Medicare Part D Administrative Expenses

Yeah.  Private companies are always more efficient
that government programs.  According to a
href="http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/1015-06.htm">recent
study
by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee:



The private Part D insurers report
administrative expenses, sales costs, and profits of almost $5 billion
in 2007 -- including $1 billion in profits alone. The administrative
costs of the privatized Part D program are almost six times higher than
the administrative costs of the traditional Medicare program.



Another tidbit:



The drug price
rebates negotiated by the Part D insurers reduce Medicare drug spending
by just 8.1%. In contrast, rebates in the Medicaid program reduce drug
spending by 26%, over three times as much. Because of the difference in
the size of the rebates, the transfer of low-income seniors from
Medicaid drug coverage to Medicare drug coverage will result in a $2.8
billion windfall for drug manufacturers in 2007.



Not only that, but when the private Part D plans do manage to negotiate
lower drug prices, they do not pass any of the savings on to seniors.
 They just keep it.  Seniors who are in a coverage
gap (the "donut hole") pay the full cost, but the insurance company
keeps the rebate.  It's the magic of the marketplace, alright.
 A bunch of damn crooks.



The data used are "proprietary data," meaning that they not openly
available.  But Congress gets to see the numbers.
 Not pretty.   



More like this

In the NY Times, economist Bruce Bartlett opposes the refund stimulus plan:
Last Tuesday Matthew Warren [reported] in the Australian: Labor plans to rid Australian homes of off-peak electric hot water systems, in a move it claims will cut Australia's greenhouse gas emissions by 7.5million tonnes each year. ...
Cash for clunkers isn't leading to fewer carbon emissions--at least not in Germany.The New York Times reports today on the 50,000 cars (at least) in Germany that have been traded in for cash rebates to put to
Despite a chorus among citizenry and punditry to end oil company subsidies, it turns out that yet another has been foisted upon us.  What is worse, it was created under the guise of a populist program: