Posted by
Stefano on Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:05:08 PM
I received the following comment on my previous post from drpete and have tried to respond below.
Thursday, August, 13, 2009 9:29 AM drpete writes:
I am over 65 and have as primary
an employer-provided medical insurance. Medicare (Part A) is automatically my secondary. I'll not sign up for Medicare Parts B or D until I lose my current primary.
It is my belief that your question, Stefano, while cute, isn't germane. Gray Ghost's question is spot on. Also, why is it that retired and no-longer-working federal legislators have their own medical insurance program rather than Medicare?
Dear drpete:
Thanks for the comment. Answering it has required further study on my part and I hope you'll comment again if you see anything out of line below.
My mother is 93 and is still on my father's retirement plan although he's deceased. In my case, I'm 64, retired by federal regulation at 60 and I'm on my employer's retirement medical. They will cut me loose at 65 into Medicare. I recognize that employer's can continue to provide insurance to those working past 65 and to retirees, just as GM and other auto companies did, and still do in some cases. Many of those companies would love to dump that expense, and a public option would give them that opportunity if they are contractually able to do so.
The cute question that I think you're referring to is whether our Congressmen and Senators over age 65 have chosen the Medicare option available to them on the roster of insurance choices. I know that they have the choice of private or Medicare after age 65, according to Spector's office and Bond's office, both of which I called. We keep hearing from Democrats how wonderful the public option is under the House proposal and how Medicare is a model for that wonderful option. My question isn't meant to be cute, but rather to ascertain, through the choice of Democrat members of Congress, where their true beliefs lie when they have a clear choice of a provider between a public or private insurance option. I don't believe that legislators have to pay a portion of the premium, so the taxpayers must pay for it; therefore, the cost of either public or private is a pure choice of competing qualities. If the majority of them have chosen the private option for their primary coverage leaving Mecicare as a backup, it undercuts their claims of the high quality of Medicare coverage which is a public option.
On the subject of federal legislators' insurance coverage after retirement, I checked with the above Senators' offices and they both said that their private choices expire and are no longer available when they leave office. They are on Medicare if over age 65 after leaving office. I don't know if they have a short term Cobra option or something else if under age 65.
I have not done an exhaustive search for the availability of individual (non-employee provided) primary private insurance in lieu of Medicare for the general public over age 65, but I checked with my American Family agent and was informed they only had supplemental policies for age 65+. If you check esurance.com for availability by filling out the search form, you will find that the 7 insurance providers listed have no primary policies for age 65+. I have not studied the history of this but Medicare seems to have driven out most if not all individual primary health insurance policies for those over sixty-five.
I am not familiar with public employee health insurance policies, and I do not know if they are under Medicare after age sixty-five.
Stefano