimated the costs of the program, it assumed that most eligible seniors would sign up, with healthy seniors balancing sicker retirees who need more drugs."
Gosh, it seems that "the administration" somehow forgot to make the program mandatory. The next thing you know, though, they'll be requiring us to buy Chevrolets, too! Or maybe they'll just incentivize it by giving out lottery chances to win the Chevrolets when you sign up for insurance.
Meanwhile. here's the link to the company mentioned in the article, Canada's Rx North. ¶ 10:01 AM 0 comments
Saturday, January 28, 2006
The real story: disenrollment
Let me tell you about my January. For instance, what about all the time I’ve spent on the telephone trying to get my mother’s prescription drug coverage reinstated by her pension (actually my father’s pension, to which she is a “survivor” beneficiary)? You know, she always got all of her drugs, virtually any famous or infamous drug, for free, that is, for the cost of the $4 postage. Then along comes the stealth Medicare Part D, brought to you by the Republican congress of two (three?) years ago. Obviously, they didn’t dare put Part D into place until after our Preznit got re-elected.
I’ve called the HMO (an insurance company: Secure Horizons/Pacific Care) approximately eight times. Sometimes the calls ended up with me shouting some obscenity at the person on the other end of the line. On my third try today, however, I actually contacted a young woman who was very sincere, pleasant and easy to deal with. Eventually, though, I had to just ask even her for the address to which I would be able to send a formal grievance – as advised by the California Department of Managed Health Care (another phone call I made this morning).
Background: the HMO, where mom has had her Medicare insurance all these many years automatically switched her coverage, as of the first of the year, over into a policy that includes the new Medicare Part D. They said they did this so as not to cause an interruption for mom being able to get her prescriptions. (Reasonable enough, really!) But hey, we didn’t know they were going to do that, didn’t think of it! After all, Medicare had made those prescriptions very inexpensive heretofore, you know, like with just an 8, 10 or 12 dollar copayment. The main point being that until this year, prescriptions were virtually free through Medicare, and now they aren’t. As for my mom, she hardly ever used Medicare for prescriptions because she got her drugs even more free by virtue of one of my father’s pension benefits, "till she dies."
Here’s the rub. The pension plan, pursuant to mom’s having been enrolled in Medicare Part D, cancelled mother’s prescription benefit. Just like that. Like, they were obviously hooked into the Medicare/Social Security database because we certainly didn’t call them and tell them mom was now enrolled in Part D. In fact, we didn’t even know said enrollment was happening, and would not have found out about it at all if mom’s prescriptions (written for one year’s worth of refills) hadn’t had to be renewed by her doctor, as usual, every January. You know, the yearly ritual of sending off her prescriptions to the drug company that contracts with the Pension to supply the prescriptions by mail.
But the actual, proximate reason I found out that mom had been enrolled in Part D is that her HMO sent us a payment booklet, $40 per month, and I had to call them to ask them what this was all about. (Oh, and yes, there's still the copayment, too!)
Remember, (did you see?) the many public service announcements on the television and elsewhere kept advising us all of how “optional” the new Medicare Part D was, and how, in any case, we all had until May 2006 to make up our minds about joining. Now, of course, the US Government agency concerned with this, CMS, is bragging about how “successful" the new program is, and how many millions of (24) seniors have already enrolled. I would wager that at least half of the 4.5 million in the category, Medicare Advantage Plan, are over age 80 and have very little idea, even now a month later, of what has happened to them. Why would they even suspect what their trusted government has done to them, i.e., sold them down the river?
Now, as for how many phone calls I’ve made. As I said above, there were at least 8 to the HMO. When I first started calling, the average time on hold was about 20 minutes . I also phoned the pension plan company (ConAgra Food) four times, and finally heard, or thought I heard them say that it might be possible that mother’s prescription coverage could be reinstated (though an ominous letter that ConAgra had sent out in October warned beneficiaries NOT to join Part D, or they would lose their benefit for good).
I’ve also called Medicare itself 4 or 5 times, most often with long hold times involved. I’ve called a State senator (Republican; I got shut down), and my US Senator, Barbara Boxer (to whom I also faxed a 12 page package of supporting documents). I’ve also called the California State insurance watchdog agency, Garamendi’s office. (No help, they have nothing to do with anything that says Medicare on it. They did give me other agencies’ names, phone numbers, websites, etc. – no use, all obfuscation and passing of the buck.)
