For decades, runaway Medicare spending was the story of the federal budget.
Now, flat Medicare spending might be a bigger one.
Something strange has been happening in this giant federal program. Instead of growing and growing, as it always had before, spending per Medicare beneficiary has nearly leveled off over more than a decade.
The trend can be a little hard to see because, as baby boomers have aged, the number of people using Medicare has grown. But it has had enormous consequences for federal spending. Budget news often sounds apocalyptic, but the Medicare trend has been unexpectedly good for federal spending, saving taxpayers a huge amount relative to projections.
…
The reason for the per-person slowdown is a bit of a mystery. Scholars have been arguing about it for years, but no one seems sure enough to confidently predict whether it is likely to stick around for much longer.
Could it have something to do with hundreds of thousands of the sickest boomers dying suddenly a few years ago?
No, this trend started over a decade ago. Here are some possible explanations from the article:
Some of the reductions are easy to explain. Congress changed Medicare policy. The biggest such shift came with the Affordable Care Act in 2010, which reduced Medicare’s payments to hospitals and to health insurers that offered private Medicare Advantage plans. Congress also cut Medicare payments as part of a budget deal in 2011.
…
Older Americans appear to be having fewer heart attacks and strokes, the likely result of effective cholesterol and blood pressure medicines that became cheap and widely used in recent years, according to research from Professor Cutler and colleagues. And drug makers and surgeons haven’t developed as many new blockbuster treatments recently — there has been no new Prozac or angioplasty to drive up spending. (Medicare is currently barred by statute from covering the new class of expensive anti-obesity drugs.)
Parts of the health system appear to have become more efficient, as medical providers have been more cautious about adopting new therapies without much evidence, and more care has shifted outside hospitals into cheaper settings.
Most (all?) insurance plans that charge copays for medications will give heart-related medications for free because of the cost when things like high-blood pressure our not treated.
This is both great and sad news if true. Great that it’s made a big difference in the quality of later life and sad that it’s largely preventable and yet nothing was done, and that there is still so much to improve with our health care system.
Considering that this is a trend that started a decade ago, probably not nearly as much as you seem to think.
Covid: “I’m doing my part!” o7
No, it’s spending per person.
Considering the change in trend started a decade before that
TFW you don’t even bother to look at the chart, let alone read the article
I am not able to read the article.
Not to mention even bother to read the article’s summary that’s available right here in the comments SMDH
Maybe Ivermectin not being covered has them all seeking coverage out of Medicare?
Future right-wing headline: “COVID vaccinated retirees cost Medicare more money”
Oh no!!! What entitlement spending scapegoat will the GOP turn to now?
I bet it involves drag queens spending welfare on wigs or something.
I bet it involves drag queens spending welfare on wigs or something.
I bet you are more right than you know. They’ve had the term “welfare queen” circulating for years now; they just need to repurpose and modernize it.
Are those the one turning the frogs gay…?
The politician’s equivalent of “I don’t know why but the code works”.
I removed the comment and everything broke
//For some reason removing this comment breaks everything
The given explanation seems to be that existing methods and medications got cheaper but…wouldn’t that mean all medical insurance would get cheaper?
Good joke
