Entitled to Know

The spin cycle is in overdrive this morning as the Senate tries to find a way to do the right thing in a stimulus package. Most Senate Republicans, pushed hard by the White House, refused to budge in last night’s vote by allowing seniors to be included in any stimulus plan .

Today’s Roll Call summed it up this way:

“’I think it’s decided. I think the Senate will just pick up the House plan,” said Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who ripped the GOP. 'They don’t blink to spend an extra dollar in Iraq, but if you ask them to spend an extra dollar in America they all cave.’ Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), whose home state has been hard hit by unemployment, blamed last-minute pressure from the White House for the defeat. ‘The White House put incredible pressure on them,' she said. Stabenow said it would be 'very difficult to come up with a new package this week given the need for unanimous consent to avoid restarting time-consuming procedural maneuvers.’”

So, now the Senate will have to punt. Members can take the President’s way and vote only on the House stimulus plan, leaving seniors out once again. It can take up last night’s Senate version one more time or consider only amendments to give seniors and veterans another shot at being included in this economic stimulus plan.

Senate leaders are meeting this morning while 20 million seniors sit in stimulus limbo rethinking their votes come November.

Reviewing the Administration’s FY 2009 budget was deja vu all over again...but for seniors this budget is even worse than in previous years...and that's hard to believe. Here's our analysis from National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare’s President and CEO Barbara B. Kennelly.

“While health care costs soar, millions of Americans remain uninsured and baby boomers approach retirement, the last thing this nation needs is more of the same from the Bush administration. Proposing $178 billion in Medicare cuts which will directly impact healthcare access for millions of seniors, while at the same time preserving $150 billion in insurance industry giveaways, is outrageous and indefensible.”... Barbara B. Kennelly, President/CEO

Once again, the President’s priorities are clear. This FY 2009 budget proposes draconian cuts in healthcare programs, which would touch the lives of millions of seniors, the disabled, and poor while allowing billions of dollars in insurance industry subsidies to continue. This budget proposes:

Massive Cuts to Mandatory Spending Programs of $16 billion in 2009, $208 billion over the next five years, and $619 billion over 10 years.

Medicare Cuts Beyond Reason. In response to the arbitrary 45% cap created in the flawed Medicare Modernization Act, the President’s budget proposes legislation to reduce Medicare spending by $556 billion over the next 10 years and more than $10 trillion over the next 75 years.

More Budget Deficits and Record Federal Debt. This budget proposes making tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans permanent. Both debt held by the public and gross federal debt are estimated to reach all-time highs in FY 2009, totaling $5.856 trillion and $10.413 trillion, respectively.

Protecting Insurance Industry Profits. Once again, private insurers in Medicare will collect $150 billion over ten years in taxpayer-supported subsidies while also reporting record profits due to the privatization of Medicare.

Privatizing Social Security. The President’s budget proposes spending $30 billion in FY 2009 and $647 billion over the next 10 years to create Social Security private accounts.

America faces a Budget crisis not a Social Security crisis. Without the Social Security surpluses, the federal government would be running larger deficits. Based on OMB estimates, $204 billion dollars of Social Security surpluses will be used to mask the true size of the federal deficit in FY 2009. OMB expects the FY 2009 deficit will reach $407 billion. However, without the Social Security surpluses the FY 2009 would be approximately $611 billion.

“The President’s Budget does not reflect Americans’ current needs or their future priorities. The nation’s most vulnerable populations cannot continue to pay the price for this administration’s ruinouseconomic policies. Continuing to slash vital programs that serve millions in need to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy and billions in insurance industry subsidies is clearly not working”...Barbara B.Kennelly

Robert M. Ball died last night at the age of 93.

Washington is a town full of public servants and political appointees but Bob Ball was unique. Few in government invest their entire lives toward a single goal but that’s exactly what Bob did. From his youngest days as a Social Security field assistant, to ultimately becoming the Commissioner of Social Security under three Presidents, Ball worked for decades to strengthen America’s social insurance programs for our nation’s elderly, disabled, survivors and their families.

Even in “retirement” Ball served on commissions and advisory boards, including the 1983 Greenspan Commission. He wrote books and crafted proposals for new Social Security reforms, including a three-point plan many consider a good blueprint for the future. Just a few months ago he took the Washington Post to task in a Letter to Editor in October. You just have to love someone who was still so engaged in an issue that at 93 he felt compelled to rattle off a letter to the Post to correct one of their (all too common) Social Security mistakes.

