Health Reform Challenge: Seniors and their Medicare
EmailFresh controversy over the impact of health care reform on Medicare underscores one of the Obama administration’s steepest challenges in promoting its plan: Getting seniors on the bus.
Americans 65 and over long have been among those most critical of the reform proposals. One factor may be their general skepticism about Barack Obama; seniors were the only age group clearly to favor John McCain last November. But another, far more specifically, is their concern about the impact of health care reform on Medicare.
We tested it in our latest ABC/Post poll: Fifty-six percent of seniors thought reform would weaken the Medicare program, far more than the 37 percent of under-65s who shared that concern. It’s a powerful reason seniors are so much more likely to oppose reform overall, and a public option in particular; and likewise are so much more apt than others to think reform would “do more harm than good” – and to say the more they hear about it, the less they like it.
News this week may give seniors’ concerns some traction. The Congressional Budget Office told senators marking up the reform bill that cuts in federal payments to the pricier, private-insurance form of Medicare, called Medicare Advantage, could force a cut in that program’s “extra benefits” (beyond those provided in regular Medicare). Medicare Advantage covers about a quarter of all Medicare enrollees.
That spells trouble for the administration for a simple reason: Seniors like their Medicare – a lot. In a poll we did in June, 71 percent of seniors were “very” satisfied with their quality of care, 65 percent with their coverage – vastly outstripping that level of satisfaction among younger adults, 44 and 36 percent, respectively. And that’s not just satisfied – it’s “very” satisfied.
If seniors strongly like the health care and coverage they have, and broadly think health care reform will weaken Medicare, you have a recipe for opposition. And that’s what the president’s gotten. Consider:
-Overall opposition to reform jumps to 61 percent among seniors, vs. 45 percent among younger adults. On one contentious element, 59 percent of seniors oppose a public option, compared with 39 percent of those under 65. (Not all doors are closed, though: As we reported last week, support for a public option nearly doubles among seniors if it’s limited to people who cannot get private insurance – a step that presumably would limit the option’s impact.)
-Sixty-two percent of seniors think reform will do more harm than good, and 60 percent think it’ll create too much government involvement in the health care system. Among younger adults these drop sharply, to 41 percent and 43 percent, respectively.
-Sixty-six percent of seniors say the more they hear about reform, the less they like it. That compares with 52 percent among younger adults – not insubstantial, but considerably lower.
At first blush it may seem odd for most seniors to oppose a public option and to be concerned about too much government involvement in health care, yet to love their own Medicare. But regard again their fears about reform’s impact on Medicare. The two are linked, as you might suspect; among seniors who think reform would weaken Medicare, 82 percent oppose it.
We’ve further sussed this out with a regression analysis testing the predictive strength of views about the impacts of reform, and basic demographic variables, on opinions about reform overall. Result: Among seniors, the single strongest independent predictor of opposition to reform overall, and to a public option in particular, is the sense it’ll weaken Medicare.
There is, in all this, a strong impetus for Congress members facing re-election to take notice. Under-65s split about evenly on whether a vote for reform would help or hurt at the polls in 2010. But seniors – a particularly reliable voting group – say by 2-1 they’d be less likely, rather than more likely, to support a congressional candidate who’d backed health care reform.
5 p.m. update: A couple of comments I’ve gotten on this post encourage me to add a slightly dorky but interesting further point: It looks like what we’re seeing does not represent pure self-interest, but rather broader interest, albeit specific to seniors. In other words what drives attitudes about reform isn’t seniors’ fears that they personally will lose out, but rather their sense that seniors as a group will suffer.
I say this because in our model self-interest measures on the impact of reform (whether it’ll hurt your own care, coverage and costs) are not significant in terms of predicting support for reform among seniors, while the Medicare measure is. Wandering beyond the data, seniors may sense that their age group worked a lifetime for these benefits, and now should be entitled to them.
Concerns about Medicare also significantly predict views on reform among younger adults, but less powerfully, and as part of a broader mix of factors.
Mitt Romney's Full Speech at CPAC 2012 
Romney Makes His Case to Conservatives at CPAC
First I blame main stream media for failing to educate, letting radical talking heads spread fear without a responsible response from major outlets like ABC.
Second, I am a senior myself though a couple years shy of medicare. In fact I am about to pack a lunch and go camping in an ER for my hip because I can afford NO CARE at all other than that.
It seems selfish beyond belief that responsible people would rather see care denied to others over a worry about a few dollars of cost to themselves. This is the same thinking insurance companies use to allow people to die to save money.
Seniors who have care have GOVERNMENT RUN care and if they love it, how can they deny it to their own uninsured fellow Americans?
Why not write polls so the actually ask real world questions and supply real-world information so people are making informed responses rather than knee-jerk ones.
