Administration Drops Controversial Medicare Changes

The Medicare agency is abandoning changes that conservatives said would undermine its drug coverage.

WASHINGTON - AUGUST 16: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services building is shown August 16, 2006 in Washington, DC. The HHS Building, also known as the Hubert H. Humphrey Building, is located at the foot of Capitol Hill and is named for Humphrey, who served as a U.S. senator from Minnesota and Vice President of the United States. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
National Journal
Sam Baker
March 10, 2014, 8:50 a.m.

The fed­er­al gov­ern­ment is back­ing off of con­tro­ver­sial changes to the way Medi­care cov­ers pre­scrip­tion drugs.

Con­ser­vat­ives and many law­makers had as­sailed the pro­posed changes, ar­guing that they would have fun­da­ment­ally changed the nature of Medi­care’s drug be­ne­fit, known as Part D. The Cen­ters for Medi­care and Medi­caid Ser­vices said in a let­ter to mem­bers of Con­gress on Monday that it would not move for­ward with the most con­tro­ver­sial changes.

CMS aban­doned pro­pos­als that would have ex­pan­ded the agency’s power to get in­volved in ne­go­ti­ations between Part D plans and phar­ma­cies. Un­til the pro­posed changes, CMS had be­lieved it did not have the au­thor­ity to be a part of those ne­go­ti­ations. It pro­posed a re­in­ter­pret­a­tion of its power, which promp­ted cri­ti­cism that the agency would un­der­mine a pop­u­lar part of the Medi­care pro­gram.

CMS had also pro­posed, but has now aban­doned, new rules for how Part D plans es­tab­lish their phar­macy net­works. The pro­pos­als would have al­lowed more phar­ma­cies to win deals as “pre­ferred” pro­viders. Ac­cord­ing to an ana­lys­is from the con­ser­vat­ive Amer­ic­an Ac­tion For­um, that would have re­duced the num­ber of pre­ferred phar­ma­cies and po­ten­tially raised seni­ors’ costs.

“Giv­en the com­plex­it­ies of these is­sues and stake­hold­er in­put, we do not plan to fi­nal­ize these pro­pos­als at this time,” CMS said Monday in a let­ter to mem­bers of Con­gress. “We will en­gage in fur­ther stake­hold­er in­put be­fore ad­van­cing some or all of the changes in these areas in fu­ture years.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.

Source:
×