Federal Health Reform Is Largely Market-Based, Despite Contrary Assertions Randall R

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Federal Health Reform Is Largely Market-Based, Despite Contrary Assertions Randall R Federal Health Reform Is Largely Market-Based, Despite Contrary Assertions Randall R. Bovbjerg and Stan Dorn October 2012 Introduction and Summary leaders for market-based health reform.1 A market works only for those who can afford to participate, so Opponents regularly deride the Patient Protection and the ACA creates advance tax credits for modest- Affordable Care Act as a government takeover of income people that will help millions of the otherwise- American health care. But the ACA relies primarily on uninsured purchase private coverage within the the private market to achieve coverage expansion, exchanges and add to the competitive rewards using public regulation to make the market work. available to plans. All legal residents with incomes The ACA is a direct descendant of the “pro- from 100 to 400 percent of FPL are eligible for competitive” reform strategy of the Reagan era, which subsidies, unless they are instead eligible for also proposed to structure competition among private Medicaid/CHIP or another public plan, or are offered health plans to expand coverage and promote better employer-sponsored insurance that the ACA value. After the ACA, as before, the vast majority of classifies as affordable. Americans younger than Medicare age will enroll in Incentives to seek good value in health coverage are privately operated insurance plans and will receive created by the ACA’s subsidy structure for individuals care from private physicians and hospitals. The ACA choosing among exchanges’ tiered offerings of plans. will expand coverage from private insurers as well as These incentives will be strengthened by a cap on the under Medicaid and CHIP (which also rely heavily on federal tax exclusion for employment groups with very private plans). high premiums that begins in 2018, the so-called 2 The ACA establishes new ground rules for insurance “Cadillac tax” —which will also encourage value- competition, similar to traditional practices of large conscious trade-offs in coverage decisions. employment groups, which require insurers to The structure of credits is a key feature for promoting compete on efficiency, rather than on avoidance of value. The new federal subsidy is pegged to the risky or costly enrollees. Starting in 2014, competing second-lowest premium charged for a “silver” health private health plans will cover the previously plan in the enrollee’s area—the so-called “reference uninsured, both under the new insurance-purchasing premium.” Silver is the label for plans with the second exchanges and under states’ Medicaid programs. -highest level of cost sharing (more than for platinum Most already covered Americans will be largely or gold, less than for bronze). Silver plans are to have unaffected, especially in large firms. an “actuarial value” of 70 percent; this means that Reform operates mainly by structuring incentives for payouts from the plan are projected to pay 70 percent private actors and states and by giving them new of the full expense of the covered services used by a information and coverage options rather than by standard population. Additional subsidies for imposing direct controls on behavior. As a result, the consumers with incomes at or below 250 percent of ACA does far more to expand personal choice and FPL raise actuarial value to between 73 and 94 autonomy than to reduce them, most obviously for the percent, depending on income. As with most insurance, much higher cost sharing applies for using tens of millions of Americans who are now either 3 uninsured or offered only a single option for insurance out-of-network caregivers. coverage. Subsidies cover the amount of reference premium that exceeds an enrollee share deemed reasonable in How the ACA Creates a More Effective light of family income. This is no government Insurance Market giveaway: all enrollees pay at least 2 percent of their income for the reference plan, which is the level Incentives, infrastructure, and information are key expected from enrollees with incomes from 100 to ways to achieve an effective marketplace. These 133 percent of FPL. Consumer premium obligations three i’s were memorably set out by early thought rise to 9.5 percent of income at 300–400 percent of © 2012, The Urban Institute Health Policy Center • www.healthpolicycenter.org page 1 FPL. Everyone wishing to upgrade to a more costly (e.g., open enrollment, comprehensive benefits, silver plan or to a gold or platinum plan must pay the choice of plan, and enrollee contributions that do not full difference in premium themselves; and, while vary based on health status, age, or gender), from accepting a bronze plan lowers the enrollee’s pioneering states’ experience (e.g., coverage of premium share, it substantially increases out-of- childless adults, health insurance exchanges), and pocket costs. Premium subsidies are indexed to rise from prior pro-competitive and Republican proposals more slowly than expected health care