Posted by: Paul Kruger | September 24, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm
Keep Medicare the same, if anything is to change change the deductible. Raise it slightly. Not a lot, just a little. The quality of Senior health care is good right now, so if we take a hit at our age then we will not be happy. Those who use the Medication Part D could pay a little more. But this again is difficult call.
Posted by: Sharon | September 24, 2009, 4:18 pm 4:18 pm
“I can’t afford health insurance” and “I was bankrupted by health costs” are much overused laments in support of government run healthcare. More appropriately for many the laments should be “health insurance is not a high enough priority for me”/”I was bankrupted by years of poor financial discipline”.
We have a growing group of people who thinks the rest of us owe them a guaranteed level of lifestyle.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 24, 2009, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm
When 60% of bankruptcies are related to health care and when many of those are people who “thought” they had insurance because they were paying premiums for years is the crime. To blame them and say they lacked “financial discipline” is an insult and shows a total lack of knowledge.
You can be the most disciplined and pay your premiums then get the rug pulled from under your feet when you get sick because your insurance company says it is “not covered”. That is an irresponsible insurance system, not an irresponsible customer.
Posted by: Paul Kruger | September 24, 2009, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
Posted by: Paul Kruger | Sep 24, 2009 4:35:24 PM:
Sorry you were insulted, but my data is at least as factual as yours.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 24, 2009, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
Posted by: Sharon | Sep 24, 2009 4:18:36 PM: I agree with you. Seniors are in an uproar just like when W wanted to offer people who wanted the opportunity to manage part of their own
Social Security funds.
The dems insist on penalizing seniors and have defeated amendments that would guarantee medicare coverage would not be negatively affected by the healthcare bills. So, guess what the dems are planning to do?
Personally, I don’t like medicare. If I could get back what I’ve put into the system with S&P growth rates, I’d take it in a minute.
BO thought seniors were represented by AARP. Well, he found out AARP is only a dem front org. that does’t represent its members. If their various discounts were taken away, I estimate membership would drop by 75=80%.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 24, 2009, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm
Can you imagine what would have happened to every senior in the U.S.A. if W had put our Social security in the stock market? We all would be dying in the streets. We paid into Social security our entire lives this also includes Medicare. It has to be kept safely in the U.S. Treasury and to be used only for the retired. I do not think social Security should be used for anyone that has not paid into it. As far as Medicare goes we must be very careful and read every line. There’s no room for mistakes or we will pay the price big time. Once it’s in, we are in for it. So, be careful.
Posted by: Sharon | September 24, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
It is hard for me to keep focused on this one issue, but I will try. Since one sixth of our total economy will be affected and we really do not know all the facts of cost, Even the OMB has stated costs will rise, The gag order by this President and Congress on Humana,…which is clearly unconstitutional… (notice AARP not involved),The refusal to give the public 72 hours to review or questions anything…etc..Herein all that has transpired in 9 months with all the other crises,bailouts, takeovers,More government buildup and entitlement programs etc.. I am very concerned and simply do not trust this president and Congress. Correct problems already existing, and simply get it right a step at a time…Next crises will be the cap & Trade to be rushed rammed through but that is another issue. What is the cost Mr President? Do not give me another same old same old speech.
Posted by: Richard | September 24, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
Why isn’t anyone addressing the issues of continuously rising medical COSTS and pharmaceutical COSTS, and the failure to control attorney’s fees for personal injury claims. Huge awards are made by juries so that the plaintiffs’ will have something left after the atty’s get their cut off the top!!!!
I’m on Medicare and I’m a 3 time cancer survivor. Without Medicare, I am uninsurable because of infections contracted in the hospital following surgeries. I have gone in for an colonoscopy and woke up with a broken hip; had shoulder surgery only to wake up with an 8″ 2nd & 3rd degree electrical burn across my chest; among many other such catastrophies. Let’s concentrate on fixing the RIGHT thing and not the WRONG thing!
If so many people’s incomes will have to be supplemented to afford the insurance coverage that will be required by this reform…why doesn’t the government just pay for those people’s insurance and leave the rest of us alone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Beverly Eldridge | September 24, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
Posted by: Sharon | Sep 24, 2009 5:49:31 PM:
You are either practicing demagogury or have been influenced by a demagogue. WW was going to do nothing with your SS money. But you could if you wanted to. Also, the stock market wasn’t the only option, you could put it into bonds also. Also, you could only put a portion into stocks or bonds.
You’re right, BO and his thugs are aafter the medicare program. His pals DO want to withhold benefits and BO is very influenced by his left wing kook friends.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 24, 2009, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Posted by: Beverly Eldridge | Sep 24, 2009 6:09:30 PM: RIGHT ON BEVERLY!
