wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:37:35 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

They have been trying to cut fraud and abuse in government since
George Washington and the scammers always manage to stay one step
ahead of the cops.

So that justifies giving up on the problem? There will always be crime.

In the case of Medicare, in the 80s Medicare did tighten up on fraud
and doctors stopped taking Medicare patients because the paperwork was
too cumbersome and Medicare was "slow pay".
When they streamlined the payments, fraud soared again.
Right now they call Medicare "pay and chase". They pay out
questionable claims and chase the guy after it is proven to be fraud.
By then the crook is long gone.

And, it can be addressed, but there's no absolute cure. Doesn't mean we
should sit on our hands.


I have no problem with trying to stop the crime but I am not confident
that we will stop a half a trillion of it in the next decade. I doubt
the fraud and waste number will be any better in 2020 than it is now.


Fixing the donut hole will probably help in the long run, since lots of
people in that situation stop buying the meds they need, they get sick,
and
end up having more expensive procedures.

Personally I think most seniors are over medicated in the first place.


Fortunately, you're not the one prescribing in the dr. office.


No the drug salesman does it.

You can always tell what you are going to walk out of there with by
looking at the logos on the pens, pads and posters around the office.

It certainly does not help that the patients are inundated with ads on
TV for pills they may or may not need. There does not seem to be any
incentive for the doctor not to give them anything they ask for.
Most people would be better off with older, less powerful medications
that come with fewer side effects but they seem to want the latest and
greatest ... as long as their prescription plan covers it.



$50B a year isn't that difficult to find if the tools are in place to look.
What really gets me is the notion that Obama (actually Congress) is spending
$940B immediately. It's over 10 years. And, the CBO is estimating a deficit
reduction over the same period of about $138B. Without the $940B, the cost
would be a lot higher. Over the following 10 years, the cost savings
approach $1.3T. The Republicans voted against PayGo. So, they're
uninterested in saving money because it _might_ mean Obama would get partial
credit.

FYI, just because you get lobbied (e.g., drs), doesn't mean you're in the
pocket of the lobbiests. Most drs have their patients in mind first.

--
Nom=de=Plume