Take Action: Tell your senators to reject harmful cuts to health care!
Medicare Watch articles are featured in Medicare Rights’ weekly newsletter, which helps readers stay updated on Medicare policy and advocacy developments and learn about changes in Medicare benefits and rules. Subscribe now by visiting www.medicarerights.org/newsletters.
A recent blog post on the Center on Budget Policy Priorities (CBPP) addresses a common falsehood repeated by some lawmakers about the financial footing of Medicare. Unfortunately, some members of Congress continue to claim that Medicare won’t be there for future generations because it’s going bankrupt. According to CBPP, this falsehood has been debunked before—Medicare is not running out of money.
The Medicare Rights Center is proud to announce its recent membership on the National Coalition for Health Care (NCHC). NCHC is a national, nonprofit organization with a coalition membership of over 80 organizations representing medical societies, businesses, health care providers, insurers, patient and consumer advocates, and more. Collectively, the coalition represents more than 100 million Americans.
Several years ago, Republican leaders in Congress unveiled proposals to make sweeping changes to the health care system, including to Medicare. Those plans—ultimately designed to create Medicare cost savings for the federal government— include raising the age of Medicare eligibility, privatizing the Medicare program through a premium support model, increasing cost sharing for people with Medicare, and more.
After the recent election, these ideas reemerged, through comments by members of Congress and the incoming Administration. When these proposals were originally introduced, we said that they were not the right solutions, and we still believe they represent the wrong path for sustaining the future of the Medicare program.
This week, the Medicare Rights Center submitted a response to a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) request for comment on Enhancements to the Star Ratings for 2018 and Beyond in advance of the draft 2018 Call Letter. The proposed changes are intended to tweak the measures and methodology of the star rating system to better capture performance, including changes to the way audit and enforcement actions affect star rating results.
In January, I’ll blow out the candles on my 65th birthday cake. A family member recently reminded me that I
Last week, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the Medicare Part B premiums for 2017. Starting January 1, most people with Medicare will see a small increase in their Part B premium, from $104.90 to an average of $109.00 per month. But about 30 percent of people covered by Medicare will see a minimum Part B premium of $134.00, a 10 percent increase from the minimum 2016 premium of $121.80.
You may be reading news reports about how some members of Congress want to privatize Medicare. By no means is this new news, but this week’s election results brought about renewed interest in these plans. In years past, proposals to privatize Medicare—commonly known as premium support—relied on vouchers that people with Medicare would receive from the federal government to purchase private health plans. Past proposals had important differences: some introduce vouchers for future beneficiaries, some preserve Traditional Medicare as an option, some include defined benefits and consumer protections, etc.
This week, the Medicare Rights Center submitted a letter of strong support for the Medicare Affordability and Enrollment Act of 2016. Introduced this fall, this bill would cap beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket expenses in Traditional Medicare; eliminate coverage gaps associated with Part B enrollment mistakes; reduce cost-sharing for low-income beneficiaries; increase eligibility for income-dependent programs; and modernize the Medicare enrollment system to facilitate easier enrollment, begin coverage earlier and reduce arbitrary late-enrollment penalties that today are paid for a lifetime.
Earlier this fall, the Medigap Consumer Protection Act of 2016 was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill would expand access to Medicare supplemental insurance plans, commonly called “Medigap” plans.
Medigap plans are already popular, and many people on Medicare find they are an invaluable part of their health care coverage. As the name suggests, Medigap plans cover gaps in the Medicare program that mostly revolve around out-of-pocket expenses. But while people 65 and older are guaranteed access to Medicap, albeit with significant limitations, people who are under 65 and enrolled in Medicare are not guaranteed access. Some states require Medigap access, but there is no federal right to purchase a Medigap plan for this population.
Last week, the Center on Aging at the American Institute for Research (AIR) released a set of issue briefs detailing the complexities of enrolling in Medicare. One of the briefs, Medicare Complexity Taxes Counseling Resources Available to Beneficiaries, highlights Medicare choices and the personalized counseling available to beneficiaries and their families.
A recent blog post on the Center on Budget Policy Priorities (CBPP) addresses a common falsehood repeated by some lawmakers about the financial footing of Medicare. Unfortunately, some members of Congress continue to claim that Medicare won’t be there for future generations because it’s going bankrupt. According to CBPP, this falsehood has been debunked before—Medicare is not running out of money.
The Medicare Rights Center is proud to announce its recent membership on the National Coalition for Health Care (NCHC). NCHC is a national, nonprofit organization with a coalition membership of over 80 organizations representing medical societies, businesses, health care providers, insurers, patient and consumer advocates, and more. Collectively, the coalition represents more than 100 million Americans.
Several years ago, Republican leaders in Congress unveiled proposals to make sweeping changes to the health care system, including to Medicare. Those plans—ultimately designed to create Medicare cost savings for the federal government— include raising the age of Medicare eligibility, privatizing the Medicare program through a premium support model, increasing cost sharing for people with Medicare, and more.
After the recent election, these ideas reemerged, through comments by members of Congress and the incoming Administration. When these proposals were originally introduced, we said that they were not the right solutions, and we still believe they represent the wrong path for sustaining the future of the Medicare program.
This week, the Medicare Rights Center submitted a response to a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) request for comment on Enhancements to the Star Ratings for 2018 and Beyond in advance of the draft 2018 Call Letter. The proposed changes are intended to tweak the measures and methodology of the star rating system to better capture performance, including changes to the way audit and enforcement actions affect star rating results.
In January, I’ll blow out the candles on my 65th birthday cake. A family member recently reminded me that I
Last week, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the Medicare Part B premiums for 2017. Starting January 1, most people with Medicare will see a small increase in their Part B premium, from $104.90 to an average of $109.00 per month. But about 30 percent of people covered by Medicare will see a minimum Part B premium of $134.00, a 10 percent increase from the minimum 2016 premium of $121.80.
You may be reading news reports about how some members of Congress want to privatize Medicare. By no means is this new news, but this week’s election results brought about renewed interest in these plans. In years past, proposals to privatize Medicare—commonly known as premium support—relied on vouchers that people with Medicare would receive from the federal government to purchase private health plans. Past proposals had important differences: some introduce vouchers for future beneficiaries, some preserve Traditional Medicare as an option, some include defined benefits and consumer protections, etc.
This week, the Medicare Rights Center submitted a letter of strong support for the Medicare Affordability and Enrollment Act of 2016. Introduced this fall, this bill would cap beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket expenses in Traditional Medicare; eliminate coverage gaps associated with Part B enrollment mistakes; reduce cost-sharing for low-income beneficiaries; increase eligibility for income-dependent programs; and modernize the Medicare enrollment system to facilitate easier enrollment, begin coverage earlier and reduce arbitrary late-enrollment penalties that today are paid for a lifetime.
Earlier this fall, the Medigap Consumer Protection Act of 2016 was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill would expand access to Medicare supplemental insurance plans, commonly called “Medigap” plans.
Medigap plans are already popular, and many people on Medicare find they are an invaluable part of their health care coverage. As the name suggests, Medigap plans cover gaps in the Medicare program that mostly revolve around out-of-pocket expenses. But while people 65 and older are guaranteed access to Medicap, albeit with significant limitations, people who are under 65 and enrolled in Medicare are not guaranteed access. Some states require Medigap access, but there is no federal right to purchase a Medigap plan for this population.
Last week, the Center on Aging at the American Institute for Research (AIR) released a set of issue briefs detailing the complexities of enrolling in Medicare. One of the briefs, Medicare Complexity Taxes Counseling Resources Available to Beneficiaries, highlights Medicare choices and the personalized counseling available to beneficiaries and their families.
