Means Testing For Medicare?

I didn't have to wonder too long why the Sunday, July 20, 2008 New York Times felt so light in weight. It was the trial balloon by Tyler Cowen (professor of economics at George Mason University) at p.4 in the business section.

Cowen focuses on and endorses a proposal by Peter Schuck of Yale Law School to use means testing to reduce the Medicare deficit and reallocate funds to the poor. He argues for tying the size of Medicare benefits to a person's lifetime income, which he describes as ". . . relatively easily measured and hard to game, rather than to one's income or assets in any current year." Cowen pays no attention to the vicissitudes of life (well described by Restoration and later English writers) which demonstrate that past earnings do not guarantee present solvency or a high station.

Cowen implicitly blames those who have worked productively for the high costs of Medicare and gives them no credit for the increased federal, state and local taxes they paid. While it may be politically expedient to point the threatening finger of blame at this group, to save really large sums, why don't he and his colleagues look at cost shifting by employers and insurers to Medicare, the rise of for-profit hospital systems, the failure of Medicare Part D benefits to take advantage of competitive bidding for supplying pharmaceuticals, the inclusion of unscientific and irrational services and systems of care in Medicare, and gaming of Medicare and Medicaid by the states.

Careful public inspection and discussion will deflate this trial balloon. Right now, it seems to be filled with political hot air.