|
QUESTION:
|
NYT article - proposed 5.1% cut in 2007 Medicare payments across the board | The following article came from the New York Times, though I found it through another article on the Internet.
If you've wondered how the Administration is cutting costs in order to balance the budget, this is one way that they propose to do it. These Medicare payment cuts will save Medicare $13 billion over the next five years, according to the Administration. (In contrast, according to MSNBC, we spend about $200 million every day in our Iraqi War; that's about $73 billion per year, or $365 billion over 5 years if my math is still intact.)
The Administration saves about 3.6% by cutting Medicare payments.
The NYT article goes on to say that these Medicare payment cuts are based on the assumption that doctors’ fees under Medicare will be cut in 2007 and later years, as required under the statutory formula.
So as Baby Boomers start to retire, they, and we, will find that our Medicare costs will continue to go up by double digit percentages even as doctors cut back on the Medicare services that they will provide.
Medicare Payments to Doctors Face Cuts
>
>
> By ROBERT PEAR
> Published: August 9, 2006
> WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 — The Bush administration on
> Tuesday proposed a cut of 5.1 percent across the
> board in Medicare payments for services provided by
> doctors to elderly and disabled patients in 2007.
>
> Skip to next paragraph Related White House
> Alters Plan to Make Large Cuts in Hospitals’
> Medicare Payments (August 3, 2006)
>
> It said the cut was required because spending on
> doctors’ services was increasing faster than
> expected, and faster than the annual goals set by a
> statutory formula.
>
> The increase directly affects beneficiaries
> because their premiums are set each year to cover
> about 25 percent of projected spending under Part B
> of Medicare, which pays for doctors’ services and
> other outpatient care.
>
> Dr. Mark B. McClellan, administrator of the
> Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said
> Tuesday that the premium would probably rise to
> $98.40 next year, up $9.90 or 11 percent over this
> year’s premium. The figures do not include separate
> premiums paid by many beneficiaries for prescription
> drug coverage.
>
> “Our current system of paying for physician
> services is simply not sustainable, from the point
> of view of taxpayers or Medicare beneficiaries,’’
> Dr. McClellan said.
>
> The White House, Congress and doctors have been
> talking for more than a year about ways to link
> Medicare payments to the quality of care doctors
> provide. To date, they have not offered any specific
> proposals and are still seeking ways to measure the
> quality of care, particularly for medical
> specialists.
>
> More than 42 million people are insured by
> Medicare. Officials estimate that the program will
> pay $61.5 billion to 875,000 doctors and other
> health care professionals next year.
>
> Such spending has increased sharply in recent
> years, Dr. McClellan said, because of “increases in
> the number and complexity of services furnished to
> Medicare beneficiaries, including more frequent and
> intensive office visits, and rapid growth in the use
> of imaging techniques, laboratory services and
> physician-administered drugs.’’
>
> Budget estimates are based on the assumption that
> doctors’ fees under Medicare will be cut in 2007 and
> later years, as required under the statutory
> formula. Congress often steps in to block or
> moderate such cuts, but it normally looks for some
> way to offset the cost of its action, often by
> trimming payments to other health care providers.
>
> Dr. McClellan said it would cost the government
> $13 billion over five years if it blocked the cut
> scheduled for 2007, without giving doctors any
> allowance for inflation. The costs would ripple
> through later years because future updates would be
> computed from a higher starting point.
>
> Federal officials |  | asked by grandpa24551, 8/31/2006 |
|
Categories:
Health Insurance, Medicare
|
|
|
| Your answer will be the first. |
|
|
|
