|
 |
 |

NEWS
INDEX
Archives
2005
November
Caution: Medicare drug plan
may cause headaches
Mark Reutter,
Business & Law Editor
217-333-0568; mreutter@uiuc.edu
11/15/05
 |
| University
of Illinios at Urbana-Champaign photo |
“A
prescription for confusion” is how Richard L.
Kaplan, a professor of law at the University of Illinois,
characterizes the new drug benefit, whose enrollment
period begins today for Americans aged 65 years and
older. |
|
|
CHAMPAIGN, Ill.
— If many seniors are scratching their heads about the new Medicare
prescription drug plan, so are the experts.
“A prescription for confusion” is how Richard L. Kaplan,
a professor of law at the University
of Illinois, characterizes the new drug benefit, whose enrollment period
begins today for Americans aged 65 years and older.
Kaplan describes the plan as “fashioned like no other pharmaceutical
coverage in the world.”
For starters, the program, known as Medicare Part D, will be administered
by private insurance companies rather than the Social Security Administration,
which handles hospitalization and doctor’s bills under current
Medicare coverage, known as Parts A and B.
This shift means that seniors must choose between drug plans with widely
differing premiums, deductibles, co-payments and covered drugs. In Kansas,
for example, Medicare beneficiaries have to shop for insurance among
40 plans from insurers such as Aetna, Humana and UnitedHealth Group,
which charge premiums from $9.48 a month to $67.88 a month.
The plan’s configuration reflects President George W. Bush’s
philosophy that competition from private insurers is more efficient
than a government program. It also reflects the belief that “what
older Americans want is a choice of plans rather than a single plan
offering a choice of providers,” Kaplan said in an interview.
“But the array of options is so complex that many elders will
be overwhelmed, as will attorneys and others who counsel older clients.”
“Some seniors will need to take a laptop computer into their medicine
cabinet to accurately compare alternatives,” he added. Kaplan
is a vice chair of the Elder Law Committee of the American Bar Association’s
Senior Lawyers Division and has written frequently about Medicare in
scholarly publications.
Another unusual aspect of the new plan is that, while coverage is voluntary,
seniors who delay enrollment will be subject to a penalty of 1 percent
per month after the close of the enrollment period on May 15, 2006.
In Kaplan’s words, “A late enrollee will be accepted regardless
of his or her medical condition – unlike the medical underwriting
that private insurance plans employ. But the premium that will be charged
will be increased as long as the enrollee remains in Medicare Part D.
Thus, a decision to defer enrollment in Part D has financial consequences
if an eligible person eventually chooses to enroll in the program.”
But there’s an important exception: seniors who had been covered
under a “creditable” drug prescription plan will not be
subject to the penalty. “Creditable coverage” is defined
as a drug plan that meets or exceeds the actuarial value of Medicare
Part D coverage.
This could include some private-employer coverage, group health plans
and veterans’ drug coverage, but not most Medigap policies. (Medigap
is a health insurance policy sold by private insurers to fill the “gaps”
in Medicare Parts A and B).
Still another complication is the prescription drug plan’s own
gap in coverage, which has come to be known as the “doughnut hole.”
Under the typical arrangement, the drug benefit will end once a senior
reaches $2,250 in annual drug costs, and will not kick back in until
drug costs exceed $5,100. The doughnut hole means that a senior who
has $2,500 in drug costs will pay $1,420 out-of-pocket expenses with
the drug benefit (using the government’s estimated average monthly
premium of $35), but will pay $3,920 – or nearly three times more
– if drug costs reach $5,000.
“Even at a fairly catastrophic level of $10,000 per year of annual
drug costs, the enrollee pays nearly 43 percent of the total bill,”
Kaplan noted.
Because of the doughnut hole, many retirees with existing employer-sponsored
drug plans might not wish to sign up for the Medicare plan. But the
caveat is that employer-sponsored drug coverage is declining rapidly
– from 80 percent of retirees covered among major U.S. companies
in 1991 to 56 percent in 2003.
Last year, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission approved
a rule that allows employers to reduce – or even eliminate –
company-provided health benefits to Medicare-eligible retirees. This
rule reversed the agency’s prior policy that such a change violates
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
“How much more likely will employers be to terminate their plans
now that Medicare Part D provides an alternative?” Kaplan asked.
The new law does provide a federal subsidy to employers who maintain
their current prescription-drug coverage for retirees. “This subsidy
relates to the cost of providing drug benefits only up to $5,000 per
year,” Kaplan wrote. “More generous prescription drug benefits
yield no additional federal subsidies to the sponsoring employers. Will
those employers, therefore, modify their plans to cap an individual
retiree’s prescription medication expenditures at $5,000 per year?
No one knows, but the stakes are huge, both for employers with existing
drug benefits and for their retirees.”
Adding to the confusion is the problem that predicting future drug needs
– and costs – for seniors is often impossible.
“Many potential Medicare beneficiaries may know what drugs they
need now and what they cost currently, but what will those drugs cost
in the future? What if a specific drug that they need is removed from
their plan’s formulary, with the result that the client must pay
substantially more for that drug? Such a development, which is increasingly
common these days, changes the entire calculus of employer-sponsored
plans and managed care plans, which typically offer widely differing
prices for ‘included’ and ‘not included’ pharmaceuticals.”
In sum, according to Kaplan, Medicare Part D may help many seniors save
on prescription drugs, especially those with incomes below 150 percent
of the federal poverty line, who will receive special discounts under
the new law.
But the bottom line is that seniors will still have to pay for a large
portion of their drug costs after January 2006, when the program takes
effect.
What’s more, selecting the best coverage for an individual “will
be fraught with confusion and uncertainty” as a result of the
program’s enormous complexity.
Kaplan’s article, “The Medicare Drug Benefit: A Prescription
for Confusion,” is scheduled to appear later this month in the
NAELA Journal published by the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys.
|
 |
 |
|