 |
Year
2007 |
|
Archives
|
|
|
Viagra coverage illustrates flaw
- Wednesday, February 9, 2005
SUMMARY: Medicare's coverage of sexual performance drugs highlights the open-ended nature of new benefits.
Last week's news from Medicare that the prescription drug coverage for seniors
beginning next year will pay for Viagra
and other sexual performance drugs is the stuff of farce. But it's
really nothing to laugh at. Subsidized sex for seniors perfectly
illustrates some of the crazier aspects of Medicare and our entire
heath care system.
Medicare will cover sexual performance drugs because the Medicare "reform" law Congress passed and the president signed in 2003 creates a prescription-drug benefit covering all "medically necessary" drugs except weight-loss and fertility drugs, barbiturates and non-prescription medications. Since sexual performance drugs aren't specifically excluded, they're covered, Medicare administrators say.
It's an awful irony. Nearly 45 million Americans have no health care coverage at all. Millions of people are on their own when it comes to insulin, antibiotics and other potentially lifesaving medications. But if you're poor enough, states and the federal government will cover your major medical needs. Ditto when you hit the magic age of 65 - even if you're wealthy.
Currently, seniors have no meaningful coverage for prescription medicine costs. They do qualify for discount cards that may or may not save them money on their drugs. Next year, however, Medicare's new prescription benefits kick in. That coverage has some pretty big holes in it, but it still will cost an estimated $500 billion over its first 10 years.
All wage-earners help pay for Medicare through payroll taxes. Some of Medicare's
costs will require the government to borrow money, which must be
repaid through future taxes. In other words, many workers have no
health care coverage of their own and couldn't begin to afford their
own Viagra, but once they make it to 65, Medicare will help pay
for all their medications, including Viagra.
Beyond the irony is this: If the government's going to buy Viagra, then there's really no limit to the medications it's going to buy. A promise to underwrite all "medically necessary" drugs amounts to a promise to pay for anything the pharmaceutical industry comes up with - "medical necessity" amounts to anything a doctor believes will benefit a patient. The drug benefits comprise an open-ended entitlement.
The notion that the government - that is, taxpayers - can afford open-ended coverage is economically wrong. The idea that people who can't afford their own medicine should buy medicines for others - including people with higher incomes - is perverse. And calling this approach to prescription coverage for seniors "reform" is downright crazy. source:-http://www.missoulian.com | 