Now I have an 85-year-old neighbor, Barbara. She’s the salt-of-the-earth type, always helping everyone, and telling everyone exactly what they want to hear even when she knows it’s the exact opposite of the truth. She happens to have the same HMO that my mother does. Her situation is not the same as my mom’s, but nevertheless, she is at a loss to explain to herself the new payment booklet. Also, and for some reason that I don’t understand either, she is having suddenly to pay large copayments (hundreds of dollars) when she’s gone in for minor (outpatient) surgeries (she always seems to be falling and breaking fingers and such like). So I am going to try to help her get her stuff sorted out, when I finally see my way clear to doing that. Meanwhile, she finally sent in, she said today, her $40 dollars for the month of January.
Now it isn’t just me and my immediate next-door neighbor who are in this kind of fix, do you think? Yet, who has heard of this sort of problem, and obviously, the bewilderment on the part of seniors over the age of say, 80? (Yes, the newspapers have said several times that everybody's confused, but I think it should be on the front page at least every other day, don't you?)
All we’ve heard about are the poorest of the poor, those so-called dual eligibles (Medicare and Medicaid), and other assorted handicapped people, who suddenly found themselves somehow outside the database. Sure this is a big problem, and the various governments have duly stepped in to provide bridge remedies.
The big news? That no one’s heard? My mom and her neighbors, (not all that far out of the official poverty group at the average income for American seniors, approx $15,000 a year) have suddenly had their pockets picked big time. These people are the people that Tom Brokaw called “the Greatest Generation,” or some such blather that made him a lot of money in his own sweet retirement. Well, Tom, I’d like to see you put some of your money where you mouth is, see that these great people are treated with some compassion and respect, instead of being crapped on by the current band of “fiscally responsible” Rethuglicans in Washington.
I’ve almost forgotten. The denouement of my little story here: why do I keep calling all of these people? Well it seems that I could or can get my mother’s pension drug benefit reinstated, as I said above. But, ConAgra’s telephone answerers tell me that I need proof that mother has been “disenrolled” from Medicare Part D. So here’s where the villainy comes in. The HMO refuses, so far, to write a letter, or give me specifics of just when any other official notification of mother’s (now changed) status vis-à-vis Part D will arrive in the mail. That’s all they’ll say is that, for example, her new Medicare Card will arrive in the mail sometime, perhaps 30 days after her change of status becomes official enough to make it into the data base and to trip whatever loop in the program that causes a new card to be sent out. And just who’s responsible for that? Dunno.
In the first place, the HMO was very disingenuous a few months ago, when it sent out the form for choosing a policy (what type of coverage) from among those that were on offer for 2006. On the form they sent, a certain “Medical Only” coverage was not listed as an option. Presumably, one had to telephone them in order to find that such a policy existed. (Yes, I have also scoured the websites!) And, at that, you had to then ask them over the phone the particulars of this coverage. And that would have been about my third call to the HMO. This was all a process that took weeks for me to sort through. A young woman read with me, over the telephone, the different terms of coverage for this policy, “Medical Only,” which it seems is available only in certain counties and certain Zip codes in those counties. Of course, I was blissfully unaware that any changes at all would be needed for this year, as I’ve already explained above.
Now, it’s not a trivial matter, either, that my mom stands to be without drug coverage for the next few months while first, I wait for some sort of proof to arrive from Medicare and/or (?) the HMO, and second, while I send that in and presumably get her pension benefit reinstated with ConAgra Foods. Also then, it will take at least another ten days to resume the prescription fulfillment process. No one seems to care. The HMO has repeatedly and explicitly refused to do anything that might expedite my having some kind of proof in my hands to send to the company providing the pension benefit. It will cost mom 3 to 4 hundred dollars to buy her drugs outright for a period of about 2 months. And (this is a kicker) if my mom’s pension benefit is not to be reinstated, she cannot swich her coverage but once during each enrollment period. Therefore, she couldn’t switch her HMO policy again (to include prescriptions through Medicare) until November.