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 24, 2009, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm
I was a victim of no health insurance and had debts of $500,000 between the hospital, physical therapists and 6 doctors. Finally, I qualified for Medicare which was a godsend. Then I chose VIVA Medicare Plus, which is offered only in my State. I have the best health care I’ve ever had. Better than BC/BS and it only cost me $76 a mo. plus my regular Medicare premium. DON’T MESS WITH MY INSURANCE!! Finally, I have great insurance and can get the health care I need. My only complaint is that stupid gap in the drug coverage that Congress put in to satisfy the insurance companies. If they did away with that it would be perfect.
We have coverage during the gap on generic meds, but my husband has Alzheimer’s and those medications are not generic. And, they cost me almost $700 a month when he hits the gap. The pharmaceutical companies are not any help with them either since we make about $35 too much on Social Security.
If you want to trim costs, I say start with the pharmaceuticals. They make the most obscene profits every year and tthe VA hands them out like candy. One man said he could make a fortune selling his pills from the VA because he gets so many he doesn’t need.
Further, a lot of illegal aliens don’t want health insurance through their employers because it costs them money. If they can get Medicaid they don’t pay. So why should I lose my good insurance in order to give insurance to people who really want something for free.
Posted by: Bamagrammy | September 24, 2009, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm
very few of the seniors now recieving Medicare paid into it their entire lives.
President Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law at a special ceremony in Independence, Missouri on July 30, 1965.
My Dad is ninety–he’s been receiving Medicare benefits for 25 yrs. He paid into the system from 1966 to 1981 when he retired. Only 15 years.
on the other hand my sister who turned 64 in July has paid into the Medicare system since her first job in 1968 and is still working. That is forty years. And next January, she will join the ranks of the uninsured because her hours were cut by her company from full time to part time this spring. For 7 months she will be praying that her diabetes, kidney transplant and recurring anemia will continue to be stable until she is old enough to be on Medicare.
ITS THE BOOMERS WHO HAVE PAID AND PAID AND ARE STILL PAYING INTO THE SYSTEM…
And there are plenty of us who are struggling in many ways to keep paying, doing our part and praying that those who have taken the easy ride are willing to share and let a few more of us in on the public option.
Posted by: Gina Burton-Hampton | September 24, 2009, 9:23 pm 9:23 pm
Posted by: Bamagrammy | Sep 24, 2009 7:57:45 PM: “If you want to trim costs, I say start with the pharmaceuticals. They make the most obscene profits every year and tthe VA hands them out like candy. One man said he could make a fortune selling his pills from the VA because he gets so many he doesn’t need.”
Ok, rhat are the profit levels of the pharmaceutical companies? Hell, Let’s just get rid of them. That will solve our aging problem!!! How about putting clamps on the lawyers. They produce nothing but big fees. For example, John Edwards made over $100,000,000 doing medical lawsuits. I have seen the defensive medicine—-over $35,000 in tests and CTs. In the end, I had just what the doctor had expected. A strained abdominal muscle.
Posted by: 1azcowboy | September 24, 2009, 9:37 pm 9:37 pm
ABC’s polls are lopsided and not balance. Even their ratings have dropped, as their viewership. Painful to watch general media these days when it comes to national new. Not reflective of the truth. There is real discontent with the general media and obama direction of our country. Thank you guys for awakening the sleeping giants. This 2010 election year is gonna be a bombshell for the general media when there’s change in congress. The venting of these so called “Czars’ and whitehouse friends. Those who didn’t vote because of malaise, will definately vote this time. Bring the balance back to our country. Too much governement jobs/plans and too much recycled money upsets the econmic balance and puts the pressure on the non-union middle class that pays it’s share of taxes.
Posted by: dj | September 25, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
For health care to work all hand must be on desk, together we stand divided we fall. it is a simple logic
Posted by: Nicholas | September 26, 2009, 3:11 pm 3:11 pm
Why on Earth would we want the federal government to take all our health resources and then redistribute them to us for 72 cents on the dollar? That’s what it costs the bankrupt MediCare system—72 cents to spend one dollar, leaving a measley 28 cents to take care of older adults. Let’s keep this a privately administered system—reform tort law (and defensive medicine), promote competition across state lines, remove unneeded insurance regulation, and promote health savings accounts (HSAs) and for the moment keep propping up the failed, wasteful MediCare system until later when politics are out of the way and we can transform this into a stellar system that we can afford. WE DO NOT WANT OBAMA AND THE POLITICIANS WHO CAN’T EVEN BALANCE THEIR OWN CHECK BOOKS HAVE THIS KIND OF CONTROL OVER 1/6 OF THE NATION’S ECONOMY! If ObamaCare passes, millions will lose jobs and thousands of hospitals will close, and rationing in an inefficient, costly, resource-starved system will prevail. And if that is not enough reason to fight ObamaCare, I’ve got one that matters than all the rest: The Constitution of the United States. -Dr. Max Chartrand
Posted by: Max Chartrand | October 1, 2009, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm