Medicare Combine Parts a And

Medicare Combine Parts a and B One of the ways that experts propose to reform Medicare is through the combination of parts a and b of the Medicare system. According to the National Commission on the reformation of Medicare, parts A and B. have become problematic because of the way that medical care has changed over the years (Building Better Medicare...1999). The commission contends that combining parts A and B. will provide Medicare recipients with several different benefits (Building Better Medicare...1999).

The benefits of this reform include improvements in the utilization of medical care and lowered costs for many Medicare recipients (Building Better Medicare...1999). The commission asserts that the improvements in the utilization of available healthcare services will increase under this reform because it will incorporate a fee for service plan (Building Better Medicare...1999). The fee for service plan will prevent uncontrollable medical cost. Likewise, the commission believes that the combination of parts A and B.

will result in lower cost because deductibles will be combined and decreased to $400 (Building Better Medicare...1999). According to an article published by the Center on Budget and Policy priorities combining parts A and B. Of the Medicare system may prove problematic. Kogan and Park (2003) assert that the administration's plan the merge the two parts will result in insolvency issues that will lead to an even greater crisis in the Medicare system.

The authors contend that such a merger would also strengthen the case for invoking a cap on Medicare benefits (Kogan and Park 2003). In addition, it would also increase the probability that the financing of Medicare would be shifted away from income taxes and become the responsibility of the payroll tax (Kogan and Park 2003). This means that the cost to finance the Medicare system would fall into the hands of the working poor and middle class (Kogan and Park 2003).

Eligibility Age Another suggested reform for Medicare is the raise the age at which American become eligible for Medicare. Individuals and groups that support a rise in the eligibility age propose that raising the age to sixty-seven will result in huge savings (Waidmann 1998). In addition the author contends that people aged 65 and 66 are more likely to be in good health than those 67 and older (Waidmann 1998). In addition, people aged 65 and 66 tend to have medical benefits through retirement programs or can afford to purchase individual healthcare programs (Waidmann 1998).

According to an article, entitled "Potential Effects of raising Medicare eligibility age" although increasing the eligibility age will decrease cost for Medicare, it will increase cost for other government programs (Waidmann 1998). The author asserts that many of the people that are currently beneficiaries of Medicare (usually the disabled) are also insured under Medicaid. Medicaid offers service regardless of age (Waidmann 1998). The author asserts that raising the age eligibility will simply increase the responsibilities of the Medicaid system (Waidmann 1998).

On the other hand, the article also asserts that an increase in the eligibility age to 67 will only make a small difference in Medicare savings. The article explains that it would only add one year to the life of hospital insurance trust fund (Waidmann 1998). Analysis of these reforms using Priester's framework Priester has some definite opinions about the values that the healthcare in America should have.

Priester explains that any type of healthcare reform that is put into place should incorporate the successes of healthcare systems in Canada and the Netherlands (Priester 1992). Priester also contends that new healthcare reform values should include Fair access, Quality Care, Efficiency, Respect for patients, Patient advocacy, and Personal responsibility (Priester 1992). According to Priester, under the current health system there is a supposed obligation to provide healthcare access without discriminatory or financial barriers. (Priester p. 89, 1992) However, he contends that under the current system such barriers exists and must be addressed.

By combining part a and part b of the Medicare system perhaps some of the financial barriers that are present can be disseminated. However, it also seems that the merger of part a and b may result in insolvency and create larger problems. These problems may prevent "fair access" to the Medicare system (Priester 1992). In addition, if the finance of Medicare becomes the responsibility of the working poor and the.