Fine, my mom will just die, probably while hideous, stupid, useless war in Iraq rages on the television, and her lovely government is busy trying to screw her out of her last dime. Great country! The best in the world! Or could be? ¶ 12:11 AM 0 comments
I’ve called the HMO (an insurance company: Secure Horizons/Pacific Care) approximately eight times. Sometimes the calls ended up with me shouting some obscenity at the person on the other end of the line. On my third try today, however, I actually contacted a young woman who was very sincere, pleasant and easy to deal with. Eventually, though, I had to just ask even her for the address to which I would be able to send a formal grievance – as advised by the California Department of Managed Health Care (another phone call I made this morning).
Background: the HMO, where mom has had her Medicare insurance all these many years automatically switched her coverage, as of the first of the year, over into a policy that includes the new Medicare Part D. They said they did this so as not to cause an interruption for mom being able to get her prescriptions. (Reasonable enough, really!) But hey, we didn’t know they were going to do that, didn’t think of it! After all, Medicare had made those prescriptions very inexpensive heretofore, you know, like with just an 8, 10 or 12 dollar copayment. The main point being that until this year, prescriptions were virtually free through Medicare, and now they aren’t. As for my mom, she hardly ever used Medicare for prescriptions because she got her drugs even more free by virtue of one of my father’s pension benefits, "till she dies."
Here’s the rub. The pension plan, pursuant to mom’s having been enrolled in Medicare Part D, cancelled mother’s prescription benefit. Just like that. Like, they were obviously hooked into the Medicare/Social Security database because we certainly didn’t call them and tell them mom was now enrolled in Part D. In fact, we didn’t even know said enrollment was happening, and would not have found out about it at all if mom’s prescriptions (written for one year’s worth of refills) hadn’t had to be renewed by her doctor, as usual, every January. You know, the yearly ritual of sending off her prescriptions to the drug company that contracts with the Pension to supply the prescriptions by mail.
But the actual, proximate reason I found out that mom had been enrolled in Part D is that her HMO sent us a payment booklet, $40 per month, and I had to call them to ask them what this was all about. (Oh, and yes, there's still the copayment, too!)
Remember, (did you see?) the many public service announcements on the television and elsewhere kept advising us all of how “optional” the new Medicare Part D was, and how, in any case, we all had until May 2006 to make up our minds about joining. Now, of course, the US Government agency concerned with this, CMS, is bragging about how “successful" the new program is, and how many millions of (24) seniors have already enrolled. I would wager that at least half of the 4.5 million in the category, Medicare Advantage Plan, are over age 80 and have very little idea, even now a month later, of what has happened to them. Why would they even suspect what their trusted government has done to them, i.e., sold them down the river?
The overall enrollment figures as of January 13 are:
-Stand-alone Prescription Drug Plans: about 3.6 million (2.6 million since December 13).
-Medicare/Medicaid: 6.2 million (including 600,000 in Medicare Advantage plans).
-Medicare Advantage: 4.5 million (plus 600,000 Medicare/Medicaid beneficiaries).
-Retiree coverage: About 6.4 million retirees are in employer coverage that is subsidized by the -Medicare retiree drug subsidy. Additionally, about 1 million retirees are in employer coverage that incorporates or supplements Medicare prescription drug coverage. Another estimated 500,000 retirees are continuing in coverage that is as good as Medicare's.
-TRICARE/ FEHB retirees: 3.1 million
Now, as for how many phone calls I’ve made. As I said above, there were at least 8 to the HMO. When I first started calling, the average time on hold was about 20 minutes . I also phoned the pension plan company (ConAgra Food) four times, and finally heard, or thought I heard them say that it might be possible that mother’s prescription coverage could be reinstated (though an ominous letter that ConAgra had sent out in October warned beneficiaries NOT to join Part D, or they would lose their benefit for good).
I’ve also called Medicare itself 4 or 5 times, most often with long hold times involved. I’ve called a State senator (Republican; I got shut down), and my US Senator, Barbara Boxer (to whom I also faxed a 12 page package of supporting documents). I’ve also called the California State insurance watchdog agency, Garamendi’s office. (No help, they have nothing to do with anything that says Medicare on it. They did give me other agencies’ names, phone numbers, websites, etc. – no use, all obfuscation and passing of the buck.)
Now I have an 85-year-old neighbor, Barbara. She’s the salt-of-the-earth type, always helping everyone, and telling everyone exactly what they want to hear even when she knows it’s the exact opposite of the truth. She happens to have the same HMO that my mother does. Her situation is not the same as my mom’s, but nevertheless, she is at a loss to explain to herself the new payment booklet. Also, and for some reason that I don’t understand either, she is having suddenly to pay large copayments (hundreds of dollars) when she’s gone in for minor (outpatient) surgeries (she always seems to be falling and breaking fingers and such like). So I am going to try to help her get her stuff sorted out, when I finally see my way clear to doing that. Meanwhile, she finally sent in, she said today, her $40 dollars for the month of January.
Now it isn’t just me and my immediate next-door neighbor who are in this kind of fix, do you think? Yet, who has heard of this sort of problem, and obviously, the bewilderment on the part of seniors over the age of say, 80? (Yes, the newspapers have said several times that everybody's confused, but I think it should be on the front page at least every other day, don't you?)
All we’ve heard about are the poorest of the poor, those so-called dual eligibles (Medicare and Medicaid), and other assorted handicapped people, who suddenly found themselves somehow outside the database. Sure this is a big problem, and the various governments have duly stepped in to provide bridge remedies.
The big news? That no one’s heard? My mom and her neighbors, (not all that far out of the official poverty group at the average income for American seniors, approx $15,000 a year) have suddenly had their pockets picked big time. These people are the people that Tom Brokaw called “the Greatest Generation,” or some such blather that made him a lot of money in his own sweet retirement. Well, Tom, I’d like to see you put some of your money where you mouth is, see that these great people are treated with some compassion and respect, instead of being crapped on by the current band of “fiscally responsible” Rethuglicans in Washington.
I’ve almost forgotten. The denouement of my little story here: why do I keep calling all of these people? Well it seems that I could or can get my mother’s pension drug benefit reinstated, as I said above. But, ConAgra’s telephone answerers tell me that I need proof that mother has been “disenrolled” from Medicare Part D. So here’s where the villainy comes in. The HMO refuses, so far, to write a letter, or give me specifics of just when any other official notification of mother’s (now changed) status vis-à-vis Part D will arrive in the mail. That’s all they’ll say is that, for example, her new Medicare Card will arrive in the mail sometime, perhaps 30 days after her change of status becomes official enough to make it into the data base and to trip whatever loop in the program that causes a new card to be sent out. And just who’s responsible for that? Dunno.
In the first place, the HMO was very disingenuous a few months ago, when it sent out the form for choosing a policy (what type of coverage) from among those that were on offer for 2006. On the form they sent, a certain “Medical Only” coverage was not listed as an option. Presumably, one had to telephone them in order to find that such a policy existed. (Yes, I have also scoured the websites!) And, at that, you had to then ask them over the phone the particulars of this coverage. And that would have been about my third call to the HMO. This was all a process that took weeks for me to sort through. A young woman read with me, over the telephone, the different terms of coverage for this policy, “Medical Only,” which it seems is available only in certain counties and certain Zip codes in those counties. Of course, I was blissfully unaware that any changes at all would be needed for this year, as I’ve already explained above.
Now, it’s not a trivial matter, either, that my mom stands to be without drug coverage for the next few months while first, I wait for some sort of proof to arrive from Medicare and/or (?) the HMO, and second, while I send that in and presumably get her pension benefit reinstated with ConAgra Foods. Also then, it will take at least another ten days to resume the prescription fulfillment process. No one seems to care. The HMO has repeatedly and explicitly refused to do anything that might expedite my having some kind of proof in my hands to send to the company providing the pension benefit. It will cost mom 3 to 4 hundred dollars to buy her drugs outright for a period of about 2 months. And (this is a kicker) if my mom’s pension benefit is not to be reinstated, she cannot swich her coverage but once during each enrollment period. Therefore, she couldn’t switch her HMO policy again (to include prescriptions through Medicare) until November.
Fine, my mom will just die, probably while hideous, stupid, useless war in Iraq rages on the television, and her lovely government is busy trying to screw her out of her last dime. Great country! The best in the world! Or could be? ¶ 12:11 AM 0 comments
Friday, January 27, 2006
Medicare's bragging about how many people enrolled.
