Kill Bill—to Expand Medicare
By Scott Holleran
October 14, 2003
From time to time, Congress passes, and the
President signs, a bill that forever changes every American's life.
The Medicare prescription drug coverage bill—which President Bush
has vowed to sign—is such an event; if passed, this expansion of
Medicare, like the Medicare Act of 1965, will make history.
With the nation at war following a devastating
attack, the economy struggling, and every realistic economic analyst
forecasting financial trouble for the 38-year-old government
program, expanding Medicare is among the most ill conceived notions
in American politics. The motive: to pay for prescription drugs for
seniors.
Seniors rank among the richest, if not the
wealthiest, generation of old people to exist—they are generally
far more active, lively and prosperous than their parents—and all
we hear about seniors is where they're taking this year's vacation
and how to refinance their second homes. Few, if any, seniors are
forced to choose between prescription drugs and dinner, so on what
grounds do Congress and the President propose to grant seniors a
huge drug subsidy?
Because, Medicare expansion advocates claim,
drugs are expensive. There's no doubt about that—prescription
drugs are expensive for Americans at any age—and the relatively
high cost is related to higher demand for drugs among people over
age 65, who are living longer than anyone expected because
drugs are helping to prolong their lives.
Robbing from future generations of Americans to
pay for the richest seniors in history is deeply immoral, but that
has not moved Congress or the President to kill the Medicare drug
subsidies bill.
Maybe this will: the bill is likely to eliminate
retired Americans' existing prescription drug benefits. Just how
many companies will be forced to kill drug coverage for retired
employees is impossible to predict, but the lowest estimate based on
studies puts the number of employers who will stop paying for drugs
at 37 percent of those who currently offer such plans. That's
according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The Congressional conference committee
negotiating Medicare expansion is led by Sen. Frist (R, TN), who is
wholly determined to enact the largest expansion of the state's role
in health care in almost 40 years.
Apparently, Sen. Frist has become alarmed at the
prospect of seniors getting dumped for drug coverage and he has
ordered committee members to devise ways to force employers
to do it. Until now, employers were relatively free to decide what
benefits they offer their employees.
Sen. Frist's dictate is based on the concept of
force. However employers are forced to provide benefits is
irrelevant; the mere consideration of such measures is tantamount to
nationalization of employee benefits. In any form, it is a dangerous
step toward national socialism, an economic system in which the
state controls the corporation.
Sen. Frist, a heart surgeon who chose to practice
politics over practicing medicine, doesn't stop there: according to
the Associated Press, the committee recently issued a memorandum
demanding that members act in total secrecy. In conjunction with
President Bush, who basically named him as Senate Majority Leader,
Sen. Frist is running the committee like it's Hillary Clinton's
Health Care Task Force.
There is no real demand for an expansion of
Medicare among the American people. Surveys show that America's
seniors are wary of drug coverage provided by the state and even the
most loyal Bush defenders, such as the Heritage Foundation, oppose
Medicare expansion.
This is a crucial moment for those who seek free
choice in medicine and yearn for a real reckoning with the cause of
America's higher health care costs: government intervention.
Americašs patients, doctors, and drug companies are on the brink of
losing the right to control their health care and there is a slim
chance to stop it. Today, Americans face a fundamental choice in
their health care: either oppose the proliferation of Medicare or
let America make one, big, historic leap—toward government-run
health care.
Scott Holleran is a freelance writer in California.
Copyright © 2003 Americans for Free Choice in Medicine. All rights reserved.
For reprint permission, contact AFCM.
|
Print Page
E-mail Page