costs, which (e.g., individual mandate, risk adjustment). means that consumers may see their premium charges rise in future years. In particular, two underappreciated aspects of traditional large-group financing parallel what the ACA Two key features of the subsidy design are so seeks to accomplish. First, such employers finance important that they deserve reemphasis: the “employer share” of premiums by setting aside funds that would otherwise be paid as wages.8 In 1. The full marginal cost of any upgrades is borne by effect, because wage offsets are not individualized, all enrollees. The structure creates a very powerful incentive for enrollees to carefully weigh added value employees are “taxed” to create a shared pool of against added cost, to seek out efficiencies much funding that supports all employees’ benefits. Employees who seek to postpone enrollment until more widely than is asked of enrollees in typical large they really need care can save only the relatively employment groups. A similar approach is used by small “employee share.” Given the extent of benefits the federal employees health benefits program, long lost by opting out, this arrangement gives employees lauded by conservatives as a good market model for 9 health insurance.4 Having consumers pay for the full strong incentives to enroll promptly and not free ride. price differentials, as noted by conservative thought Second, employers also typically charge the same share of premium to all employees, a form of full leaders, also “triggers much stronger price/quality “community rating.” competition among plans seeking the business of enrollees. Plans [must] compete to satisfy customers The ACA’s allegedly heavy-handed provisions are who are motivated to pick a plan according to the full much weaker than these widely applicable private- package of premium, services, quality, and sector practices. The ACA’s payments from anticipated out-of-pocket costs.”5 individuals who remain uninsured are much smaller 10 2. Government contributes toward a modest plan and much less reliably enforced than is the only, not the best plan or what families or their employer share of premium held aside from wages for caregivers consider “needed.” This approach is a all workers, whether or not they accept employer deeply conservative one, classically espoused by coverage offers. And the ACA calls only for “modified” President Reagan’s Commission on Ethics in rather than full community rating; premiums can vary Medicine and vigorously promoted by Professor Alain substantially by age and tobacco use and somewhat Enthoven, that era’s leading proponent of pro- by geographic location, with significant latitude for competitive reform.6 The level of premium subsidy state variation, as well as variation across plans depends on income, asking more of people who can within states. afford more, and cost sharing is subsidized for people The ACA likewise creates modest incentives for up to 250 percent of FPL. But every enrollee must medium and large employers to contribute to the cost pay some premiums and some out-of-pocket cost of their workers’ health coverage, rather than allow sharing, up to limits that also vary by income and tier 11 7 such costs to be paid entirely by taxpayers. While of coverage chosen. these payments are significantly below the cost of The requisite purchasing infrastructure comes from group coverage to most employers, they establish the new nongroup and small-group exchanges, along modest disincentives against firms dropping coverage with new ground rules for insurance that create the entirely or structuring health coverage offers to shift lifetime protections of open enrollment—protections costs to the public sector. not available at any price within unstructured insurance markets. Such rules are essential to avoid Modestly standardized benefit structures are another the segregation by risk that inevitably excludes many infrastructural component that promotes more people from coverage. Rules are also essential to effective competition. The ACA requires that plans create insurance market competition that focuses include 10 “essential health benefits.” Echoing that most on the value of health coverage rather than same federal employees plan previously so admired mainly on how insurers and customers can sort by conservatives, the ACA sets out only broad categories like ambulatory care, emergency services, themselves out according to medical risk and 12 expected expenditure. and hospitalization. It has been implemented not to impose a single, uniform national package for all but The ACA’s basic concepts and ground rules come to allow state discretion to adapt benefits from a wide from traditional practices of large employment groups range of private-sector models. Each state defines its © 2012, The Urban Institute Health Policy Center • www.healthpolicycenter.org page 2 own comprehensive benefits package, and out-of- The Medicaid expansion also relies heavily upon pocket cost sharing can vary dramatically, even within private health plans. Medicaid and CHIP expansion “color” tiers, as long as overall actuarial value targets are an important part of the ACA.
Recommended publications
  • 2012 Commencement
    Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks NSU Commencement Programs NSU Digital Collections 5-27-2012 2012 Commencement - Graduate - College of Osteopathic Medicine, College of Pharmacy, College of Optometry, College of Health Care Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, and College of Dental Medicine Nova Southeastern University Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/nsudigital_commencement Part of the Higher Education Commons NSUWorks Citation Nova Southeastern University, "2012 Commencement - Graduate - College of Osteopathic Medicine, College of Pharmacy, College of Optometry, College of Health Care Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, and College of Dental Medicine" (2012). NSU Commencement Programs. 37. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/nsudigital_commencement/37 This Commencement Program is brought to you for free and open access by the NSU Digital Collections at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in NSU Commencement Programs by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE PRESIDENT, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ADMINISTRATION, FACULTY, AND STAFF CONGRATULATE YOU ON THIS VERY SPECIAL DAY. TODAY'S COMMENCEMENT EXERCISE IS THE CULMINATION OF YOUR HARD WORK AND INTELLECTUAL EFFORT, WHICH SHOULD BE DULY NOTED AND PUBLICLY RECOGNIZED. MAY ALL OF YOUR DREAMS AND WISHES BRING FORTH A PROSPEROUS FUTURE. CONGRATULATIONS! NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY WELCOME TO THE COMMENCEMENT CEREMONY OF 2012 FOR THE COLLEGE OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE COLLEGE OF PHARMACY COLLEGE OF OPTOMETRY
    [Show full text]
  • Privatization
    PRIVATIZATION The Proceedings of a Conference Hosted by the National Center for Policy Analysis and the Adam Smith Institute Edited by John C. Goodman Copyright @1985 by The National Center for Policy Analysis, 7701 N. Stem mons, Suite 717, Dallas, Texas 75247; (214) 951-0306. Nothing herein should be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the National Center for Policy Analysis or as an attempt to aid or hinder passage of any legislation before Congress or any state legislature. ISBN 0-943802-13-X II Table of Contents Introduction and Acknowledgements John C. Goodman ......... ...... , .. v Chapter 1 How Public Policy Institutes Can Cause Change Edwin Feulner . ..... 1 Chapter 2 Privatization Techniques and Results in Great Britain Madsen Pirie. , . .. ...., 11 Chapter 3 How the Thatcher Revolution was Achieved Eamonn Butler. , . , . .. 25 Chapter 4 Privatization in the U.S.: Why It's Happening and How It Works John C. Goodman .. .. ....... ........ 35 Chapter 5 Applying the British Model: Case Histories Stuart Butler .... , ................................ ,41 Chapter 6 Building New Coalitions as a Key to Privatization Fred L. Smith . ....... ,51 Chapter 7 Privatization From the Bottom Up Robert Poole . .. .............. 59 Chapter 8 Privatization From the Top Down and From the Outside In E. S. Savas .......... , .... , ......... , ............. 69 Chapter 9 Opting Out of Social Security: Why It Works In Other Countries John C. Goodman .................... , ............ 79 Chapter 10 Social Security and Super IRAs: A Populist Proposal Peter 1. Ferrara . , , . 87 Attendees . 99 Appendix Privatization In The U.S.: Cities And Counties .............. 101 III Introduction On October 12, 1984 a conference was held in Washington. To my knowledge no conference like it had ever been held before.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Massachusetts Site Visits Agenda
    Kaiser Media Fellowships Program: The Affordable Care Act in Massachusetts: Cost Containment –Boston & Cambridge site visit, Sunday, May 20-Friday, May 25, 2012 PAGE 1 Accommodations: Cambridge: The Hyatt Regency Cambridge Sunday, May 20 6:30pm/6:45pm: Reception, meet in hotel: The Charles Room, 16th Floor 7:00pm: Working dinner with Sarah Iselin, president, The Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation: Overview of MA health reform, and cost containment initiatives; and David Seltz, chief policy adviser, Office of the MA Senate President Therese Murray Monday, May 21 8:30am: Buffet Breakfast, The Cambridge Room, 2nd floor 9:00am-11:00am: Jonathan Gruber, Professor of Economics, MIT, and