Medicare Advantage (Medicare Part C). Overall, Medicare provides nearly 42 million elderly and disabled citizens with healthcare benefits. About nineteen percent are covered by private health plans through Medicare Advantage. These plans generally provide all Medicare-covered benefits, including prescription drugs. Every year there are many legislative proposals introduced that would affect Medicare. You can rest assured that I am aware of the implications that changes to Medicare and the Medicare Advantage program could have on you and your loved ones, and I will be fighting to ensure the preservation of your benefits.
Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit (Medicare Part D). The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 created a new benefit to assist seniors with the rising costs of prescription drugs. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted in July 2006, over 80% of those enrolled in the benefit are satisfied with their coverage.
The Medicare prescription drug benefit has encouraged competition among providers, resulting in the average monthly premium for 2007 being $22 – 40% lower than originally predicted. Kentucky’s seniors are saving money, while at the same time access to vital prescription medications has increased.
Over 79,000 Medicare beneficiaries are currently receiving prescription drug benefits in Kentucky’s Fourth District. It has been reported that on average, seniors are saving $1,100 annually on prescription medications.
Problems with Medicare Part D?
If you are having difficulty with Medicare Part D, please contact my Fort Mitchell office at (859) 426-0080, and we will do everything we can to assist you. In addition, the Kentucky State Health Insurance Assistance Program (SHIP) is a valuable Medicare resource. SHIP provides information, counseling and assistance regarding the new Medicare benefit. Seniors, family members and care givers can acquire SHIP’s services by calling (877) 293-7447.
Government Negotiated Prices in Medicare Part D. During the new Majority’s 100 Hours Agenda for the 110th Congress, the House considered legislation that would permit the government to negotiate prices in the Medicare prescription drug program. After careful consideration of the evidence and all sides of the argument, I decided that the current plan allowing for private competition among plan providers would continue to result in the lowest prices for seniors.
In 2003, when Congress considered the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act (MMA), the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office determined that allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate drug prices would have no significant impact on drug prices, plan premiums or federal spending.
In January 2007, the Congressional Budget Office, responding to a request from House Energy and Commerce Chairman John Dingell [MI-15], stated that H.R. 4 “would have a negligible effect on federal spending, because we anticipate that the Secretary would be unable to negotiate prices across the broad range of covered Part D drugs that are more favorable than those obtained by PDPs (Prescription Drug Plans) under current law.”
Advocates for negotiated prices have likened their plan to the prescription benefits provided by the Veterans Administration (VA) and Medicaid. However, those programs do not work the same way as the Medicare Part D benefit. Careful research has demonstrated that conforming Medicare Part D to a VA-like plan, because of its size and scope of coverage, could result in negative consequences for beneficiaries, including reduced access to various drugs. Nearly 70% of all prescriptions filled by the VA are received through a mail-order pharmacy, and those on a VA plan are limited to the VA’s list of approved medications (a single formulary).
This would be an unworkable reality for Kentucky’s seniors who rely on community pharmacists to provide important and potentially life-saving information about prescriptions through face-to-face consultations. Currently, Medicare Part D covers more than 3,300 different prescriptions. If the government began negotiating drug prices, it would be forced to choose which drugs it could afford to buy. Prescriptions are not one-size fits all, but H.R. 4 would result in exactly that approach.
Initial reports indicate that private market forces and competition have resulted in lower drug costs, lower premiums and significantly less cost to the federal government than was predicted when the MMA was considered and enacted. The proposal to change this successful program, by requiring more government involvement, would result in fewer choices for seniors, no change in drug prices for seniors and no savings to the government. I voted against H.R. 4, and I urge the Senate to carefully consider the implications that this legislation could have for our seniors and the cost of their critical prescription medications.
Congressman Geoff Davis in the News...
5/17/2007 – Press Release: Congressman Davis Votes Against Budget That Will Harm Long-Term Solvency of Medicare
5/1/2007 – Column: Meaningful Entitlement Reform Is Needed
4/2/2007 – Column: Congress Continues Work on the Budget
3/27/2007 – Column: Congress Begins Consideration of the Budget
1/16/2007 – Column: Keep Medicare Part D Working the Way It Was Intended