Paul Ryan has come up with a remarkable innovation – gradually bring elderly and disabled folks back to the standard of living they enjoyed in the 1930s. Brilliant! Obviously the idea behind moving Medicare to a voucher system is to save the government – and, therefore, the collective “us” – money. But it’s only a savings if you don’t count the vast, vast majority of elderly people for whom that voucher will be worth very little in terms of health services. This is a very serious issue for anyone planning to become elderly one day. (Note: if you care nothing about the elderly and disabled and plan on jumping off a cliff when you turn 65, the Ryan plan will probably be fine by you.)
I’ve blogged about this before, so forgive me for covering the same ground – it’s just that when a person of influence advances a legislative plan that overtly calls for the dismemberment of Medicare and Medicaid, I feel compelled to repeat myself. This isn’t a question of saving money. This is a question of what we collectively decide is necessary to preserve the well-being of the nation. I’m not trying to appeal to your sense of charity. I’m saying that virtually every one of us is liable to need this type of coverage at some point in his/her life. Like investing in first responders, this is something we all have an interest in preserving.
No matter how much Ryan and his associates claim that is precisely what they are trying to do, don’t buy it. A voucher plan will throw elderly people into the private insurance market – one that is already way too expensive for pre-retirees to afford. What kind of premium will an Excellus ask of a 75 year old with a weak ticker? Seriously… Medicare is there for a reason. Before its existence, elderly people relied on charity, family members, etc., and many had access to neither.
The only reason why wunderkind Ryan and his express can feel comfortable criticizing such vital programs is that Medicare and Medicaid cost so much. They do because they cover those most prone to serious illnesses. If we had a reasonable single-payer system – Medicare for all – the system would also cover those many millions of us who see a doctor once a year and no more. Include them (i.e. us) and the system will finance itself. And frankly, wouldn’t you be willing to trade whatever plan you have (if you have one) for Medicare coverage at a reasonable cost?
Note to Dems: there’s a reason why Medicare is a third rail issue. It’s because it’s freaking necessary.
luv u,
jp
