Legislation could grant early access to Medicare

[raccoon]

Older uninsured face high costs, denial of coverage

Legislation could grant early access to Medicare

By Liv Osby

HEALTH WRITER

Realtor Sandra Davis had group health insurance through her job all her life, but the builder she worked for dropped coverage last year as the housing market slumped.
So the 62-year-old Greer woman and her husband, who owns a small business, went to the individual market.
But five months after paying a $1,250 premium for a policy with a $4,000 deductible, they had to give it up and pay their medical bills themselves.
“We couldn't continue it,” she says. “It was like having a second mortgage.”

Nationally, 7.1 million Americans between 50 and 64 were uninsured in 2007 – 117,000 of them in South Carolina, or 15 percent of the population, up 36 percent since 2000, according to AARP. And those numbers are growing thanks to layoffs and early retirements.
But proposed legislation could help at least those 55 to 64 by allowing them to buy in to the Medicare program.

"People between 55 and 65 are the fastest-growing group of uninsured Americans,” said U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat and sponsor of the Medicare Early Access Act. “This legislation helps a vulnerable segment of our population who need access to affordable health insurance.”

The average cost for individual insurance is three times the premium for employer-based coverage, according to AARP. But it's not just cost that keeps many in this group uninsured. One in six people at 50 and one in four at 60 are rejected by insurers, AARP reports.

But without government subsidies for early access, many people still could not afford the premiums, Kaiser reports. And while subsidies would help, they also would increase federal spending at a time when the Medicare Trust Fund is projected to go broke in 2017 without some changes.

The Congressional Budget Office is working on cost estimates for the bill, S. 960, which has been referred to the Senate Finance Committee.

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20090608/NEWS/906080312/1069/YOURUPSTATE01/Older%20uninsured%20face%20high%20costs%20%20denial%20of%20coverage?GID=JssGhYs+BzjMGpd6JjKJdOHc0UCWbSp3ZXNGQLFT/Zo%3D


Single payer for everybody would be even better, of course. But if this passes it would help a lot of people.

[Coyote_Bandit]

1. It still has to be affordable

to help people.

There seems to be a rather widespread assumption that it will be affordable - even in the absence of pricing information. Fact is, many may stil be priced out of the market and find health care (and health insurance) unaffordable.

[old mark]

2. Due to recent changes in our state employee's retirement system,

I would have literally never been eligible for health insurance when I retired - I simply would not have had enough time working for the state
(Thanks to Ed Rendell). I would have had to work till age 66 and then go on medicare.
BUT- I had already had several heart attacks, and my wife was very ill and needed someone with her at all times, so...I retired a few months before my 60th birthday, which is the standard retirement age for PA state employees.
I soon found NO ONE would insure me because I had bypass surgery in '03, even though I was healthier than I have been in many years.

Fineally we found that Blue Cross would cover me, but it was poor coverage and $800/month just for me. We found almost by accident that PA has a state supported insurance program that they aren't advertising that allows me to get subsidized insurance for about $250/month untill I have been on the waiting list long enough to get it free. It will cover me till I am on Medicare, and it has proved to be better coverage than the insurance I had as a state worker.
(I could have COBRA'd the employees coverage, for nearly $800 as month).

I find I am seeing better doctors under my current insurance, have no referral requirement, and lower co-pays than the Employees plan as it was several years ago.

FWIW, my wife is on Medicare Disability Insurance and it has been wonderful coverage.

mark

[raccoon]

3. What kind of changes did they make in the retirement system there?

I have some time that I could "buy back" in my state's (SC) retirement system (I worked for the state and then withdrew retirement money when I left).

I've thought about doing that. But I'm kind of apprehensive about that. What if I do and then the state retirement fund runs out of money? I'm almost 60, for the record.

Edited to add: I know if I were going to retire from the state of California, I would be real apprehensive.

[old mark]

4. Retirement age is 60 for people in my classification. It WAS, when I

was hired, in the contract that if you had ten years service and reached age 60, you could retire with a pension and benefits, including insurance. It was later changed to a stepped option - If you reached age 60 before aspecific date, all was as before, but if after a certain date, the requirement was 15 years service and age 60 again till a certain date, when it became 20 years service and age 60.
I missed the cutoff date by several months, meaning I would have to have worked till age 76 to get health insurance, except that it would have expired when I reached Medicare age at 66.

I retired at 59, have my own state supported health insurance that will become free in a year or so, a small pension and my Social Security beginning this fall.

mark

[Winterblues]

5. When my wife turned sixty her insurance went up thirty percent

She now has to have a deductible of five thousand and still is paying a hundred a month more than her previous policy. Blue Cross... She has basically just Catastrophic Care and pays almost five hundred a month with five thousand deductible..I doubt either of us will live long enough to see any real relief...I have come to the conclusion that Obama is just as trustworthy as Ponzi was. Both very Charismatic and trusted by all.

[raccoon]

6. Geez, something else to look forward to (Not).

I have a policy similar to your wife's with a huge deductible.