Our President & CEO, Barbara Kennelly, served on the Ways and Means committee during the 1983 Greenspan Commission and has known Bob Ball for decades. Here are her thoughts:

“It is not an understatement to say that generations of Americans owe their retirement security and wellbeing to Bob Ball’s tireless ommitment to preserve, protect and strengthen Social Security. Not only did he serve as Commissioner of Social Security under three Presidents, he was actively involved in virtually every Social Security development over the past 60 years. His firm belief in social insurance programs, including Medicare, helped to ensure that seniors, the disabled and their families would continue to thrive in spite of health
challenges and financial constraints.

Bob understood the balance between policy and politics. He mentored, educated, and encouraged so many of us, inside and outside of government, to remain committed to strengthen Social Security for future generations. He was one of my personal heroes.

Bob Ball’s voice will be missed but his legacy will continue to motivate us to ensure America’s seniors, survivors and the disabled will not be forgotten in Washington.”

by Barbara B. Kennelly, NCPSSM President/CEO
and Social Security Advisory Board Member

The rush to pass a stimulus package is not reason enough to ignore the millions of American seniors who can help make this stimulus effort a success. We congratulate the Senate Finance Committee for understanding this and working quickly to craft a package that considers all needy Americans, young and old alike. If timely, targeted and temporary really is the goal of this stimulus package, then seniors should not be left out. The Committee is scheduled to meet at 2:30 Wednesday to take up their version of a stimulus proposal.

Older Americans living on a fixed income feel the pressure of high prices and the slowing economy as acutely as anyone, yet the White House-negotiated stimulus package ignores almost half of our nation’s 65-plus population. Many of these seniors are in the direst need and most likely to spend any additional income on necessary resources such as medicine, utilities, food and clothing.

Even so, the Bush Administration acts as if including seniors in this package is a gift rather that what it really is, good economic sense and the perfect example of their stated goals (timely, targeted and temporary).

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Americans over 65 are responsible for 14% of all consumer spending. Seniors are also among the demographic groups most likely to spend any stimulus benefit they receive. The most recent Consumer Expenditure Survey by the Bureau of Economic Analysis says the average household headed by someone over age 65 spent 92% of their annual income, which is higher than any other demographic group with the exception of those under age 25. Seniors spend what they earn, especially as prices continue to rise, because they live on a fixed income.

But it won’t be that simple, of course. The administration is already making it clear it does not want seniors included in this proposal. White House spokesman Tony Fratto called it "political gamesmanship) and we expect to hear more of the same in the President’s State of the Union address tonight.

So much for those 3 T’s.

Senator John Kerry (DMA) has sent a letter to his fellow Senate Finance Committee members urging they include seniors living on fixed incomes in the economic stimulus package negotiated in the House. Kerry says:

Seniors owe Senator Kerry a debt of thanks for his willingness to try and reverse a Washington legacy of ignoring millions of American seniors when crafting economic recovery plans.

So, now the race to passage begins. The Senate has begun work on its version of the stimulus package and the full House hopes to vote next week. Why the rush? Even if this package stays on the fast-track most don’t expect any of this stimulus to make it to Americans before June. All the more reason, we say...Why leave out seniors, when they could receive their stimulus sooner and, studies show, they will spend it faster?

“The people who need a stimulus check the most will spend it the fastest. Why, then, is the Administration abandoning millions of seniors in an economic stimulus package? Senior households currently spend 92% of their income each year. Many retirees live check to check and would immediately spend any rebate they receive. This should be the first step in any plan to pump billions of dollars into the economy as quickly as possible.” Barbara B. Kennelly, President/CEO The National Commitee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare and Member of the Social Security Advisory Board

Here we go again...

Just as we saw in stimulus packages in 2001 and 2003, America’s seniors living on fixed incomes are once again the forgotten constituency. The stimulus plan negotiated in the House ignores millions of retired Americans who live on their savings, pensions and Social Security and feel the pressure of high prices and the slowing economy as acutely as anyone. These seniors are in the direst need and most likely to spend any additional income on necessary resources such as medicine, utilities, food and clothing. They are literally the demographic poster-child for the stated stimulus goals:

Timely - Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue says checks could be delivered in 6 weeks, compared to the IRS’s 10-12

Targeted- Social Security databases allow easy access to Social Security beneficiaries. Americans 65+ spend 92 percent of their annual income, which is more than any other demographic group with the exception of those under age 25.

