Medicare Buy-In Proposal Could Begin In 2010

There is "growing enthusiasm" for a proposal that would make Medicare coverage available to more consumers as early as next year, a Democratic source with knowledge of health care negotiations tells the Huffington Post.

Throughout the day, Senate Democrats have been feeling out a supplemental compromise to the public option that would allow consumers between the ages of 55 and 64 to buy into Medicare. The sticking point, at least for progressives, has been how quickly such coverage will be made available.

Now, it appears, negotiators are making headway to ensure that the expansion would take place at a far quicker pace than any proposed public option. According to the well-placed source, Democrats are rallying behind a proposal that would allow a portion of the 55-64 year old age group to buy in to the Medicare system as early as 2010. By contrast, a public plan for insurance coverage would not come into being until 2014.

This would be a major breakthrough in the context of negotiations. Former DNC Chairman Howard Dean, who was responsible for pushing the buy-in proposal among Senate Democrats this past week, told Think Progress that he backed the idea, but only if it was available from day one. A Democratic aide on the Hill confirmed that discussions about a start date for such a Medicare buy-in proposal were, indeed, taking place. Though the Hill source cautioned that discussions are fluid.

In addition to debating a potential start date for a Medicare buy-in proposal, Senate Democrats are also in negotiations over who, exactly, should be allowed to qualify for the expanded Medicare program. At this juncture, it doesn't appear that everyone in the 55-64-age bracket would be granted access. Negotiators are considering limiting consumers to those who would qualify for high-risk insurance pools already set up under the Senate's health care legislation. This would mean primarily those who have been uninsured for a certain amount of time, have a history of poor health or are unable to get insurance because of a preexisting condition. The Senate has already earmarked $5 billion for subsidies for this group to buy insurance and may increase that total to help them pay for Medicare coverage -- should it become available to those under 65 and above 55 years of age.

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[PaxEterna]

03:14 PM on 12/09/2009

Our so-called leaders are as bad as the insurance companies: they slice and dice, steer and tier, until the reform, such as it is, is whittled away to nothing.

Problem solvers? No way.

What good is "opening up Medicare" (the spin) if the reality is that the door is barely opened and then you have to wait in line and pay through the nose?

Another hoax on the American people.

[EdCoughlin]

02:57 PM on 12/09/2009

This would just force people 55-64 to spend X number of months/years uninsured so they could get into the high rick pool for cheaper medicare coverage. It is a stupid handout to insurance companies to put any restrictions on it. We should let anyone over 55 buy in the day the bill passes and then move the minimum age down over time until everyone is covered in a medicare for all program.

No restrictions other then being an American Citizen. Everyone from 1-100 included. Would be great, just like such a system is in almost every other major country.

[Lefty08]

01:08 AM on 12/10/2009

Totally agree Ed...

[Grannysue]

12:44 PM on 12/09/2009

Trust me folks after a liftime working in healthcare management this is a GOOD deal, let's get behind it please, and tell them there's no reason to delay they can open up the enrollment in 2010, the program is already in place, it's a No Brainer!

[PaxEterna]

03:15 PM on 12/09/2009

Read the fine print ...it is not what they are saying it is.

[tibetanterrier]

12:00 PM on 12/09/2009

Why not open Medicare to all the undesirables? This is not reform this is a hoax on the taxpayer

[minerva117]

12:16 PM on 12/09/2009

Honey, that was taken off the table before negotiations even began. It's called Single Payer, and it had Big Insurance and Big Pharma leaving skid marks in their underoos. All of the congeresscritters who rely on the largesse of these two groups for campaign $$$$ made sure that the best, fairest, cheapest and most inclusive reform didn't even see the light of day.

[ampersand59]

02:18 PM on 12/09/2009

Could you explain to me what humanbeing do you classifiy as undesirables: is it your mother-in -law or close relatives who you disdain?

[tibetanterrier]

04:26 PM on 12/09/2009

Read the article again! To qualify for Medicare you have to have a prior illness or chronic sickness.. Undesirables are those rejected by BIG Insurance.

[JoAnnCr]

11:40 AM on 12/09/2009

What's the point of giving up a Robust Public Option (which admittedly has faded into ancient history) for a Medicare for ages 55-65 if only a few people can get in?

Is anyone getting the feeling we are in a corporate dictatorship existing just to line the pockets of the extremely rich and powerful? Caste system anyone?!?