director of the health care program, National Bureau of Economic Research: An update on how MA health reform is working, and how that relates to Federal reform 11:30am-12:40pm: MA 1115 Medicaid Waiver with Robert Seifert, Senior Associate, Center for Health Law and Economics, University of Massachusetts Medical School; and Jean Sullivan, Director of the Center for Health Economics 12:40pm: Working buffet lunch 1:00pm-2:00pm: Medicaid issues, including dual eligibles, with Robert Master, M.D., President & CEO, Commonwealth Care Alliance 2:50pm: Depart by van 3:30pm-5:30pm: Meeting with John McDonough, Professor of the Practice of Public Health, Harvard School of Public Health 5:45pm: Return to hotel 6:40pm: Depart hotel by van to restaurant 7:00pm: Working dinner: Sandrines Restaurant Tuesday, May 22 8:30am: Depart by van to Harvard School of Public
    [Show full text]
  • CCR AR 2014.Pdf
    The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights move- ments in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization commit- ted to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change. Design: Nicholas Coster, [email protected]. Photo credits: p 2: Yanick Salazar • p 4: Pam Bradshaw • p 6: Pam Bradshaw • p 7: Juan Manuel, Herrera/OAS • p 11: Qa’id Jacobs • p 12: Qa’id Jacobs • p 14: Alexis Agathocleous • p.15: Snowden: Laura Poitras/Praxis Films. Assange: Cancillería del Ecuador. Manning: courtesy of www.bradleymanning.org • p16: © RON- ALD KABUUBI/epa/Corbis • p.19: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance • p.20-21: Picture 2: Laura Raymond. Picture 5: Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq. Pictures 6, 11, 15: Pam Bradshaw. Picture 10: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance. Picture 12: Aliya Hana Hussain • p 22-23: Pictures 2, 6: Pam Brad- shaw. Pictures 4, 5: Sameer A. Khan • p 23: Pictures 4, 5 by Sameer Khan • p 27: Pam Bradshaw • p 29: David Hicks: Adam Thomas (devdsp@flickr) • p 30: Top left: Shayana Kadidal • p.32: Chelsea Manning by Alicia Neal, in cooperation with Chelsea herself, commissioned by the Chelsea Manning Support Network • p 33: Top: Pam Bradshaw. Bottom: Kevin Gay • p 34: Bot- tom left: Alexis Agathocleous • p 36: Bram Cymet (bcymet@flickr) • p 41: Bottom: Courtesy of Iraq Veterans Against the War/Civil Soldier Alliance • p 46: Douglas Gorenstein • p 62: Ruby Dee: Courtesy of MDCarchives The Center for Constitutional Rights is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Transcript
    MILLENIALS-2019/10/22 1 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION HOW MILLENNIALS THINK DIFFERENTLY ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND NATIONAL DEBT: LESSONS FOR POLICYMAKERS AN EVENT CO-HOSTED BY THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION AND THE MILLENNIAL ACTION PROJECT Washington, D.C. Tuesday, October 22, 2019 Introduction and moderator: STUART BUTLER Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, The Brookings Institution Keynote: Challenges and Opportunities: DEREK KILMER Representative (D-WA), U.S. House of Representatives How to Speak Millennial: Debt and Climate Change: NAT KENDALL-TAYLOR Chief Executive Officer, Frameworks Institute MOLLY REYNOLDS Senior Fellow, Governance Studies, The Brookings Institution ALEX TYSON Senior Researcher, Pew Research Center LAYLA ZAIDANE Chief Operating Officer, Millennial Action Project Lessons for Lawmakers: Millennial Perspectives: MODERATOR: STEVEN OLIKARA Founder and President, Millennial Action Project ERIC T. HARRIS Senior Advisor and Communications Director Office of Representative Jimmy Gomez * * * * * ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 600 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 MILLENIALS-2019/10/22 2 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. BUTLER: Good morning everybody. My name is Stuart Butler, I'm a senior fellow here at the Brookings Institution. And I want to welcome you to our event today. I also want to welcome the many people that are watching this online and we will be able to take some questions from people online if you use the hashtag mobilizing millennials. It's a scary thought, isn't it? But anyway, if you use that tag, you can also ask questions which we can include during the discussion. I'm going to be by far the oldest person that you're going to see on the stage today.
