CALIFORNIA
Check out the new California section

McManus: Mixing Medicare and mudslinging

ElectionsPoliticsHealthMedicareHealth InsuranceRepublican PartyDemocratic Party

Don't look now, but the 2012 election is turning into a national referendum on what to do about Medicare.

Democrats want to run on the issue — and to charge that Republican proposals to change Medicare into a voucher-based system would end the current guarantee of virtually unlimited healthcare for the elderly.

The chairman of their House campaign committee, Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), has told candidates to stress three issues: "Medicare, Medicare and Medicare."

At least some Republicans — such as Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), author of a leading GOP Medicare proposal — say they welcome that fight. "Medicare is the issue," Ryan told reporters last week.

Ryan believes Republicans can only lose if they play defense and allow Democrats to "scare seniors." Instead, he argues that if the party spells out its ideas clearly, it can win a mandate to transform Medicare from a government-run plan to one run mostly by insurance companies.

That means voters may face a choice this fall not only over who should be president but also over how Medicare, the biggest driver of the federal deficit, should cut its costs: through government jawboning and regulation (the method prescribed by President Obama's healthcare reform law) or via free-market pressure applied through insurance companies (Ryan's prescription, endorsed by the GOP presidential candidates).

In simplified terms, Ryan's plan issues every senior citizen a voucher to buy a private insurance policy and relies on insurance companies to keep costs down. Last month he added a new element: the option of retaining old-fashioned Medicare. But the system would still rely on competition to keep basic costs below the value of the voucher, which would rise within a limit set by Congress.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has signed on to cosponsor Ryan's latest scheme, but most Democrats reject it, charging that it would shift much of the burden of rising costs onto the elderly.

In his budget proposal last week, Obama suggested cuts of about $300 billion in Medicare spending over the next 10 years, but said they should be borne mostly by drug companies and other providers. And he called for strengthening the new Independent Payment Advisory Board, a federal panel that is supposed to make healthcare spending more efficient but is barred from recommending restrictions in benefits.

"What I will not support are efforts to turn Medicare into a voucher," the president said, planting his feet in opposition to the Ryan-Wyden plan.

And there, in a nutshell, is the problem: A heated, polarized election campaign isn't the best forum to debate complex, competing proposals for bringing down healthcare costs.

Presidential and congressional candidates aren't likely to look for ways to combine the best of each approach. Instead, they're heading into their ideological corners.

There's a lot of merit in the Ryan-Wyden proposal. "It's a good compromise," notes Alice Rivlin, an early proponent of Medicare vouchers and the former director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Clinton. "It preserves traditional Medicare; it gives people more options. But now that the Republican presidential candidates have endorsed it, the Democrats feel they have to reject it."

There's a lot of merit in Obama's advisory board too. Republicans denounce it as an unelected board of 15 that would dictate healthcare decisions, but that's not true; the healthcare law limited its influence over medical practices, and Congress retained the right to overrule the board's recommendations.

"These plans will have bad results only if you implement them badly," Rivlin said. "There's no reason to assume the worst outcomes."

Which is no doubt what both sides will do. Last week Mitt Romney attacked Obama for failing to "take any meaningful steps toward solving our entitlement crisis," even though the healthcare act does just that. He also slammed Obama as "the only president in modern history to cut Medicare benefits," even though Romney's proposals cut benefits too.

There's a shred of good news buried in this shrill debate: Both sides agree that Medicare's costs need to be reined in. Many on both sides support raising the eligibility age and increasing the cost of Medicare for affluent users.

Both sides recognize that Medicare spends billions of dollars wastefully and that some mechanism must be found to end that waste. Most Americans, however, still don't think Medicare needs to be cut at all. In a National Journal poll released last week, 80% said just that.

It would be a great service if the presidential candidates of both major parties disabused voters of that notion and helped them focus on the real choices we face. But don't hold your breath.

In the end, unless one party wins big and takes both halves of Congress as well as the White House, there won't be a very clear mandate at all — and the difficult work of Medicare reform could be even harder than before.

doyle.mcmanus@latimes.com

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
ElectionsPoliticsHealthMedicareHealth InsuranceRepublican PartyDemocratic Party
  • Children's Health Insurance Program deserves funding
    Children's Health Insurance Program deserves funding

    In what may be a hopelessly quixotic effort, supporters of the federal Children's Health Insurance Program are trying to persuade Congress to renew its funding almost a year in advance — and in a lame-duck session. Nevertheless, lawmakers ought to heed that call. The program plugs...

  • In the Obamacare birth-control debate, there's a logical path
    In the Obamacare birth-control debate, there's a logical path

    In case you haven't encountered enough illogic in the American healthcare system, consider this: Once a medication has been determined to be safe and effective enough to be available without a prescription, we assume it should no longer be covered by insurance. That doesn't follow,...

  • Why California needs Prop. 45
    Why California needs Prop. 45

    If you believe the advertising on television, health insurance in California is now the best deal since sliced bread.

  • Anthem Blue Cross' welcome new HMO idea
    Anthem Blue Cross' welcome new HMO idea

    The 2010 federal healthcare law experimented with a number of ways to limit healthcare costs, but the real impetus to hold down spending has come from those who pay for coverage — most notably large employers and governments — and from doctors, hospitals and insurers seeking more...

  • Dad pleads: Don't let health insurance offer my daughters birth control!
    Dad pleads: Don't let health insurance offer my daughters birth control!

    Remember the prediction that the Supreme Court’s decision to let Hobby Lobby opt out of Obamacare contraception coverage would open the floodgates for more of the same?

  • Don't turn down a Medi-Cal gift, Gov. Brown
    Don't turn down a Medi-Cal gift, Gov. Brown

    The 2010 federal healthcare reform law let states expand Medicaid, the joint federal-state health insurance program for the poor, largely at federal expense. California is one of 27 states that have taken up Washington's offer, and well over 1 million newly eligible residents signed up...

  • A California solution for a Medicaid quirk
    A California solution for a Medicaid quirk

    The 2010 federal healthcare reform law required virtually all adult Americans to carry insurance, starting this year. And to help make policies affordable, it offered subsidies to lower-income households while expanding the Medicaid insurance program to more of the poorest residents. But...

  • What can be done about Covered California's doctor gap?
    What can be done about Covered California's doctor gap?

    The insurance reforms in the 2010 federal healthcare law went into full effect this year, dramatically reducing the number of Californians who don't have health coverage. At the same time, however, some low- and moderate-income residents have struggled to find doctors who'll take...

Comments
Loading