![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
OMG.
I spent a few days this week diving into Medicare and Medicare policies for my mother.
She has a great Medicare Advantage -read private!- HMO plan, that we were trying to replace with "regular" Medicare -government- and Medigap -private- policy.
The one reason to change is that she wants to spend more time with my sister in OR, and her current plan is very Louisiana and Mississippi specific.
She pays nothing for her current private plan, including drug coverage and her total out of pocket isn't bad. The benefits are good.
To get the equivalent with Medicare and Medigap, if even possible (smoker) would cost several hundred dollars a month (about $350/month was the best estimate I got), more than her current maximum out of pocket.
From my very limited perspective (my FIL had a great Medicare Advantage plan as well, my MIL's is pretty good) and sample size of three, strong regulation of private plans in the context of Medicare can work.
We're still working on things, but since her current HMO advantage policy covers emergency care out of state, and we may be able to get her a PPO from the same company. Or something. None of this is easy. A lot of it is confusing.
My takeaway?
Sanders and Warren are promising too much, too fast, and making too much of a change for there not to be some pretty major pitfalls (like, fex, the people put out of work in the insurance industry). I think Harris has the right idea and I think I'd have come to that conclusion just given the data of this past week, based on empirical observation. Allowing private industry to play in the sandbox, provided they are regulated seems to be working thus far, so eh, it could continue to work. One thing I'd like to see added to Harris's plan, which may already be there, and I've just missed it or not understood it was there, is an immediate public option available under ACA to ease the transition... Wait. This is Harris. Unlike Warren who talks about having plans, Harris actually has them, and I'm sure these is a plan for expanded coverage during the transition time.
My guiding principle is still that health care is a human right, and I want to see everyone covered as fast as possible, with as low costs as possible, and without the risks to the vulnerable that "profound structural change" can bring.
I spent a few days this week diving into Medicare and Medicare policies for my mother.
She has a great Medicare Advantage -read private!- HMO plan, that we were trying to replace with "regular" Medicare -government- and Medigap -private- policy.
The one reason to change is that she wants to spend more time with my sister in OR, and her current plan is very Louisiana and Mississippi specific.
She pays nothing for her current private plan, including drug coverage and her total out of pocket isn't bad. The benefits are good.
To get the equivalent with Medicare and Medigap, if even possible (smoker) would cost several hundred dollars a month (about $350/month was the best estimate I got), more than her current maximum out of pocket.
From my very limited perspective (my FIL had a great Medicare Advantage plan as well, my MIL's is pretty good) and sample size of three, strong regulation of private plans in the context of Medicare can work.
We're still working on things, but since her current HMO advantage policy covers emergency care out of state, and we may be able to get her a PPO from the same company. Or something. None of this is easy. A lot of it is confusing.
My takeaway?
- Medicare is a good model to work off of to get coverage for everyone.
- It's complicated enough that it is going to take time. Harris's 10 year transition is better than the 4 year one. We do need to make sure people are protected during the transition.
- Private companies can have a part in this, provided they are regulated.
- None of this is going to be cheap. Heh. We knew that, right?
Sanders and Warren are promising too much, too fast, and making too much of a change for there not to be some pretty major pitfalls (like, fex, the people put out of work in the insurance industry). I think Harris has the right idea and I think I'd have come to that conclusion just given the data of this past week, based on empirical observation. Allowing private industry to play in the sandbox, provided they are regulated seems to be working thus far, so eh, it could continue to work. One thing I'd like to see added to Harris's plan, which may already be there, and I've just missed it or not understood it was there, is an immediate public option available under ACA to ease the transition... Wait. This is Harris. Unlike Warren who talks about having plans, Harris actually has them, and I'm sure these is a plan for expanded coverage during the transition time.
My guiding principle is still that health care is a human right, and I want to see everyone covered as fast as possible, with as low costs as possible, and without the risks to the vulnerable that "profound structural change" can bring.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}