Another $80-some Billion Down the Tubes
Business Week (which I wouldn't normally bother to read, but it shows up at our house and has actually been really good on Washington coverage lately) seems to be the only publication to pick up the issue that I thought was the single most disturbing aspect of the Medicare bill: the huge tax giveaway to companies that already provide retiree prescription drug benefits to "incentivize" them to keep doing so.
When I last commented on this, the number I had seen was $70 billion. In the end, apparently, it reached $86 billion, just $1 billion short of the supplemental cost for operations in Iraq that was so upsetting to people. And yet this has happened with almost no notice at all. Twenty-two cents of every dollar in the Medicare bill will go to this corporate tax subsidy.
Business Week confirms what had been my instinct: that these tax breaks will go to companies that would continue to provide retiree coverage anyway, or are bound to do so by long-term labor agreements, while the companies that want to drop coverage and can drop coverage will do so anyway. In other words, in addition to the fact that not one penny of this $86 billion tax break will improve the current conditions of life for any American, most of it will not even serve the purpose intended.
BW Online | December 15, 2003 | Commentary: Medicare's $86 Billion Band-Aid (requires registration)
[The bill] also threatens the nearly 12 million retirees who now get drug insurance from their former employers. The reason: With a government-financed option now available, many companies will consider dumping coverage and letting Medicare provide drugs for their retirees instead.
To prevent such a shift, Congress bought a little insurance of its own: It set aside $86 billion to induce employers to keep providing prescription drug benefits over the next decade. Problem is, much of that funding will be wasted. That's because it will provide a windfall for some employers unlikely ever to drop coverage. And it isn't enough to forestall others from joining the trend toward slashing retiree benefits. In fact, the new legislation will allow some companies to blame Washington for dropped coverage. "Retirees will get a letter from their former employer that begins, 'Due to recent legislative changes in Congress..."' says Heritage Foundation health policy analyst Edmund F. Haislmaier.
WHY DIDN'T CONGRESS design a better solution? Mostly, because nobody can think of one -- short of redesigning the entire Medicare program, a step Congress rejected. The subsidy may have its flaws, but without it, most retirees would wind up with Medicare coverage, which is less comprehensive than private plans.
That conclusion, though, is maddeningly weak. The article pretty solidly establishes that many retirees will end up shifted to Medicare coverage anyway, and that those who won't, wouldn't have been shifted even without the subsidy. In other words, it is entirely likely that there would be zero net difference in employer coverage of retiree drug benefits as a result of the tax break. So how is this the only solution anyone could think of? How about the alternative of a stick instead of a carrot? Companies that cut off benefits could have been denied existing tax breaks for their executives' health benefits. Or, Democrats could have offered a plan focused on catastrophic coverage. Instead of cutting off drug coverage completely at $2400 in costs, real insurance would mean coverage that starts at about that level, and covers everything above a certain amount. It would be cheaper for the insured, cheaper for the taxpayer, and it would actually avoid this problem, because it would be complementary to most retiree plans, rather than duplicative.
That $86 billion, by the way, is likely to be much more in the next ten years. Just another big slice out of our long-term ability to fix Social Security, deal with future recessions, repair the entire health care system, etc. There ought to be more outrage.
Posted by Mark Schmitt on December 14, 2003 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Another $80-some Billion Down the Tubes:
» Bmw. Bmw part bmw motorcycle bmw usa bmw m3 bmw car from Godzik Blog
2005 BMW 5-Series. Competition from Acura, Audi and Mercedes-Benz Make AWD 5-Series Reality... [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 24, 2005 6:34:22 AM
Tracked on Jun 25, 2005 12:48:14 PM
» Conspicuous absenc from Crooked Ti mber
Forbes is the latest magazine trying to capitalize on the blogging thing by holding a best blog competition across various categories. It’s interesting to note that no less than 53% of voters say that the best blog on the economy... [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 28, 2005 10:27:10 AM
» Email, RSS un Wikis from HIRSCgarden
Reiner Langenhan schreibt auf Handakte Von E-Mails zu RSS, in Reaktion auf meinen Beitrag im KMU-Blog: das kann ich nur best䴩gen! Ross Mayfield hat einen recht 䨮lichen Artikel in seinem Blog zu... [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 30, 2005 11:17:13 AM
» Finding Information on the Internet from Net Search
The University of California Berkeley recommends search strategies, explains search tools, and gives guidance on evaluating and citing web pages... [Read More]
Tracked on May 3, 2006 8:26:00 AM
Tracked on May 28, 2006 12:48:12 AM
Tracked on May 28, 2006 5:22:22 PM
Tracked on Jun 9, 2006 10:39:53 AM
Tracked on Jul 24, 2006 11:13:56 PM
Posted by: vera | Mar 12, 2005 3:56:46 PM
anunciate ya anuncios gratis
ven a chatear gratis
liens gratuits en dur
portal web de motril
Posted by: portal web gratis | Sep 8, 2007 12:21:59 PM