Temporary-One time checks would be issued to seniors (through Social Security) just as currently planned for workers (through the IRS).

Including retirees in any effort at economic recovery makes good sense yet the administration treats seniors as if they’re just asking for a handout. Consider Treasury Secretary Paulson’s answer to a reporter’s question about including Social Security beneficiaries. Clearly the Secretary believes stimulus for millions of seniors is merely a “gift”: “

The Christmas season has come and gone. We're not trying to decorate a Christmas tree here”... Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson

The good news is Senate Democrats have made it clear they have some ideas of their own to strengthen this stimulus package. But seniors will have to make their case quickly as this package is moving on the fastest track we’ve seen on Capitol Hill in years.

While Congress and the President start work on legislation to stimulate our slowing economy, it appears America’s 23 million seniors will once again be overlooked. This, in spite of the undeniable truth that the economic downturn and rising prices have hit older Americans especially hard since many live on a fixed incomes with little ability to increase their earnings.

Once again, legislative proposals are focusing on tying stimulus to tax relief or rebates. However, millions of retirees do not earn enough to require filing a tax return and therefore are not eligible for a tax rebate, yet they are also not poor enough to qualify for low-income programs being considered for increases.

According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Americans over 65 are responsible for 14% of all consumer spending. Seniors are also among the demographic groups most likely to spend any stimulus benefit they receive.

The most recent Consumer Expenditure Survey by the Bureau of Economic Analysis says the average household headed by someone over age 65 spent 92% of their annual income, which is higher than any other demographic group with the exception of those under age 25. Seniors spend what they earn, especially as prices continue to rise, because they live on a fixed income. Why should America’s fastest growing demographic continually be ignored in these economic recovery measures?

We’ve sent a letter to Congress today, and will provide testimony to the Senate Finance Committee next week, urging Washington to use Social Security as the vehicle to distribute to American retirees the same stimulus checks being considered for younger Americans.

It’s a boost for seniors and our economic recovery.

The new debit card program, “Direct Express”, is scheduled to debut this spring. In the next few months, applications will go to beneficiaries in Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana and ultimately, the Treasury department hopes a large percentage of Social Security’s 49.3 million beneficiaries and 7.4 million Supplement Security Income recipients will sign on.

The debit card is Treasury's latest attempt to convince recipients to get away from paper checks. A few years ago, the department started direct deposit. The feds say not only will going electronic save money...since each check costs about 89 cents to print, compared with 9 cents to load a payment onto a debit card...it also protects seniors from fraud and check theft.

Currently, four million beneficiaries do not have bank accounts and Treasury predicts that if each of them signed up for the debit card, the government would save $44 million a year. But of course, there is a flipside to this convenience. Depending on how and where beneficiaries use their cards they could be charged usage fees.

Cardholders who use one of 56,000 designated ATMs, including those at 7-11’s and PNC banks wouldn’t be charged a fee for their first withdrawal from each government payment. However, additional ATM withdrawals will cost 90 cents. Like other debit-card holders, users may also face surcharges at many ATMs.

Let’s hope the potential savings for the government won’t increase the financial drain on beneficiaries.

The Kaiser Family Foundation has issued a new Medicare brief worth a read. It’s a comprehensive look at Medicare’s financing and long-term solvency issues, which thankfully goes way beyond the “we can’t afford entitlements” crisis calls so popular within the Bush administration.

Financing Medicare: An Issue Brief draws many of the same conclusions offered by the Congressional Budget Office and which we’ve offered here in the past. Kaiser researchers say:

We’d take it a step further to say the word “could” really must be “should” because the next administration needs to tackle health care reform in a serious way, if we hope to be prepared for an increasing population of aging Americans.

Presidential candidates are making their final push in Iowa today before heading to New Hampshire but do you know where they really stand on issues affecting seniors?

It can be hard to keep track. The National Committee surveyed each Presidential candidate with 14 questions on issues such as Social Security, Medicare, pensions, healthcare reform, long-term care, prescription drugs, and the federal budget.

Five Democratic presidential candidates provided detailed responses to our questionnaire; Senator Joe Biden, Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Chris Dodd, John Edwards and Senator Barack Obama. Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee declined to respond while the remaining candidates have not replied to date.

