Tuesday, November 15, 2005
In celebration of the first sign-up day for Medicare Part D...
...a few observations and a few questions.
Observations first:
Later.
Observations first:
- Last night, as usual, Mom and I watched national and local news for 1.5 hours from 1730 to 1900. Mom is The News Girl. I'm not, but I accede to her wishes. Normally this is a time for me to do evening chores, fix or set up fixings for dinner and keep a peripheral watch on the news in case there's something Mom wants to discuss.
Last night's news watch included two national broadcasts: NBC and CBS, which play back to back on their local Arizona affiliates. The former broadcast featured a story set, yet again, at one of those infernal Medicare Part D "Help Sessions". The story included short interviews with a few seniors, one of whom (a woman) was completely confused, the other of whom (a man) was like a six year old who can't wait to hit the "hard books" in a "real school" and learn, learn, learn. After these snippets a man who was either a representative from Medicare or from one of the insurance companies involved in this suspiciously hoaxy program expressed his opinion that the Medicare Part D plan was difficult, yes, but so is filing a tax return; so is registering one's car [Really!?! I don't recall that registering a car is at all difficult. I'll concede the point on tax returns, though, which is why so many people who don't qualify to file EZ returns have H&R Block or a CPA do it.], etc. Yes, he said, "some" seniors are going to need help, but help is available in a variety of areas for seniors, anyway; helping seniors is not new. And, he added, this is good for seniors. They have to "go back to school", insinuating that it's been proven beneficial for seniors to stimulate their minds.
Curiously, as I recall (and I may be wrong about this), CBS did not broadcast a story about Medicare Part D. - Flashback to the November 6, 2005, airing of the "live debate" episode of The West Wing in which the democratic candidate for President mentioned that administrative expenses for Medicare are substantially lower than those for commercial insurance. He cited the figure of "2%". It seems that the Congressional Budget Office cites an even lower number: 1.2%.
- Our illustrious government assures us citizens that the reason for commercial insurance company involvement in Medicare Part D is to control costs (by this I have to assume they mean administrative costs, since insurance companies are going to be on the side of commercial drug companies when it comes to protecting drug profits), to allow the plan to be tailored to the individual in regards to types and costs of product (which Medicare is already doing, by the way) and insure the ever elusive and malignant American Ideal of Choice for the Consumer.
- Why should anyone have to "go back to school" to receive adequate, cost effective health care for themselves and their charges?
- If it is common knowledge that Medicare operates administratively much better than commercial insurance companies, why is the government "trusting" commercial insurance companies to administer Medicare Part D?
- Could it be that the current government is not interested in cost-effectiveness but rather in lining the pockets of powerful commercial lobbies?
- How much money is Medicare spending to explain an exceedingly difficult program which, ultimately, will need to be explained over and over again? Is this part of President Bush's Jobs Creation Plan for his second term? If it is, shouldn't these jobs be stimulated in the private sector and backed with laws and private agreements insuring livable wages and, yes, health care insurance?
- Is this program the beginning of an insinuative insurance that the pristine development of professional Medical Advocates will be imperceptibly overtaken by commercial medical-industrial interests and ultimately not operate on behalf of the patient but on behalf of the medical-industrial complex?
- If "help" for seniors is so readily available from family and outside sources, why do country-wide seminars have to be set up to teach seniors where to get help?
- We all know that no one, I repeat, no one relishes the possibility of declining mentality as one ages. If keeping mentally fit were as easy as going to a Medicare seminar, don't you suppose there would be a lot more seminars and a lot fewer seniors whose "intellectual acuity" (Thank you MFASRF) was in decline? Wouldn't you figure, in fact, that seminars would not be needed, that staying mentally fit would be as easy, as natural and as freely available as expanding intellectual ability in one's growing years?
- Why does President Bush and his administration, why, in fact, do most of our incumbent and prospective political leaders, as well, continue to institute and promote policies and programs which are clearly pro-business and anti-common-citizen?
Later.
