So I worked with the Congress and we've modernized Medicare, and for the first time, seniors can now get a prescription drug benefit under Medicare. And that's what we're here to talk about: the benefits of such a program; the need for people to, at the very minimum, take a look to see whether or not that program makes sense, and if it does make sense, to sign up on it. You'll hear me make the case: It's a good deal. Now, don't take my word for it. I would hope people would seek advice, seniors seek advice as to whether or not it's a good deal. Twenty-six million seniors so far have taken a look and said, I think it's worthwhile to sign up.Let's see. So far we find out from this little PR Junket, conducted at a good deal of American Taxpayer expense, we see the number of new enrollees is established at 26 million.
THE PRESIDENT: No, I'm the emcee. (Laughter.) You're the explainer. (Laughter.) You know how these PhDs are, you know, they kind of -- (laughter.)So, here we see the first discrepancy pointed out by Scotty McMessage McClellan's brother, the Good Doctor in charge of CMS. The number is more like 20 million.
DR. McCLELLAN: That's right. Well, we had more than 20 million people start in this program at the beginning of January. And January is always the toughest time for pharmacies anyway; a lot of people changing coverage. And some of the people starting the program didn't have all their information in the computer systems, especially some people with Medicare and Medicaid who had previously been getting their drug coverage from Medicaid. And we saw some long wait times on the health lines for the pharmacies and the health lines for beneficiaries.
But we went out, we talked to pharmacists like Diane. We went around the country. Secretary Mike Leavitt from HHS, as well, was leading this effort to find out what was working, what wasn't, and what needed to be fixed, and we've been doing that.
THE PRESIDENT: Thanks. Thirty -- 26 million people have signed up. That requires a lot of community effort around the country. And I want to thank Susan and others who just make sure the opportunity is at least presented in a way that people can make a choice. And the amazing thing about our country is we've got a lot of really decent souls, like Susan, at the community level who are very concerned about somebody else, that they want to help somebody. And one way to help somebody is to let seniors know about the opportunities available in this Medicare reform.So, the President is now confused about the number himself - is it 30 or 26 million? Or is it closer to 20 Million, as the good Doctor McClellan suggest? Why is this number important? How did they reach this number in the first place and is there somewhere that I can check it's veractity? Does the very fact that this many people have signed up for a new, bigger-government program that didn't exist before mean it is successful?
And you're signing up quite a few people, I understand.
MS. WILBER: We've had quite a few people sign up initially.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. How's it going?
MS. WILBER: It's going well. There was a little bit of confusion at first, but --
Again, I ask that all seniors who are bloggers who have experience with this new benefit, please share your stories as comments to this post. I would be curious to see how the actual end user views this program. Is it as successful as the W, Rove and Co would have us believe?
7 comments:
Not in the age bracket yet. But from what I have heard from folks on local tv, this thing is a bear to figure out.
My 88 year-old mother is definitely in the age group here, but MOST fortunately, thanks to my dogged pursuit of why the fuck her shitty old doctor in OHIO had her on some very heavy-duty meds that only seemed to make her suffer horrendous side effects - can you pick up on my contempt and anger here, folks?- she's only taking a multiple vitamin and an 81 gram aspirin every day. She doesn't need any Rx coverage, and if she did, her teachers' retirement health plan seems fine. We got the damned info on the Medicare stuff, and it was absolutely baffling. No way in HELL she'd ever be able to figure it out, or even me, unless my beloved spouse, who seems fluent in weird dialects such as Federal Tax Code, helped me through it.
So I guess I can't offer any experience with it other than to say I'm relieved we don't have to deal with it.
I recently saw a news article somewhere concerning its effect on pharmacies. They say they're losing money because of it. Article from yesterday's NYT,states that "...many independent pharmacies might have to shut their doors because they are not being paid adequately or promptly under Medicare."
Well, Bush/Cheney/Rove no doubt do not give a flyin gfuck about independent pharmacies, is my gut reaction. There are some other interesting bits in the article, written by one Robert Pear.
From what I understand any older person who does not have someone to help them with this could do the wrong thing and screw themselves badly.
All the elderly should ban together and sue the fucking gov for torturing them with this crap.
You know, Isa, your comment makes me think again as to why the W, Rove and Co. is so hot for this idea - and then it occured to me - perhaps they have pals in the consolidated pharmacalogical markets as well as the insurance industry that stand to win big with this change. No surprise there. The sad story of it is that the nation's old folks are going to get screwed, and if you are not, chances are you don't need Medicare or Medicaid in the first place.
PoP - you may be right, suing the government may have to happen before there is any positive change. I too don't fit in the category and don't have enough familiarity with the program to have a bone of contention with it, but still, the bugaboo about the numbers is totally confusing in the first place.
Blog on all.
I love that they're trying to blame this fiasco on JANUARY! On JANUARY for chrissakes! "January is always the toughest month for pharmacies..." Jesus, they have NO shame. I think I won't bother to pay my taxes this year and if they ask I'll just blame it on April. "April is always the toughest month for me. If I could just get rid of April, I'd be OK...
There's no mystery about why there's a Medicare Part D
The Drug 'benefit' was supposed to buy the vote of Senior Citizens, notably heavy voters, for Republicans, forever.
Unfortunately, the benefit was so poorly constructed that no one could figure it out. What is clear is that it's an insurance plan, not a 'benefit' per se. Seniors who aren't currently on drugs are supposed to buy insurance, to subsidize Seniors who are using prescription drugs. The hole in the plan is that coverage is not mandatory, Seniors don't have to buy into a plan, of which there are hundreds varying by state. If you're not currently buying drugs in excess of what a plan would cost, why would you buy it? when you're no worse off than you are today, having to buy your own drugs should you need them at a later date. For Seniors who have huge drug bills, Part D is a winner since the government (that's you) is subsidizing them. For everyone else its just a loser.
What you should expect. When the government subsidizes anything you're going to get more of it at higher prices. Drugs, corn converted to alcohol for your car, etc..
The clear winners are insurance companies who handle the paper for their usual fee, and the drug companies who now charge retail for a product that under any sensible government scheme would be priced at wholesale. Part D forbids the government negotiating lower prices with the drug companies. Someone is getting screwed. (That's you.)
If the ordinary non-Senior voter ever figures this out, the Republicans are doomed. I'm betting they won't.
Medicare Part D new signups number 5 million
March 16, 2006
Cameron W. Barr writes in The Washington Post: ''In his pitch for the program, Bush was misleading about its success so far.
"Since the program got going, 26 million seniors have signed up. That's a lot. Pretty quick period of time -- 26 million people take a look and signed up for the program," he said.
But, as Barr writes, "that figure includes 21 million who were already receiving prescription drug coverage."
Do the math. 26-21=5
More lies from the Liar-in-Chief.
Post a Comment