[Lefty08]

01:14 AM on 12/10/2009

These days, according to most insurance companies, if you have anything from serious illness, cancer, heart disease, MS, to migraines, high cholesterol, zits, boils, runny nose, etc. etc. you are considered high risk....th­at sounds like most people to me.

[goodnews7]

11:35 AM on 12/09/2009

The Medicare Buy-In Compromise
A Senate working group is considering a Medicare buy-in option as an alternative to the hotly contested public option, which would provide an alternative insurance exchange in competition with the private insurers. Although full details aren’t available yet, it appears that it would allow people aged 55 and over to buy-in to Medicare at reasonable cost.

That sounds good at first, until you consider how many people might actually be able to use the new benefit and why the public option was needed. It looks suspiciously like a “feel-good” provision that will be largely useless at fixing the problems with the current system. Remember that half of the population is covered by private plans, a third by government run plans, and one sixth (around 44 million) have no health [...]
http://silverbuzzcafe.com/?p=5887

[FWDpost]

11:20 AM on 12/09/2009

This is another joke from Obama and gang. You can get Medicare early if you pay the premium, have been uninsured for a long time, qualify for a high risk pool, and have a pre-existing condition. What a benefit for the insurance companies - taxpayers will pay for the sickest, and healthy people over 55 will continue to pay $800 a month for private insurance.
Kucinich for President. Nader for President. Hell, even McCain is starting to look better than Baracken Promises.

[MaryMay]

10:34 AM on 12/09/2009

This is a stellar result for the health insurance companies.

They get rid of the aging baby boomer population, which will surely be tapping into more expensive medical procedures as it ages over the next decade and beyond.

The insurance companies will be enrolling millions of younger and healthier persons. Their coffers will swell.

Their costs will go down, their revenues will go up. In a perfect world, they would pass on the savings in the form of lower premiums to those whom they insure.

Not gonna happen. Beautifully orchestrated. They won.

[mark331blue]

10:42 AM on 12/09/2009

Yep.

[Lefty08]

01:28 AM on 12/10/2009

Mmmm....don't think so. I am a relatively healthy 55 yr. old....but I have migraines. Since I own my own business, I can only get individual health insurance which is basically unaffordable since they consider migraines (not a terminal condition) a pre-existing condition. Not only has it been difficult to find an insurance company that would not exclude anything "neuroIogically-related, but when you can find one, the premiums are just not affordable. And the drug co-pays are outrageous as well. I would be willing to pay a reasonable premium for adequate coverage. I know others that would qualify by age and situation as well. Right now, believe it or not I know a person where the high risk pool is the only option because the insurance companies have deemed that moderately high cholesterol is the only "pre-existing condition". There are millions of people in this situation-- Premiums are unaffordable because of bogus label of "Pre-existing condition."

[braytjr]

10:11 AM on 12/09/2009

This might just work. In 2011 we can lower the age to 45 - 55 and raise the age of S-CHIP to 25. By 2012, the age could be lowered to 35 - 45. After the 2012 elections we throw Medicare wide open for everyone. This might be the first step of providing universal health care by 2014.

[Rastaman1967]

10:18 AM on 12/09/2009

totally agreed. Let's get this done first. I really believe by the time 2012 comes around, Obama will make this a campaign pledge to get those 45-55 into this program. Here is why I think this has a real shot, we all know that the insurance companies will continue to try and squeeze consumers...more evident that the one payer system will work.

[nohobear]

11:59 AM on 12/09/2009

He's very good at campaign pledges, isn't he? Keeping them, not so much. You've been duped my friend. As have I.

[Deruist]

08:47 AM on 12/09/2009

I'm all for the Medicare Buy-In, definitely want it in 2010.
Make it affordable, not Cobra priced!

[Lefty08]

01:29 AM on 12/10/2009

Sign me up too.

[Buffyboy]

07:38 AM on 12/09/2009

"Buy-in"? I guess it depends on what it costs.

[rgilley]

09:24 AM on 12/09/2009

Exactly, the question is, what's in it for big insurance and pharma.
Plenty I'll bet.

[bungerman]

05:42 AM on 12/09/2009

this is all good in theory, expanding medicare, but where are the cost controls exactly without the public option competition? This is the second biggest reason we are undertaking reform. First, health care obviously, but second, curb the costs that will bankrupt the system in the not so near future because without that, eventually there will be medicare for nobody.

[Cryptic Quill]

01:49 AM on 12/09/2009

Reposting from earlier; the board was going very quickly and I wanted to make a few corrections.