It certainly is discouraging that two candidates specifically declined to answer our questions about policies affecting millions of seniors and their families. Our President/CEO, Barbara Kennelly, says:

“The next President will need to lead Congress as they shape the policies that will impact the long term outlook for our retirement and health security. As the nation’s leading organization advocating on behalf of Social Security and Medicare we know we may not agree with every candidate’s position; however, our members deserve straight forward answers on these issues. Ultimately, we hope every presidential candidate will offer detailed responses to these key policy questions”

That’s really not too much to ask, right?

Unlike many of us, Humana, a private Medicare Advantage insurer, doesn't have the post-holiday blues.

According to the Associated Press , one Wall Street analyst has upgraded shares of health insurer Humana Inc. today saying it will be at least three years until Congress can make any cuts in Medicare Advantage programs. Carl McDonald with CIBC World Markets predicts:

"There will be no Medicare Advantage cuts in 2009, and unless cutting Medicare is the first priority of the new administration, it will be difficult to enact any cuts in 2010, either," he said. "This will give Humana and the Medicare industry three more years of strong enrollment and earnings growth."

Ultimately, this is what last month’s Congressional Medicare debate really was about...protecting the private “Medicare industry’s” profits. But at what price? Seniors will continue to help foot the bill for massive Medicare subsidies to these private insurance companies, while companies like Humana report record annual profits.

MedPAC has estimated that every Medicare beneficiary pays $24 a year in higher Part B premiums just to fund these excess payments to private plans. Because subsidies are projected to continue rising, all Medicare beneficiaries can expect to pay dramatically higher premiums in the future, and can expect increasing portions of those premiums to be diverted to private plan subsidies.

According to CBO, paying private plans at the same rate as traditional Medicare would save $54 billion over the next five years and $149 billion over the next ten years. Not only would eliminating these large overpayments save billions of dollars, it would also add two years of solvency to Medicare's hospital insurance trust fund.

While Wall Street investors may be giddy with predictions of the status quo in Medicare Advantage, seniors and taxpayers aren’t likely to quietly or happily continue to foot this bill for three more years.

by Alison Bonebrake, NCPSSM Policy Analyst


'Twas the night before Christmas, yet the Senate and the House
Have yet to fix Medicare due to a political louse.

Seniors were hoping that government would care,
That insurance industry subsidies made their premiums flare.

Those in traditional Medicare couldn’t get it through their head,
why they had to pay subsidies that were so widespread;

Those in private plans felt completely entrapped,
with high out of pocket costs and benefits severely capped,

Seniors wanted Congress to resolve this matter,
and prevent insurance company profits from getting even fatter.

But insurance industry lobbyists began doling out cash,
to preserve the subsidies they’ve collected en masse.

Negotiations received a deadly blow,
When Bush said MA savings are a no-no.

He threatened to veto legislation this year,
that reduced subsides the insurance industry held dear.

Without MA savings, the bill was pared down quick,
And Medicare improvements were no longer a policy pick.

All-in-all the Medicare bill looked pretty lame;
In fact, it was really more of the same.

No preventive, no mental health, no low-income protections!
Only future growth in insurer subsidy projections!

Seniors were astounded, they couldn’t believe the gall,
Bush’s allies in Congress didn’t eliminate subsidies, or reduce them at all!

They passed a short-term doc fix that was incredibly shy
of achieving the priorities the House laid out in July.

The one thing that seniors know is true
is their monthly premiums will increase in dollars of two.

They are charged more to fund MA plans, and if you need proof
The Medicare Modernization Act engorged this illogical goof.


MA subsidies give all taxpayers a reason to frown,
and the 150 billion dollar price tag is sure to confound.

The Medicare HI trust fund is also asked to foot,
the bill for these subsidies which are so hard put.

Subsidies place the trust fund further under attack,
It loses two years of solvency unless they are rolled back.

The unfairness of the situation made seniors anything but merry!
How could Congress pass a bill with public opinion so contrary?

Despite receiving subsidies, didn’t Congress know,
MA plans offered inferior coverage for services seniors couldn’t forgo?

Sure they might give you glasses or even some new teeth,
But hospital stays are costly and other tricks lurk underneath.

Their marketing handbooks must have been written by Machiavelli,
Because sales tactics can be unethical, illegal and just plain smelly.

Unfortunately for seniors, this year no Angel or Christmas elf,
will correct the situation since the issue has been shelved.

