Higher TRICARE Fees Hotly Debated, Coolly Received
Since 04-02-06
From: Waspscpo@aol.com
[mailto:Waspscpo@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:03 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: Higher TRICARE Fees Hotly Debated, Coolly Received
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,92725,00.html
TRICARE Hotly Debated
Tom Philpott
March 30, 2006
Higher TRICARE Fees Hotly Debated, Coolly Received
Ignoring the intimidating props – boxes of angry letters from thousands of
military retirees -- senior Defense officials and military leaders appeared
March 29 before a contentious House subcommittee to make their case for
hiking TRICARE fees sharply for under-65 retirees and their families.In the
verbal sparing that ensued, Pentagon leaders gave as good as they got.
But no lawmaker took the role of referee. All threw punches on behalf of
retirees, and treated with kid gloves a second panel of witnesses representing
dozens of pro-retiree military associations and veteran groups.The Pentagon’s
plan to boost out-of-pocket
TRICARE costs for three million beneficiaries, to include a tripling of
managed care enrollment fees for retired officers and a doubling for senior
enlisted retirees, seemed to shatter some traditional alliances and form new
ones.
Republicans and Democrats together questioned the realism of projected cost
savings from
raising TRICARE fees and the wisdom of doing so in wartime. The active duty
four-star officers in the room spoke in support of the increases. Retired
officers led the opposition.David S. C. Chu, under secretary of defense, and
William Winkenwerder Jr., the Pentagon’s health affairs chief, reminded the
armed services’ subcommittee on military personnel that, since 1995,
TRICARE benefits and the beneficiary population have grown, program costs
have soared, yet TRICARE fees have remained the same.
They portrayed it as a bureaucratic oversight that now needs
correcting. Otherwise, military health costs, which have doubled since 2001,
could double again by 2015.Defense leaders were joined by the vice chiefs of the
Army, Navy,
Air Force and
Marine Corps who echoed the contention that a prized benefit will be
difficult to sustain unless fees are raised."For 11 years we have not done just
service to this benefit, in that we failed to index" TRICARE fees and
co-payments to inflation, said Adm. Robert F. Willard, vice chief of naval
operations.
Benefit enhancements, rising medical costs nationwide and a widening disparity
between TRICARE cost-shares and private health insurance premiums have led to a
migration of working retirees and their families back into TRICARE.That recent
shift, said Chu, is encouraged by civilian employers, some using cash
incentives, hoping to trim their own
healthcare obligations.Indexing TRICARE fees to medical inflation back in
1995, said Willard, "would have prevented the current crisis that we find
ourselves in."But Rep.
Vic Snyder (Ark.), ranking Democrat on the panel, challenged Willard use of
the word “crisis.”
"A crisis implies we’re not going to pay for anything. We’re going to pay for
health care for our men and women in uniform, and retirees. We’re going to
sustain the program. The question is how…and right now there’s not a lot
of…enthusiasm for the method you all have proposed," Snyder said.He also
questioned department hand-wringing over the widening disparity between
TRICARE fees and private health insurance premiums."
We want there to be a disparity because that’s part of what we give for people
turning their life over to us 24 hours a day," said Snyder.Snyder referred then
to comment from Gen. Robert Magnus, assistant
Marine Corps commandant, in defense of the higher fees, that TRICARE would
remain the “gold standard” of health plans.If that’s true, Snyder suggested,
migration of retirees will continue despite higher fees because “people are
going to jump from the silver standard.
They’re going to jump from the copper and bronze standard.”"The issue is…can we
sustain the gold standard," said Chu. "What happened in the last 10 years is we
polished the gold standard to a very high luster. The result is that private
companies and state governments are trying to shift their appropriate medical
costs to the Department of Defense."
To the charge the planned fees would climb too far and too fast, Chu said
another way to look at them is that for 11 years, "our beneficiary population
has enjoyed a relief from indexing." Defense officials estimate the higher fees
will save $11 billion by 2011. The assumptions are that 144,000 current users
will decide to leave TRICARE and another 350,000 beneficiaries, who would have
shifted to TRICARE if fees stayed frozen, will stay with their private sector
plan.
What the estimates really mean, said Snyder, is that 500,000 retirees don’t
agree that the increases are modest, as Chu suggests.Chu said younger retirees
should be willing to contribute more to sustain the program and "to deal with
the [employer] cost-shifting issue.""Usually when a product improves people are
happy to help contribute to the cost of improvements," Chu said. "And that’s
what we’re asking here."
Retired
Navy Vice Admiral Norbert R. Ryan, Jr., testifying on behalf of The Military
Coalition, a consortium of service associations, called the planned fees
"disproportional and inappropriate."Ryan said he was surprised to hear uniformed
leaders take "a sky-is-falling approach" to TRICARE costs.
The greater danger to an all-volunteer force, during a long war, would be
raising future health care costs for careerists facing their second or third
wartime
deployment, he suggested.Snyder asked if the firestorm over TRICARE fees
could have been avoided if officials pushed for a more modest change, perhaps to
adjust retiree TRICARE fees in the future by the percentage rise in military
retired pay each year. Ryan said he couldn’t be sure that wouldn’t anger
retirees.
Retired
Army Maj. Gen. William M. Matz, speaking for another group of associations,
the National Veterans Alliance, said it was "astounding" to hear the Pentagon
explain a cost-saving plan intended to discourage thousands of retirees not to
use their earned
benefits.
For a detailed chart showing the proposed TRICARE Fee changes visit
www.military.com/TRICARE_Chart.
To comment, e-mail
milupdate@aol.com, write to Military Update, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville,
VA, 20120-1111 or visit:
www.militaryupdate.com
How do you feel about this action?
Let your public officials know how you feel!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Copntributed,
YNCS Don Harribine, USN(ret)