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
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
