“In 2016,
federal payments to plans are estimated to be 2 percent higher than traditional
Medicare spending, on average, including the bonus payments.“
Yeah? So? Well, if you don’t recall or
don’t follow the history, in 2009 Medicare was paying private insurers about 14% more for seniors enrolled in
Medicare Advantage than if the same seniors had stayed in traditional Medicare
(Part A and Part B). Here's a typical article of the time - again, third paragraph.
The
reduction in cost relative to traditional Medicare from +14% to +2% since 2009 is a very important achievement – particularly when one considers how sharply Obamacare costs have risen from 2010 to the present..
And don’t forget that Medicare Advantage coverage is superior to original Medicare. As a result, most seniors who enroll in Medicare Advantage have no need to purchase a Medicare Supplement policy, at their own expense, to fill in the gaps in original Medicare coverage. Yet private insurers are now able to provide Medicare Advantage for only 2% more than the cost of original Medicare. The better Medicare Advantage coverage is worth the 2% and maybe more. So this outcome is a win for seniors, a win for all taxpayers, and a win for CMS – which is why I wanted to draw attention to it.
And don’t forget that Medicare Advantage coverage is superior to original Medicare. As a result, most seniors who enroll in Medicare Advantage have no need to purchase a Medicare Supplement policy, at their own expense, to fill in the gaps in original Medicare coverage. Yet private insurers are now able to provide Medicare Advantage for only 2% more than the cost of original Medicare. The better Medicare Advantage coverage is worth the 2% and maybe more. So this outcome is a win for seniors, a win for all taxpayers, and a win for CMS – which is why I wanted to draw attention to it.
Posts
