By Heather Cottin
Whenever the Bush administration talks "reform," workers had better watch out.
President George W. Bush is planning to eviscerate Medicare, the government health plan for the elderly that workers pay into all their lives. And he has the support of powerful Democrats in Congress. With millionaire Bill Frist now the Senate majority leader--he's part of a for-profit hospital dynasty--a bipartisan plan that would gut Medicare and force elderly Social Security recipients to pay more for health care is moving ahead.
Sen. Frist, a Tennessee Republican, is a surgeon. He has been getting a lot of publicity portraying him as a doctor who knows first-hand about the problems of the sick. It's more important, however, that his family owns Columbia/HCA, the biggest chain of for-profit hospitals in the country.
According to a 1996 New England Journal of Medicine article, when Columbia/HCA takes over a hospital, the result is less "charity" care for the poor, replacement of senior health pro fessionals with less experienced and lower-paid workers, and sacrifice of quality service in the interest of profit.
"With the new Senate majority leader as a powerful ally, President Bush will propose sweeping, long-term changes in Medicare administration," reported the Jan. 3 New York Times. "Dr. Frist can explain and defend the Medicare proposals in a way that the previous Senate Republican leader, Trent Lott of Mississippi, never could."
These big-business politicians are once again extolling the virtues of the "market" for health-care services. At the same time, Bush attacks Medicare as a "program that's antiquated and likely to go bankrupt."
His plan, however, spells disaster for the elderly--on several fronts.
To begin with, Bush's "new" plan is just a rehash of the Breaux-Frist bill, introduced three years ago by Frist and Louisiana Democrat John Breaux.
Ron Pollack, executive director of the advocacy group Families USA, characterizes the Breaux-Frist proposal as "a riverboat gamble ... likely to leave seniors, especially those with illnesses and chronic conditions, considerably worse off than they are today."
'Breaux-Frist bill would destroy Medicare'
In March 2000, an organization made up of unions and consumer groups examined the Breaux-Frist proposal. "The Breaux-Frist bill is a voucher program that would destroy Medicare," explained Diane Archer of the Medicare Rights Center. "This proposal is not about taking care of older and disabled Americans' health care needs; it's about charging them more money for less health care and taking away the core guarantees of Medicare."
According to the study, Medicare recipients would lose their choice of doctors and hospitals, be forced into HMOs, lose benefits for basic medical services, lose government accountability for any difficulty with delivery of medical services, and be faced with high prescription drug costs.
"Instead of preserving and improving Medicare, the Breaux-Frist proposal dismantles Medicare as Americans know it and need it," said Vicki Gottlich of the Center for Medicare Advocacy.
So who gains? Drug companies and HMOs, which look for more profits from Bush's new program.
While the elderly make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, they account for one-third of the nation's drug expenditures. (The Nation's Health, April 2001.) If Bush's "Medicare Modernization" legislation is passed, the drug companies stand to win big.
It's no wonder that, in testimony to the Senate, Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., senior vice president of corporate strategy and policy for Eli Lilly & Co., lauded Breaux and Frist for their "efforts to bring the outdated Medicare program into the 21st century."
Bill Frist has been a great friend to Eli Lilly. There are reports that he helped the company avoid prosecution for its role in producing Thimerosal, a dilutant for vaccines that contains mercury and is suspected of being linked to autism in children. An amendment shielding drug companies from litigation over Thimerosal appeared mysteriously in the Homeland Security bill.
"Rep. Dick Armey, R-Texas, has denied reports that he wrote the amendment at the urging of White House officials. Armey's spokesman said it came from Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn," Sara Fritz reported in the Nov. 16, 2002, St. Petersburg Times.
According to "Medicare vs. Private Insurance: Rhetoric and Reality," a report of the nonpartisan Commonwealth Fund, people on Medicare "report fewer problems getting access to care, greater confidence about their access and fewer instances of financial hardship as a result of medical bills." The report concluded, "Medicare provides a level of security not typically found in employer or individual coverage." (Newsday, Dec. 17, 2002)
Bush's plan would push the elderly into for-profit health organizations.
For the average Medicare recipient, medical premiums under the Breaux-Frist plan would fluctuate wildly. Since these premiums are deducted from Social Security checks, the income of the elderly and infirm would markedly decline. National spending for drugs has tripled in the past decade and is expected to further double by 2008. (The Nation's Health, April 2001)
Seniors who have been booted out of HMOs in increasing numbers would face more of the same.
What is needed in this wealthy country, of course, is to take the profits out of the delivery of health care through a national, government-funded program for people of all ages. The Bush "reform" instead slashes away at the limited government program that exists so that the billionaire HMO and pharmaceutical corporate vampires can suck the life blood from the elders of this country.
To Bush's war on Iraq, in which young people are expected to spill their blood for the oil and military corporations, must be added his war at home--in which the health and well-being of the elderly are to be sacrificed to enrich the medical profiteers. It will take a multigenerational movement committed to peace, justice and people's needs to fight this cynical, malicious attack on workers' rights.
Source: Worker's World News Service.