    [Show full text]
  • Buy Insurance Or Else? 2/5/2019 11:37 Am
    BUY INSURANCE OR ELSE? 2/5/2019 11:37 AM BUY INSURANCE OR ELSE?: RESURRECTING THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE AT THE STATE LEVEL *Brendan Williams INTRODUCTION The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been subject to considerable volatility, with perhaps the greatest blow being the rescission, as part of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, of the penalty for its individual mandate to have health insurance coverage.1 As a New Republic article noted, “we will now find out whether or not an individual mandate really is essential to health reform. And that will settle an old intra-Democratic fight that has been dormant for a decade.”2 The author, Joel Dodge, noted that in the face of Republican efforts to repeal the ACA, “Obamacare defenders (myself included) rebutted these attacks by doubling down on the argument that the law’s entire structure would collapse without a mandate.”3 Yet, following the mandate’s repeal, Dodge admitted: The mandate was also never much of a mandate to begin with. The Obama administration gave numerous exemptions from * Attorney Brendan Williams is a nationally-published writer on health care and civil rights issues. M.A., Washington State University; J.D., University of Washington School of Law. 1 Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010); Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Pub. L. No. 115-97, 131 Stat. 2054 (2017). The individual mandate requires that “[a]n applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month.” 26 U.S.C § 5000A(a) (2018).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 May 11, 2020 VIA Electronic Delivery Chief FOIA Officer
    May 11, 2020 VIA Electronic Delivery Chief FOIA Officer Communications Division Office of the Comptroller of the Currency 400 7th Street SW Washington, DC 20219 Re: Freedom of Information Act Records Request Dear FOIA Officer: Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Department of the Treasury regulations at 12 C.F.R. Part 4 and 31 C.F.R. Part 1, respectively, Democracy Forward Foundation and California Reinvestment Coalition make the following request for records. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act) authorized the Small Business Administration (SBA) to create a new loan program, the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), to assist small businesses harmed by the coronavirus emergency and resulting economic contraction. Under the PPP, financial institutions originate forgivable, SBA-backed loans to small businesses that can be used for payroll and other designated purposes. But the implementation of the PPP left many out, particularly small businesses and business owners of color who have been unable to secure these loans for their businesses.1 According to one study, approximately 95 Percent of Black-owned businesses, 91 Percent of Latino-owned businesses, 91 Percent of Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander-owned businesses, and 75 Percent of Asian- owned businesses are likely to be denied a PPP loan by a traditional bank or credit union.2 1 See, e.g., Neil Haggerty & John Reosti, Did banks play favorites in PPP
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Comments for the Record U.S. House Committee on Ways And
    Comments for the Record U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Oversight Hearing on Health Insurance Individual Responsibility Tuesday, January 24, 2017 By Dr. John E. McDonough Harvard TH Chan School of PuBlic Health Chairman Buchanan, Ranking MemBer Lewis, and memBers of the SuBcommittee on Oversight, my name is John E McDonough and I am a professor of practice in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of PuBlic Health in Boston, Massachusetts. I hold a doctoral degree in puBlic health and a master’s degree in puBlic administration. Formerly I worked Between 2008 and 2010 as a senior advisor on national health reform for the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions where I participated in the writing and passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Between 2003 and 2008, I served as executive director of Health Care for All, Massachusetts’ leading consumer health advocacy organization where I was deeply involved in the passage and implementation of the 2006 Massachusetts Health Reform Law. Between 1985 and 1997, I served as a memBer of the Massachusetts House of Representatives where I held many health policy positions of responsiBility, including co-chair of the committees on health care and insurance. I am here to offer testimony on the ACA’s “requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage” (Section 1501, 42 USC 18091), as well as a similar provision enacted as part of the 2006 Massachusetts health reform law that served as a model for Title 1 of the ACA.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Aging Forum
    Center for Strategic and International Studies Global Aging Forum Perspectives on U.S. Health-Care Reform Speakers: October 22, 2007 Stuart Butler, Vice President for Domestic and Economic 12:00-2:00 pm Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation CSIS 4th Floor Len Nichols, Director of the Health Policy Program, The Conference Room New America Foundation Chaired by: Richard Jackson, Director, CSIS Global Aging Initiative and Neil Howe, Senior Associate, CSIS The Global Aging Forum meets over lunch roughly once a month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies to discuss the fiscal, economic, social, and geopolitical challenges arising from the aging of the population in the United States and around the world. There is a brief presentation by a prominent policy or thought leader followed by an off-the-record discussion. Attendance is by invitation only and meetings are closed to the press. Please RSVP to Keisuke Nakashima at [email protected]. CSIS wishes to acknowledge the generous financial support for the Global Aging Forum received from: AEGON USA, Inc. • The American Council of Life Insurers Goldman, Sachs & Co. • Japan Association of Corporate Executives • MetLife, Inc. The Prudential Foundation • Watson Wyatt Worldwide . CSIS Global Aging Initiative 1800 K Street, NW • Washington, DC 20006 Phone: (202) 457-8718 • Fax: (202) 775-3199 • www.csis.org/gai Center for Strategic and International Studies Global Aging Forum Perspectives on U.S. Health-Care Reform ---Speakers’ Biographies--- Stuart M. Butler, Ph.D. Vice President, Domestic and Economic Policy Studies The Heritage Foundation Since joining Heritage in 1979, Stuart Butler has played a major role in shaping the policy debate on a wide range of domestic policy issues from health care and Social Security to welfare reform and privatizing government services.
    [Show full text]
  • National Press Club
    NATIONAL PRESS CLUB TAKING BACK OUR FISCAL FUTURE INTRODUCTION: ISABEL SAWHILL, SENIOR FELLOW, THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION STUART BUTLER, VICE PRESIDENT, DOMESTIC AND ECONOMIC AND POLICY STUDIES, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL: ALICE RIVLIN, SENIOR FELLOW, THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: ROBERT REISCHAUER, PRESIDENT, THE URBAN INSTITUTE RUDOLPH PENNER, SENIOR FELLOW, THE URBAN INSTITUTE MONDAY, MARCH 31, 2008 THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB WASHINGTON, D.C. ISABEL SAWHILL: Good morning. I’m Belle (sp) Sawhill from Brookings and we – I want to welcome you on behalf not only of myself, but of the terrific team of people who put together the paper that we’re releasing today. We’re here to talk to you about our fiscal future and what we think needs to be done to get it under better control. And although the nominal sponsors of this event are Brookings and Heritage, I want to emphasize that a much broader group of institutions and people have been involved in this effort. And it may be that one of the more significant things about this paper is not just what it says, but who is saying it and what a diversity of people is saying it. This paper, believe it or not, has 16 authors. You may ask, how in the world could 16 people co-author a paper? And let me tell you, it is difficult. But, of course, the true answer is that several people took the lead, particularly Alice Rivlin. Nevertheless, this was very much a group effort. These are not nominal co-signers to this document; this is a group of people that has been meeting for more than two years, every month, and talking about these issues and wondering what we might be able to do as a group to address the fiscal challenges facing the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Raise the Medicare Eligibility Age
    Perspectives AARP Public Policy Institute REFORMING MEDICARE Option: Raise the Medicare Eligibility Age Since Medicare’s creation in 1965, the eligibility age has been 65 for people without disabilities. Some proposals would gradually raise Medicare’s eligibility age from 65 to 67. So instead of receiving health coverage through Medicare, 65- and 66-year-olds would need to enroll in coverage through an employer plan or a government program (such as Medicaid) or purchase their own coverage on the individual market or through a health insurance exchange. Argument for: Argument against: Stuart Butler, Ph.D. Henry J. Aaron, Ph.D. The Heritage Foundation The Brookings Institution Stuart Butler Raising the Medicare eligibility age is a good idea, given the budget problems we face and the fact that Americans are living longer. But it must be done carefully, to make sure that older workers still have health insurance. Both Medicare and Social Security were intended for retired Americans. So it would make sense to set the normal eligibility age of each program at the age where we have decided as a nation that retirement typically begins. And since working Americans generate the money to pay benefits, it’s also important for the eligibility age to be set where the number of years Americans work is enough to pay retirement benefits. With Americans living longer, we have already slowly raised the normal age for Social Security benefits from the original 65 to age 67 (you can claim Social Security as early as 62, but the check is much smaller). Many argue for raising it to 70 over the next 20 years or so.
    [Show full text]
  • American Dream for This Generation and the Next.” — Senator Jim Demint (R-S.C.)
    What leaders say about Heritage’s plan for: AMERIC A N DRE A M “Getting our country’s fiscal house in order is no easy task. Thankfully, our friends at The Heritage Foundation have done the hard work of thinking through and creating public policies that get government under control and save the American dream for this generation and the next.” — Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) “The analysis of our fiscal problems is compelling, and the proposed solution is bold and imaginative.” — Ambassador John Bolton “The Heritage Foundation’s plan to save the American dream would create economic certainty for businesses by putting our nation on a more stable economic course and giving businesses the freedom to expand.” — Andrew F. Puzder, CEO of CKE Restaurants Inc. (Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr.) “… a plan that truly reforms… This plan is the cure for our ‘disease.’” — Cal Thomas, Syndicated Columnist “Comprehensive tax reform is an essential element of restoring fiscal sanity and spurring economic growth in the country. The Heritage Foundation’s proposal moves the country’s tax code in the right direction toward a more low-rate, flat tax.” — Arthur B. Laffer, Ph.D., the Father of Supply-Side Economics “America does not have to be a country in decline. Do we have choices to make? Yes. And I encourage anyone who is serious about making the right choices to read The Heritage Foundation’s plan to fix the debt, cut spending, and restore prosperity.” — Steve Forbes, Editor-in-Chief, Forbes magazine 214 Massachusetts Avenue N.E. n Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]