Note: this post is from Deborah Banda, State Director, AARP Massachusetts; we join AARP in questioning both the wisdom and the compassion in cutting Prescription Advantage again.
Last Thursday, Governor Patrick closed part of the $600 million mid-year state budget gap by cutting $277 million from state agency budgets. The administration claims that the budget reductions maintain investments in core services. But not all core services were spared.
The Prescription Advantage program, which helps seniors and some younger persons with disabilities afford their medications, will see an additional $5.6 million cut from its $40 million total budget. This continues the unfortunate trend of reducing funding for this core service. The overall program budget has been reduced by a staggering 37% in last three fiscal years, causing 45,000 seniors to lose some of their coverage.
So what does this current round of cuts mean for the low-income enrollees? It means added out-of-pocket costs.
As of January 1, 2010, enrollees will be forced to pay for their entire Medicare Part D premium, as Prescription Advantage eliminates the premium assistance feature of this program. So, for nearly 50,000 older and disabled residents, Prescription Advantage will no longer pay for part of their premium. The program will continue to assist with coverage once people fall into the so-called “doughnut hole”.
Prescription Advantage enrollees will receive information about the program changes in the next few weeks, including resources to assist them with changing to a Medicare Part D plan that may better suit their needs.
Defining core services for residents is a critical role for the Governor and elected officials. We know that Prescription Advantage is a lifeline for those who rely on the program. We also know that prescription drugs help keep people healthy and out of more expensive care.
I manage my parents health care affairs and was very disappointed to receive the notices that PA will discontinue paying premiums in 2010.
I have always doubted the merits of the government mandated Part D program and this cut from Prescription Advantage basically proves it. Prior to Part D, the premiums that PA was minimal to none. Now I will have to pay approx $33/month per parent for their premiums. I truly believe the $33 is nothing more than overhead/ administrative costs. I have seen little value except for bottle necks due to PA authorizations which is timeconsuming for me and the doctors involved. What has our society become when nurses can require doctors to justify what they are prescribing to their patients??
State-funded programs like Prescription Advantage accommodate the poverty to low income groups. Those remaining citizens who can afford prescription plans will pay whether it is government mandated or not.
Prior to 2019, PA was a miracle in the wildernes of escalating needs of the “elderly” poor. Stop and think about it. Today’s elderly are primarily women. Consider that these are pre equal opportunity women,stay at home moms, underpaid pink collar workers, teachers, nurses, service or factory workers; often divorced. The PA cuts are another form of negative discrimination for a cohort of women who were born, educated, and lived in the antiquated culture we seem to forget is still very real in some quarters.