Just what kind of a campaign is this? The question in my mind, how many of these millions of people, like my mother, did not want to be enrolled?
The number who did not want to be enrolled would be people much younger than my mother who do all in their power not to/ to never have to take prescription medications. I can't here the Christian Scientists putting up a big stink about this, can you? Maybe they, like so many others, just haven't realized what's going on yet. This was truly "the stealth ripoff."
I have been on the phone several times now with various people and parts of Medicare. It seems that when you call 1-800 MEDICARE, one of the things you will find out is that it's very difficult to get connected to the "Disenrollment" section. Could it be the best kept secret that this is the busiest section at Medicare? ¶ 12:54 PM 0 comments
The number who did not want to be enrolled would be people much younger than my mother who do all in their power not to/ to never have to take prescription medications. I can't here the Christian Scientists putting up a big stink about this, can you? Maybe they, like so many others, just haven't realized what's going on yet. This was truly "the stealth ripoff."
I have been on the phone several times now with various people and parts of Medicare. It seems that when you call 1-800 MEDICARE, one of the things you will find out is that it's very difficult to get connected to the "Disenrollment" section. Could it be the best kept secret that this is the busiest section at Medicare? ¶ 12:54 PM 0 comments
Sunday, January 22, 2006
Jonathan Chait makes it just simply partisan.
Today's opionion section in the times includes an Op-Ed by Jonathan Chait titled The Republicans' poison pill. It's a good enough coverage of the issue(s), but hey, this is about old people who are vulnerable and even helpless, it's not about political warfare. Again, I have to ask, where is the outrage!
¶ 11:32 PM 0 comments
Saturday, January 21, 2006
About the LA Times. Getting up to speed?
Well, no, not really. As for the Op-ed piece today, It's a benefit, but for whom? it was very good, touched all the bases, at least a little bit, but hey, where's the outrage? And the piece on the front page? Medicare Drug Program May Harm, Not Help, GOP Good, it was on the front page, but in the tiniest little box they've got for the front page.
¶ 11:52 PM 0 comments
Friday, January 20, 2006
What if they gave a drug program and nobody came?
So, I don't know if this pharmacist in Boston can do any mail order, but hey, this must be happening elsewhere. If you know of other pharmacies in other cities, let me know.
¶ 10:07 PM 0 comments
Thursday, January 19, 2006
L.A. Times, Michael Hiltzik, in any case, is beginning to get it.
(note, I composed this post as a comment over at Americablog this moring.)
Finally, in the L.A. Times this morning is a Michael Hiltzik column that begins to tell a little truth about this Scam. As I have been watching these articles, none have begun to tell what an incredible Orwellian maneuver this Part D has been. Even in this piece, (another is promised for Monday) in paragraph 6, there is an oversight of understatement.
Unfortunately not! Anyone who was enrolled in a Medicare HMO coverage, (e.g. at Pacific Care - Secure Horizons in California) was automatically enrolled in Part D as of the first of the year. The reasons given by the HMO included that since the former coverage (2005 and before) included drug coverage (virtually free, but for a copay), they didn't want any of their customers to find themselves suddenly without drug coverage at the first of the year. And an option to enroll in a "medical only" plan, in Los Angeles and several other counties of California, was accidentally left off of the form for renewing your coverage for 2006. And no matter what they say about, even, the websites (of little use to seniors in any case) this sort of information was not articulated at all. I only began to realize what was happening when the new premium payment booklet ($40 per month) arrived in the mail at my mother's home.
All the television kept saying was, "it's all voluntary, you don't have to do anything, now," while in fact, letters duly went out to all of the recipients involved, dubiously informing them of the changes. In my own mother's case, this meant that she simultaneous lost her free drug coverage at her pension, and the pension's October letter, I belatedly found out, warned that she would be automatically cancelled if she enrolled in Part D. Further, her free drug coverage would not be reinstated.
I haven't explained this all that clearly, but I initially spent at least a day and a half just discovering the "catch 22" nature of what our wonderfully, compassionately conservative government has/had done, in order to get re-elected.