As they pay rising premiums with a bit of dread,
they look forward to 2008 and the election ahead.

Politicians who do not address this overpayment quirk,
may very well find themselves in 2009 out of work.

Perhaps the holiday season can convince our foes,
that traditional Medicare is not something they should oppose.

We should preserve social insurance, not arrange for its dismissal,
as we’ve discovered private plans are as thorny as a thistle.

As we approach the holiday, Medicare beneficiaries unite to say
"Happy Christmas to all, and next year we’ll win the fight."

Seniors nationwide are watching their Social Security checks shrink before their eyes ...

as rising premiums for healthcare and drug coverage eat away more and more of their limited monthly income. And each year it’s getting worse.

Skyrocketing healthcare costs are triggering rising Medicare premiums that reduce the amount of money left in seniors’ Social Security checks each month. In fact, the average retiree will lose 25% of their Social Security COLA in 2008 due to higher Medicare premiums. Many seniors enrolled in more expensive prescription drug plans will see even larger reductions in their COLA. Those with lower incomes (and smaller Social Security benefits) can lose their entire COLA due to the rising health care costs reflected in the Medicare premiums.

It’s easy to see why seniors’ Social Security cost of living adjustments (COLAs) are shrinking away at such a fast pace. That’s why we’re especially pleased to see new legislation introduced this week to limit the bite premiums can take from retirees’ monthly Social Security check. The “Social Security COLA Protection Act of 2007” would guarantee that no more than 25% of a retiree’s annual COLA could be taken by the combined increases in Part B and Part D Medicare premiums. Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) and Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) are the bill’s sponsors.

by Barbara B. Kennelly, President/CEO

"The debate over Medicare legislation has been a true disappointment to millions of seniors tired of paying more in premiums so that insurers offering private Medicare Advantage plans can keep their billions in government subsidies. While everyone in Washington talks about fiscal discipline, the President’s veto threat with support from his allies in Congress, shows the influence of the insurance lobby once again ruled the day.

This legislation offers only a band-aid fix to the doctor’s fee cut and clearly puts insurers’ profits ahead of Medicare’s solvency and seniors’ needs. The National Committee will continue to work with House and Senate members next year on legislation to eliminate these outrageous and wasteful subsidies to Medicare Advantage insurers, strengthen aid for low income beneficiaries and improve Medicare’s long-term solvency.”

The Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget have released their FY 2007 US Financial Report. This report shows that by using the same accounting methods as private companies, the federal budget deficit is actually 69% higher than the administration reported two months ago, putting the deficit at $275.5 billion for this fiscal year. The Bush administration will proudly tell you that this is 38% less than last year’s deficit. But who would’ve thought seven years ago we would be expected to celebrate a $275.5. billion dollar deficit?

Rather than focusing on the tax and spend policies which created this deficit, this report touts the “healthy economy” and continues to issue more dire warnings of an “oncoming fiscal train wreck” of entitlement spending.

Let’s be clear here, entitlement costs did not create our current budget deficit. The challenges facing each of these programs are different and they’ll require unique solutions, yet the Bush administration continues to lump Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid together in an attempt to persuade older Americans and their families to foot the bill for this administration’s irresponsible budget policies. The long-term challenges facing Social Security are modest and manageable and should be addressed -- but there is no need to buy into this “crisis” campaign designed to persuade Americans this program must be eviscerated in order to be fixed.

Medicare, on the other hand, faces a shortfall in 2019 in large part because it suffers from the same skyrocketing healthcare costs Americans are seeing nationwide. We can’t continue to ignore national health care reform if we want to control federal spending. Yet the administration’s supporters continue to ignore the real issues in favor of their rhetoric designed to erode Americans’ deep faith in social insurance programs.

Americans want fiscal discipline returned to Washington; however, the challenges facing Medicare and Social Security are different. A one-size-fits-all ‘let’s cut entitlements’ approach won’t work no matter how hard the Bush administration tries to sell it.

More than 10 million Medicare beneficiaries live at or near the poverty line but it’s been hard to get much attention for reforms that could ease their burden.

House and Senate conferees appear bogged down in negotiations of a Medicare reform bill. Of course, the focus of Congressional wrangling so far has been on cuts to wasteful subsidies to private Medicare Advantage insurers and a fix to prevent a 10% pay cut to Medicare physicians, which is scheduled for the New Year.

