Government price controls for our seniors?
Senate Democrats today failed to gain enough support to force a vote on legislation that would allow government price controls in the Medicare prescription drug program. Phil adamantly opposes this misguided legislation, because it’s the marketplace that has kept prices low and choices vast for our seniors. The Wall Street Journal this morning (subscription required) makes the case against this legislation.
[T]here’s no denying the program’s innovation of using private-sector competition has worked far better than critics predicted. In the first year alone, the cost of Medicare Part D came in 30% below projections. The Congressional Budget Office calculates the 10-year cost of Medicare Part D will be a whopping $265 billion below original estimates.
Seniors are also saving money under this private competition model. Premiums for the drug benefit were expected to average $37 a month. Instead, premiums this year are averaging $22 a month — a more than 40% saving. Democrats don’t like to be reminded that many of them wanted to lock in premiums at $35 a month back in 2003. No wonder recent polls find that about 80% of seniors say they’re satisfied with their new Medicare drug benefits.
Democrats who opposed all of this private competition now say that government-negotiated prices will do even better. They must have missed the new study by the Lewin Group, the health policy consulting firm, which found that federal insurance programs that impose price controls typically hold down costs by refusing to cover some of the most routinely prescribed medicines for seniors. These include treatments for high cholesterol, arthritis, heartburn and glaucoma.
…Supporters of federal price “negotiations” — really, an imposed price — also like to point to the example of the Veterans Health Administration, which negotiates prices directly with drug companies…Here’s the real kicker: Statistics released March 22 by the VHA and Department of Health and Human Services show that 1.16 million seniors who are already enrolled in the VHA drug program have nonetheless signed up for Medicare Part D. That’s about one-third of the entire VHA case load. Why? Because these seniors have figured out that Medicare Part D offers more convenience, often lower prices, and better insurance coverage for their prescription drugs. In short, seniors are voting with their feet against the very price control system that Democratic leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi want to push them into.
For the complete article, click HERE. For more on why Phil opposes this legislation, click HERE.