Hiltzik's normally great columns appear in the Business Section, this one, of course, should be on the front page. ¶ 10:14 AM 0 comments
Finally, in the L.A. Times this morning is a Michael Hiltzik column that begins to tell a little truth about this Scam. As I have been watching these articles, none have begun to tell what an incredible Orwellian maneuver this Part D has been. Even in this piece, (another is promised for Monday) in paragraph 6, there is an oversight of understatement.
"Unlike Medicare-only members, for whom the new benefit is voluntary, these patients [those who are currently both Medicare and Medicaid recipients] were automatically enrolled in the new system as of Jan. 1."
Unfortunately not! Anyone who was enrolled in a Medicare HMO coverage, (e.g. at Pacific Care - Secure Horizons in California) was automatically enrolled in Part D as of the first of the year. The reasons given by the HMO included that since the former coverage (2005 and before) included drug coverage (virtually free, but for a copay), they didn't want any of their customers to find themselves suddenly without drug coverage at the first of the year. And an option to enroll in a "medical only" plan, in Los Angeles and several other counties of California, was accidentally left off of the form for renewing your coverage for 2006. And no matter what they say about, even, the websites (of little use to seniors in any case) this sort of information was not articulated at all. I only began to realize what was happening when the new premium payment booklet ($40 per month) arrived in the mail at my mother's home.
All the television kept saying was, "it's all voluntary, you don't have to do anything, now," while in fact, letters duly went out to all of the recipients involved, dubiously informing them of the changes. In my own mother's case, this meant that she simultaneous lost her free drug coverage at her pension, and the pension's October letter, I belatedly found out, warned that she would be automatically cancelled if she enrolled in Part D. Further, her free drug coverage would not be reinstated.
I haven't explained this all that clearly, but I initially spent at least a day and a half just discovering the "catch 22" nature of what our wonderfully, compassionately conservative government has/had done, in order to get re-elected.
Hiltzik's normally great columns appear in the Business Section, this one, of course, should be on the front page. ¶ 10:14 AM 0 comments
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Miami Herald, also missing the point.
Everyone is paying more, much more for their drugs this year. I'm talking about the "average" income group among seniors, i.e. around $15,000 per year. Here's yet another article focused on the so-called short-term fix, getting the drugs to people now (of course, that's important). But where's the story about the big Orwellian-ly labeled "drug benefit" put in place by "compassionate conservatives" in order to get re-elected? As the Miami Herald notes, it's "one of the biggest entitlement programs, ever," but exactly who is being entitled here? It sure isn't seniors, of any stripe.
¶ 10:51 AM 0 comments
Sunday, January 15, 2006
LA Times, still missing the point.
This article in the LA Times, Medicare Situation Still Chaotic, well what did they expect? The point isn't just that poor and disabled people of all descriptions are not receiving their prescriptions in a timely way, if at all. Of course that's true, and it's horrible because it's happening everywhere around this would-be "greatest-country-in-the-world" country, AND the drugs ARE often critical to these people's well-being. The real point is, it seems to me, that it is not a "drug benefit" at all, to anyone, compared to the way things were just last year. It's a take-down. EVERYONE is having to pay more for their drugs. And it didn't turn out to be an "optional program" in any practical sense, so even if you theoretically have until May to sign up (to avoid penalties), the sh*t is in the fan NOW. (Of course, it is a "benefit" to those for whom it was really meant as such, the Pharmaceutical Companies and the Insurance Companies. What I don't get, is why did the Republicans think they could get away with their Orwellian lying about this? It may have worked in their favor in the last election, but it certainly won't this time around.
Of all the stories I've read today, I liked the one related by the daughter whose father was complaining about the confusion and expense and so on. She asked him who he'd voted for (Bush) and told him he'd got what he wanted: higher prices and incompetence. Simple and true. ¶ 12:21 AM 0 comments
Of all the stories I've read today, I liked the one related by the daughter whose father was complaining about the confusion and expense and so on. She asked him who he'd voted for (Bush) and told him he'd got what he wanted: higher prices and incompetence. Simple and true. ¶ 12:21 AM 0 comments
Saturday, January 14, 2006
Bloggers are busy with this topic. Look at Dailykos and Americablog.
I have found some amazingly well informed people making comments (and telling horror stories) in some of the blogs. Please read, and if you are unfamiliar with these blogs in general, take time and look around. They are the best!
First, some diaries, etc. from Dailykos -
One, Two, Three
And at Americablog there is an amazing couple of comments in this post
Does the Bush team plan or organize anything, ever?
Here is an excerp, two excellent comments:
First, some diaries, etc. from Dailykos -
One, Two, Three
And at Americablog there is an amazing couple of comments in this post
Does the Bush team plan or organize anything, ever?
Here is an excerp, two excellent comments:
"All of the worst predictions came true,"¶ 10:46 PM 0 comments
Thanks very much for posting this. You should keep track and post something on it once in awhile.
It is worse than the article indicates.
First, the bill's povisions for dual eligibles are a farce. Dual eligibles are elderly in both Medicaid and Medicare and are usually in bad shape, as article says -often have mental illness or severly handicapped, or demented or speak poor English, often with no relatives or legal guardian readily available. There were restrictions on anyone except a legal guardian advising them on which program would be best to sign up for. Then, as article states, CMS sent out official information that was wrong. That was SOOOO helpful. Many nursing home staff, social workers, doctors, pharmacists, etc. were hesitant to provide counseling to dual eligibles in fear of getting in trouble over the provisions prohibiting guidance toward specific programs.
But, OK, the best part is coming. Any dual eligible who did not choose a program would be RANDOMLY assigned to one of the programs available in the area, without regard to whether the program provided drugs they needed, or whether they could afford them.
I just wonder who thought up that scheme. Probably the special pharmacy benefit managemkent companies (ie, administrative profit skimming sharks) that had to be set up specially for the program. That was a stroke of genius by this administration: force opporunity for some take, er, rakings, er "value added efficiency" by requiring an extra layer of middle management money sharks.
The bill also rigged the reimbursement to favor large mail order and regional pharmacy benefit operations rather than onsite pharmacies or docs, which would be in better position to monitor patients' needs and whether they were getting good service.
So even if the program had worked perfectly, it would have been a mess. And probably a rip off for many dual eligibles.
Second, everyone knew there were going to be big problems, and CMS keep promising fixes, but did nothing. Pharmacy students were organizing emergency programs to get people signed up so they wouldn't be randomly assigned, pharmacy associations, doctors and nursing homes were raising holy hell.
Some pharmacies are taking advantage of the situation, as article indicates, others are footing bill to $250 K per store and more to provide needed medication for this month (and for how longer if things don't get fixed next month?) and hoping CMS will pay up eventually. I forget if article mentioned that things are so bad in one state that it declared a public health emergency over this (I forget which state).
A complete mess that people saw it coming, and Bush administration provided big talk and no action. just like Katrina.
But so what, you are only killing, and hurting and bankrupting poor people and small businesses? What the hell? You snooze you lose, right? Probably see Fox news bigshots making fun of demented old people raving because they are off their medications any day now. I can see "Ha ha ha, that old bag looks funny having a seizure. What a hoot. I bet that lucky ducky gets some kind of fat government subsidy to lie in that rest home that always smells a little bit like piss."
True mess. Thanks for covering it.
anon | 01.14.06 - 3:50 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The mission is to show that government programs don't work and must be privatized. This is done by partially privatizing the public programs and pretending it works.
BOING!!!!!!!!!
Friday, January 13, 2006
Articles galore, but where is the final, authoritative word?
Well here's an article from the WSJ. It's about drug companies disembling, or is it the government? I am still looking for who said what to who and when. I don't know if anyone in the MSM is doing so. There is some information out there on the Web about just how scandalous this Republican adventure has been. The bottom line, for now, is that the new Medicare Part D law was written by lobbyists from and for the pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies. It was meant to begin the process of dismantling Medicare as a viable program for the baby boomers. It's all about whether we are ever going to have a rational health care system in the country or not. Some think the law should be and will be repealed sooner rather than later. All this for what then? Yeah, right! This is the greatest (time wasting) country in the world. If the stupidity of this law, and the chicanery with which it has been implemented precipitates a realistic view and then rethinking and rebuilding of our entire health care system, then it will have been a good thing. In the meantime, the big corporations can enjoy their not insignificant windfall.
¶ 11:02 PM 0 comments
Thursday, January 12, 2006
My own mother's story as of mid-January 2006
I will be revising this post by and by. I am still sorting things out.
¶ 12:16 AM 0 comments