Now, Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) are sending a letter to Medicare negotiators, signed by more than 30 of their Senate colleagues, urging them to support reforms in three other areas:

· Increase the asset allowance for the Part D low income subsidy so that those with very limited incomes, but modest retirement savings, can obtain the assistance the Medicare Modernization Act was intended to deliver in paying premiums and coinsurance under the drug benefit

· Update the income and asset allowances for the Medicare Savings Programs, and provide continuing inflationary adjustment for those limits. Today many fail to receive needed assistance due to an asset test which has been unchanged for two decades

· Improve outreach and enrollment in both programs

Here’s more information on the Medicare Savings Program and the Low-Income Subsidy.

Yes, you read that correctly. Unfortunately, it’s a statement that is less likely to be included in any news coverage thanks to a 7-year propaganda campaign created to convince Americans that “Social Security won’t be there when today’s younger workers retire...baby boomers will bankrupt the system and you can make more money if you trade your Social Security for a Wall Street account.”

These myths are simplistic and wrong. The facts, unfortunately, are more complicated to understand. Maybe that’s why the mainstream media has bought the Social Security “crisis” claims so easily and completely? Until lately, that is.

The Dallas Morning News has among the most comprehensive articles we’ve seen in months describing the truth of Social Security. Bob Moos talked to a broad range of economists, actuaries, and advocates. He also summarizes the Presidential candidates’ positions. It’s definitely worth a read.

The Association of Marketing & Communications Professionals has honored the National Committee’s website and blog for outstanding achievement among public service and charitable organizations. “Entitled to Know” received MarCom’s Gold Award and the redesigned website received an Honorable Mention.

As baby-boomers age and an increasing number of older Americans turn to the internet for their news and information, the need for thorough and thoughtful analysis on issues affecting seniors is also growing.

That’s why, as the nation’s leading advocate for strengthening Social Security and Medicare for future generations, the National Committee launched it’s blog “Entitled to Know” earlier in 2007 to positive reviews from senior bloggers:

“I write about these issues frequently, but I can’t keep up as thoroughly and with as much detail as the people who write for this blog. I urge you to bookmark “entitled to know”. It’s important stuff you need to know”...Ronni Bennett, Time Goes By

The National Committee’s website also continues its tradition of providing detailed briefing papers, policy analysis, and advocacy tools to help seniors understand the issues and communicate their positions directly to their elected leaders on Capitol Hill. The Wall Street Journal has recognized the National Committee’s “Ask Mary Jane” advice column as “the best source of help for questions about Social Security”.

by Max Richtman, NCPSSM Executive Vice President

That simple sentiment sums up my trip to Iowa this week perfectly. I met with National Committee members and supporters who are organizing for the Iowa Presidential Caucuses,which are just a month away. We have more than 38-thousand supporters in Iowa and these seniors want to be sure that the Presidential candidates don’t ignore issues critical to retirees and their families.

We talked about so many different issues of concern to seniors including, the continuing preoccupation by some in Washington with privatizing Social Security and the inadequacy of the Medicare drug benefit. But nothing raised the hackles of this group of National Committee activists as much as our discussion about the Medicare Advantage Program or, as one participant characterized it, the Medicare Disadvantage Program.

They resent the fact that all Medicare beneficiaries, including the 81% of beneficiaries who have not signed up for Medicare Advantage, are paying more in premiums ($2 per month) to help finance this outrageous subsidy of the insurance companies selling Medicare Advantage Plans.

They were outraged that $149 billion dollars will be spent, or more accurately wasted, over the next 10 years on government subsidies to these plans while so many health care needs of seniors go unmet – supposedly due to lack of money in the Medicare budget.

The participant who said, “I thought Medicare was for seniors – not the insurance industry”, summed up the tone of our meeting perfectly. The Medicare law passed nearly 4 years ago had a different set of priorities and forgot that Medicare is for seniors. The National Committee is doing every thing we can to change this and is urging the Congress to eliminate this wasteful spending on subsides to the insurance companies.

It is time to get our priorities in order. It is time to devote theses precious resources to those in need -- not those motivated by greed.

The huge irony of watching President Bush accuse Congress of “wasteful Washington spending” while at the same time threatening to veto a Medicare bill which could trim billion dollar subsidies to the insurance industry might make us chuckle...if only it weren’t so harmful to seniors.

According to Congressional Quarterly today: