As I pointed out last week, there has now been a three year trend of Medicare per beneficiary spending growing at a very slow rate. These three years of slow growth have already produce substantial reductions in the deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s new budget outlook:
Medicaid and Medicare. In recent years, health care spending has grown much more slowly both nationally and for federal programs than historical rates would have indicated. (For example, in 2012, federal spending for Medicare and Medicaid was about 5 percent below the amount that CBO had projected in March 2010.) In response to that slowdown, over the past several years, CBO has made a series of downward technical adjustments to its projections of spending for Medicaid and Medicare. From the March 2010 baseline to the current baseline, such technical revisions have lowered estimates of federal spending for the two programs in 2020 by about $200 billion—by $126 billion for Medicare and by $78 billion for Medicaid, or by roughly 15 percent for each program.
For three years now Medicare spending has grown at a rate significantly slower than what the CBO projected. As a result, the deficit outlook has improved by roughly $200 billion.
It is possible this slow growth will end soon, but it is also possible that this trend could continue. If it did, that would mean the CBO is still overestimating future spending on the programs. If this trend continues for several more years it would improve the budget outlook by several hundred billion more.
I, of course, wait with bated breath for the deficit hawks to acknowledge this improvement and change their deficit reduction demand accordingly. The slow rate of growth has already reduced the deficit by even more than raising the Medicare age from 65 to 67 would have done.
Photo by TimmyGUNZ under Creative Commons license.




8 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Will any “good news” regarding the deficit change the goal of implementing austerity for the masses? I think the deficit was just the handiest issue to use. Break the unions, close the Post Office and redistribute the real estate bubble up to the top is still the plan and no amount of “savings” will stop the master plan.
No, no! Not serious! The olds must wait for their handouts. Hard choices!1!!
I hope that people are getting the care that they need and not delaying it or being unable to afford co-pays/deductibles etc. There’s the financial side and the patient side. Plus practitioners’ concerns too.
We’re running up the credit card bills slower than we thought we would be.
Success!
67% of bankruptcies are due to medical expenses and the PTB don’t think it is a problem. Co pays stop people from seeing the Doctor, that is why they were created. If you don’t go for preventative care it will generally cost much more later.
It so happens I was in the emergency room this weekend. Bit of an annual stop for me as I work on my car and do housework and yardwork and have become somewhat clumsy and careless in my old age.
Never saw a doctor. Only a nurse and a “physician’s assistant”. They stitched me up in no time at all and sent me packin’. All in all, the shortest time I have ever spent in an ER.
Regrattably, the two guys who came in with toenail fungus and a broken nose from a local rugby match didn’t make it.
What do bankruptcies have to do with Medicare and Medicaid?
BTW, I have a high-deductable health care account. Costs me almost nothing per month, but I pay the first $5k out of pocket and insurance pays everything else. That’s a co-pay!
My brother went bankrupt due to medical expenses from an intra cranial aneurism and was on medicare the rest of his life.