iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Medicare Cuts Target Providers, Then Beneficiaries For Savings

Obama Medicare

First Posted: 09/19/11 02:41 PM ET Updated: 11/19/11 05:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- President Obama wants to extract $320 billion in savings from the health care system in his push to trim the deficit, starting with cutting payments to Medicare and Medicaid providers and ending with making beneficiaries pay more.

The biggest savings -- $135 billion over 10 years -- would come from letting Medicare pay for drugs at the same rates as Medicaid, which enjoys much greater rebates on generic and brand-name drugs.

The next largest source of savings -- $42 billion -- would come from nursing homes, rehab centers and long-term care facilities, which the administration thinks can be encouraged to be much more efficient in providing care right after people get out of hospitals.

After that, the plan includes a grab-bag of items, many of which sound familiar from the health care reform debate and target a mix of Medicare and Medicaid programs, with about $248 billion in savings coming from Medicare overall.

Changes in Medicaid payment rates will likely spark protests from large states that have disproportionate levels of people needing assistance getting medical care.

But the cuts that are most likely to spark the loudest cries are those targeting future Medicare beneficiaries.

The White House insists none of the changes will affect people already in the program, and will largely kick in during 2017.

Among the hikes under consideration are:

  • Increasing the deductible for doctors' services (part B of Medicare) by $25 in 2017, 2019 and 2021,
  • Requiring $100 co-payments for home health care visits,
  • Charging an extra 15 percent premium on people who have especially generous Medi-gap plans,
  • Hiking the premiums by 15 percent for Medicare recipients who earn from $85,000 to about $210,000, to raise about $20 billion.

President Obama said in a speech touting his cuts that the pain has to be shared, however, and administration officials insisted he would not pursue such health care cuts unless Congress also requires the wealthy and corporations to pay more.

"The president has also said he will veto any bill that takes one dime from the Medicare benefits seniors rely on without asking the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to pay their fair share," an administration official said on a call with reporters.

The plan got a cool reception from AARP, the influential lobby for older Americans, although the group praised the president for not trying to raise the eligibility age for Medicare.

“AARP urges Congress to first cut waste and close tax loopholes instead of taking away the benefits Americans have earned after decades of working hard and paying into the system," AARP Vice President Nancy LeaMond wrote in a statement. "The president and Congress should be thinking of ways to restore middle class prosperity, not weaken it through cuts to benefits. It is neither balanced nor fair to ask seniors, whose incomes average less than $20,000, to contribute even more for their health care."

Read a summary of Obama's health care proposal here.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- President Obama wants to extract $320 billion in savings from the health care system in his push to trim the deficit, starting with cutting payments to Medicare and Medicaid providers an...
WASHINGTON -- President Obama wants to extract $320 billion in savings from the health care system in his push to trim the deficit, starting with cutting payments to Medicare and Medicaid providers an...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,594
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (27 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Di Saia
An Opinionated Plastic Surgeon in the OC
08:35 PM on 09/20/2011
Class warfare for re-election...plain and simple.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AcademicFreedom
Often banned; always factual
05:07 PM on 09/20/2011
Who pays for POTUS's mother-in-law's health care?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AcademicFreedom
Often banned; always factual
05:06 PM on 09/20/2011
One can get a home health care visit??? wow --- I'm calling for a bath today!!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Gin1234
I am not fond of republicans.
07:15 PM on 09/20/2011
You probably need one, but you should learn the terms before you talk about it here, so as not to make a fule out of yourself.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Glen Davi
All Men Are Brothers
10:18 AM on 09/20/2011
In 2017 I will be one of the people who these changes effect. Who looks forward to having to pay more for health care? For sure not me. On the flip side I know that everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, has to share in the cost of fixing our countries economic mess. Some will feel it more (like myself) than others. It will be tough, but I am an American, and it really is like what they say, Country First. Just make damn sure they can't screw us like this again! The other side of the coin is who knows the state our economy will be in six years from now. The country may have recovered and prospered and this proposal was reversed in say 2015 having never taken effect. Dream on you say. Possibly, but I know that generations before me faced worse and somehow they made it, so will I.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Gin1234
I am not fond of republicans.
07:18 PM on 09/20/2011
The really important thing is to dump as many of these republicantbagurs as possible in the 2012 election so that real reform can take place that makes improvements and not cuts, including tax improvements to finially get the due from the wealthy.
09:32 AM on 09/20/2011
OBAMA IS EITHER NUTS OR PLAYING POLITICS...EITHER JUST PIS.... ME OFF!! $100.00 CO-PAY FOR HOME HEALTH CARE VISITS (NOT BASED ON INCOME EITHER!)! He has many good ideas but you can't hear them because you head is screaming "BULL!!!". What an idiotic stunt to pull! I have backed many good things he has done BUT A SPADE is a SPADE and this is just plain stupid. Karl Sandstrom help me with your extended, multi-national, "swear words that sound so sophisticated", vocabulary! I am speechless... .
10:09 PM on 10/28/2011
Go Back And Read it . its based on your income from retirement ect as far as what it will be. Its actually not something that is screwing people out of their benefits.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thegreenhornet
civil rights lawyer
08:01 AM on 09/20/2011
I would rather see Medicare preiums increased by more on those who are still well employed than see co-pays increased and charges for home health caree visits for those who really need to help. We should not cure the Medicare problem on the backs of the poor. There are many people in this country who continue to work and earn good salaries while getting Medicare benefits. Increase their premiums more. I do agree that post hospital caregivers seem to miraculously cure their patients sufficiently to go home on the 100th day following their admission to respite care. What a coincidence--that's when Medicare benefits end.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
innerpuppie
The truth is an absolute defense...
01:51 AM on 09/20/2011
Any cuts to Medicare will be for those who can afford to pay a little more - not those who are living in poverty. That headline reeks of yellow journalism.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:59 AM on 09/20/2011
It should not be proposed at all!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Sundae Driver
"The path to youth takes a whole life." (Picasso)
06:18 AM on 09/20/2011
Why not? The program's funds are running dry; something has to be done to adequately fund it.
sammy3110
Humpty Dumpty was pushed
01:05 AM on 09/20/2011
I somehow thought that when the Official Media headlines that the historic Nobelist is talking about changes to Medicare, it wasn't about Medicare For All but about cuts in existing benefits.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:03 AM on 09/20/2011
I'd like to see an impartial impact study done on the care providers and beneficiaries - how many more elderly will die, become homeless, not seek medical care, not take medications, or slip into poverty with these "savings"? How many more jobs will be lost - how many people won't be hired or be shifted to part-time despite the need? Sure the private corps are robbing the taxpayers blind, but why not focus the "savings" just on them and not allow them to pass their loss on to the consumer? How about some oversight? How about your promise to your dying mother, Mr. Obama?
01:03 AM on 09/20/2011
Home health services, whether be they for nursing, home health aides, or therapists, is a HUGE rip-off. Though an argument can be made that the patients benefit from being treated at home, vs. in a skilled nursing facility, I've seen too many abuses by the providing agencies to maximize the number of visits, whether necessary or not.
12:59 AM on 09/20/2011
There was a lot about how this will effect seniors, but how will it effect those of us on social security disability?
10:19 PM on 10/28/2011
You Will Be Okay And it will get better with those changes. it will help you keep more of your ss money and increase better coverage of services. Check With the different insurance companies that have contracts with Medicare and you will find some really good plans out there. The companies differ from state to state. without getting myself into a whole lotta stuff just know too that this plan is not gonna happen real quick and without warning. right now its identifying the corruptions. Kannah tc
12:55 AM on 09/20/2011
And so it begins. The slide down the slippery slope for Medicare and the care providers. When will ANY polititian ever talk about paying back Medicare for all it has done outside of health care. They have milked this golden cow for all she's been worth and now want to send her to the slaughter house. Anyone suprised?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:27 AM on 09/20/2011
If I were Pres. Obama, I would give some thought to holing up at Camp David or Martha's Vineyard, maybe, until about October 2012. A program that would meet with approval from repubs does not exist. Voters have shorter memories than mayflies (they only live about 24 hours - hence very short memory) and then begin his campaign for re-election.

That would put him on par with dubya for vacation and repubs approved of that. Even with the crack to an emissary to get dubya to read a daily brief stating, in essence, "Bin Laden determined to strike in the United States", repubs approved of that, too. They prefer making war and killing innocent civilians.
sammy3110
Humpty Dumpty was pushed
01:10 AM on 09/20/2011
The historic Nobelist now has Yemen to "Unite the Nation." To mention just one of the latest threats to our democracy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:17 AM on 09/20/2011
To cut cost, co-payment is the key. With co-pay added for doctor's visit, expensive lab tests, hospital
admissions and nursing home care, utilization will be down for those who don't absolutely need care
and there are a lot of those nowadays. Get rid of the present tort laws and there will even be more
savings as physicians will comply with the patient's request to cut cost and do only the absolutely
necessary tests and treatments. But then, this will be considered rationing and not free market
capitalism. Free market capitalism broke the banks just two years ago. In time, it will break the bank of health care for sure as it is profit oriented and nothing else.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:12 AM on 09/20/2011
As Stephanie Miller would sing, you are an idiot! Increasing costs to the consumer and no penalties or oversight for the fraudulent practices and overcharging by private corps is business as usual. Tort laws date back to the medieval ages in England - you'd be the first to cry foul if you or your loved one were injured or killed by a negligently constructed product or careless or overworked practitioner. Courts and tort lawyers are the last line of defense for an otherwise powerless citizenry. Destroy them at your own peril.
Before managed care, there were no issues with too many tests or rising costs. I was there. Blame this one on Nixon.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
njoytday
12:03 AM on 09/20/2011
The president has said he will veto any bill that takes one dime from the Medicare benefits seniors rely on without asking the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to pay their fair share

How does it help me that rich get more taxes or not if what I get is reduced? What is going to be done with any new taxes? Is it going to seniors? I cannot afford the health insurance I have as it is a necessity like my rent payments and food are.It is NOT more fair to me to get cuts AS LONG as rich pay in some more. One has nothing to do with the other if I am STILL negatively affected.
I agree that cost of drugs can be reduced ( bulk discount for all medicare recipients) but the age of receiving medicare should be reduced to 60, as at that time seniors's income is ~ 20,000 and that keeps them from getting Medicaid but forces them to but insurance they can't afford OR have none at all.
If Obama wants applause, let him realize we do not care if he raises taxes, but what he does with the taxes he gets!