The Medicare plan is good but this still could be better. Out of disclosure I will say I’m fiscal conservative but I cross party lines on social issues, so all in all I completely understand if you take what I say with a salt mine. Medicare is, for all of its faults, an extremely effective example of smart government. Its main vulnerability is through fraud but that’s because only (if I’m not mistaken) about 5% of the cases are audited. I’m hopeful Senator Reid will use this to move the debate along because the public option started strong and ended as a watered down shell.

The left has an incredible, once in a generation opportunity here and there’s time. Don’t offer any more compromises to the right, my occasional party will do nothing but sit in their squishy pants and demand more. Ham.me.r that this is a long term investment with substantial savings in both terms of dollars and lives; that preventative care benefits the entire country. Over 45 million lack basic healthcare insurance; it doesn’t mean they don’t fall ill. If the argument is about cost, wait another 20 years and it will be completely unattainable. I say open Medicare as a buy in for all, it already has the experience and resources in place it just needs stronger anti-fraud safeguards.

Thank you for taking the time to read.

[Ifticar2]

02:18 AM on 12/09/2009

It is a shame that impersonating a Republican is not crime. We could have you arrested.

[Cunningham]

03:15 AM on 12/09/2009

"I’m fiscal conservative but I cross party lines on social issues"

"my occasional party"



He never claimed to be a republican.

[billw8017]

02:55 AM on 12/09/2009

Medical care is big; it commands a larger share of our national economy than manufacturing does. Medicare is comprehensive; it would have to funnel every penny of health care provisioning if extended over all. Altogether, this would be a tremendous step. To leave anybody without essential care is a moral outrage, but it's too late to worry about that. This is where we are right now.

Proceeding in steps is the right way to put in a plan that sticks.

I hope the Medicare extension is made effective in 2010. I always thought setting 2013-13 as the effective date was a concession to the Republicans because it made the plan less political. In view of their obduracy, they don't deserve that much mercy.

[Raccoon1]

11:39 AM on 12/09/2009

It's not so much the medical care. It''s expensive because of advertising expenses, dividends for investors, high salaries and bonuses for executives, and lobbyist expenses. Take them away and health care becomes more affordable. Medicare runs on a three percent overhead.

[Clem2]

01:44 AM on 12/09/2009

Are they getting rid of that abomination of Medicare Part D? that's the overpriced drug program that was a handout to drug companies and insurance companies?

Would love to see that go.

[Ifticar2]

02:18 AM on 12/09/2009

Are you on Medicare? If not, do you plan to live long enough to be on Medicare?

[LiteSleeper]

02:27 AM on 12/09/2009

What does this nonsensical statement have to do with what Clem2 said? Medicare D IS a rip-off. Does all the same stuff of Medicare B at higher cost. Oh yeah, that private enterprise is sure efficient.

[billw8017]

03:01 AM on 12/09/2009

I am on Medicare. My doctor told me to have my eyes checked, and I kept putting it off until shortly before our next session. I came across a place that advertised the examination at $50. When I said, the doctor had advised the exam, they submitted a bill to Medicare.

They asked for $90, got $46, and I saved six dollars. It was nice of them to split the swag with me.

This is how drugs cost half as much in Canada.

[kassandrasduplex]

01:02 AM on 12/09/2009

In other words, the 55 to 64 year olds will be given the opportunity to buy insurance for themselves. How generous and progressive of our leaders. And you'd think that simply by being tax paying citizens they had already "bought" into Medicare. (Of course their taxes go to Afghanistan and Iraq ...)
Maybe this will be the way the Democrats and Obama make up for the $400 BILLION in cuts they are making to Medicare Medicaid.

[murphy20]

01:21 AM on 12/09/2009

Read the article again. It states that it would be restricted to those who were UNABLE to get insurance due to pre-existing conditions or who would qualify for high risk insurance pools.

The only thing being cut from Medicare is the Advantage plans, which pay commercial carriers an outrageous bribe to act as a third party administrator for Medicare HMOs. It's the same policy as a Medicare HMO, except that the taxpayer is paying for the bribe for no good reason. It's ludicrous. Advantage plans were enacted in 2003 as a payoff for campaign contributions. Sound familiar?

[Ifticar2]

02:21 AM on 12/09/2009

Those of us that have Medicare have been paying for it all of our lives. I had been paying for it for 40 year while getting nothing in return. Now that I am on Medicare, I am still paying for it. I get a bill every month from Medicare.

[rgilley]

09:41 AM on 12/09/2009

The simple and obvious reason is that politicians have robbed medicare accounts almost since the day they began.