Image by most uncool via Flickr

Unemployment is over 9%, with 14 million people out of work, and the situation is not likely to show marked improvement in the near future.  On top of this is the unknown numbers who are underemployed or have simply given up looking for a job.  The extended unemployment benefits have or are running out for these folks. 

Many of those who have been hit hard by the recession are uninsured, so this becomes a drain on the nation’s already over-stressed health care system.  Those of us who are insured find our health insurance premiums are on the rise. 

These people, and those who are working but are financially overextended, find themselves having to walk away from their homes or living in them without making mortgage payments.  That means more houses are on the market at lower prices in order for the banks to recoup some of their losses.  At the same time, it is difficult for people to qualify for financing.  For current homeowners, this translates to reduced equity and less likelihood of being able to sell their property even at a bargain price.

Nobody can deny that many people are hurting.  As Americans, we want to help the less fortunate, but there comes a time when trying to save a drowning person will result in our own demise as well.  Why can’t those receiving unemployment benefits earn the money by engaging in state or municipal work?  This would help communities and may encourage folks to worth harder at getting a job.

Consideration ought to be given to the food stamp issue, since more people use them than ever before.  Welfare in general needs to be reformed.  If a recipient has smart phones, video games and a flat screen should they qualify?  And, if someone is going to check on what the money is buying, they might find out what kind of car is in the driveway.  This is not a matter of the government poking its nose into private matters, rather those taking public money must be responsible for what they do with the dollars taxpayers are spending on their behalf.

Reducing waste, fraud and abuse will help if coupled with good stewardship by our elected representatives.  However, the current financial crisis won’t be fixed until people are willing to let the government rework the two major entitlements: Social Security and Medicare.  Until citizens accept the fact that these programs are not sustainable in their present form, the government will fall deeper in debt.  It’s time to put aside party politics and unite to solve common problems that sooner or later will affect every American.  Scaring us won’t fix things but caring will.    

Image by The Consumerist via Flickr

Clearly this political football will takes many strange bounces before the 2012 elections.  And the outcome of the election may well determine how much if any of the health care bill is actually implemented.  Of course, the part of the equation that could have a dramatic effect on the situation is what happens in the courts.

With more than half the states engaged in law suits against the federal government, there will be more legal decisions coming forth in the weeks and months ahead that could further damage the administrations efforts to save this controversial legislation and possibly derail it altogether.

As time goes on, the exceptions could overcome the rule.  For instance, the companies requested waivers from participating has exploded from a handful at first to what could be a thousand or more.  Unions have sought exemptions as well.  Individuals have not been afforded this same opportunity.  In fact, many private policyholders will suffer because some Medicare Advantage insurers have been forced out of business.

Health insurance rates continue to rise as insurance companies anticipation higher costs resulting from the plans implementation.  In addition, 32 million previously uninsured people will soon be covered and benefits must be paid on their behalf.  Some 50% of the newly insured will be covered by Medicaid, which means individual states pick up about half these costs.  This in turn hurts financially strapped states and could raise taxes.

While there is a shortage of doctors in the United States, the medical profession is being asked to absorb more patients into the system.  Yet, they are being asked to accept funding cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, which could lead to significant restrictions in the number of these patients being seen and the care that is offered.

Fewer doctors are willing to accept Medicare and Medicaid patients.  Those individuals wanting to keep their regular health care provider may be forced to pay for service out of their own pockets or switch doctors.  And, there will be longer waiting periods to see specialists or to have tests performed.  This may well be the first step in rationing.

The best that those receiving Medicare and Medicaid benefits can hope for is that the politicians fast-track the health care case to the Supreme Court and a decision regarding constitutionality bill is rendered.  Politicians may want to do this in hopes that health care won’t be headline news going into the next election.  For the average citizen such a ruling may clarify the coverage situation.  But, there will still be many unanswered questions, particularly how is this entitlement program going to be paid for and by whom.

Image via Wikipedia

If the health care program continues to move ahead, only 19% of those surveyed believe it is unlikely they will have to change their insurance in some way.  With New Seniors, only 12% say this is not at all likely, according to an early January 2011 Rasmussen research study.  73% of the total sample thinks costs will exceed government estimates.

Americans are worried about possible coverage change because most of those insured are happy with their current insurance.  Good to excellent is the claim of 76% of respondents.  For those 65 or older the number jumps to an 88% satisfaction level.  Why, then, did the Washington political gang try to force this health care bill on the people in spite of the concerns voiced by the constituents across the country?

Many believe the health care bill was a way to place a sixth of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) under the control of the federal government and out of the hands of individuals and the private sector.  While passing health care legislation was at the top of the agenda for the past two years, the US financial crisis continued. 

As a result of out-of-control spending by politicians and little relief on the unemployment front, there was a major change that came when people cast their votes last November.  The landslide reflected the attitudes of an overwhelming majority of those who went to the polls.  Now the new Congress has been sworn in and is starting its work. 

If you’re one of those who want health care service to improve but don’t believe coverage should be changed, let your representatives in both houses of Congress know about it.  And don’t let up. 

An example of how much your opinion matters is that last year there was talk about the government enlisting doctors to get involved in end-of-life counseling.  Many of those 65+ and their families objected.  As a result, the politicians backed off.  Recently this notion resurfaced again.  This time it came up through bureaucratic channels.  Once more the “death panel” concept was withdrawn thanks to the efforts of New Seniors.  

If the current health care plan is not repealed, than New Seniors must pay attention to individual parts of the bill when debated in Congress.  Then, contact the appropriate law-makers and tell them what you like and don’t like about the elements being discussed. 

Keep the pressure on these elected representatives, and don’t hesitate to remind them that elections take place again in less than two years.  They know, all too well, New Seniors accounted about one in four votes in November.  That’s “platinum power” at work.        

Image via Wikipedia

Several insurance companies have applied to states for rate increases of up to 40%.  At the same time some insurers are no longer accepting applications for employer programs and becoming more particular in writing individual policies.  Insurers argue that as people live longer the claims increase over time, resulting in higher costs for the companies.  Additionally, low interest rates are not helping the problem, because the insurers’ investment portfolios are producing moderate returns at best.  Therefore, the only way they can continue to cover policyholders is by raising premiums.

Over the past 10 years long-term insurance premiums have remained relatively stable. That was before the firms reworked the numbers and reevaluated the costs for servicing policies in light of the baby boomers turning 65 starting next year.  As they become New Seniors at the rate of one every ten seconds through 2030, the insurance companies will have more people than the current 8 million holding long-term care insurance.  And these folks are expected to live longer than existing policyholders.

Those on fixed budgets are already concerned about the increasing costs for maintaining coverage.  As more people retire, fully or partially, escalating premium costs could lead to some canceling their insurance.  However, dropping coverage amounts to throwing money away, since the policyholder gets nothing back from payments already made.  Putting off buying a policy only leads to higher premium costs.  So, it’s best to review an existing policy or shop around before committing to a new one.

Although it may not appeal to everyone, having the grown children pay for the premiums, or at least the increases, is a sound solution; because it is the heirs who may be faced with picking up the cost of assisted-living or nursing care if there is no insurance.  Short of that, longer waiting periods before benefits start, higher deductibles or reduced daily/monthly coverage can be renegotiated with the insurance carriers.  Reduction in the number of years covered is also something to be considered.  Paying higher premiums earlier, when income is still being generated; or signing up for a combination policy that offers both an annuity and long-term care are also possibilities.

The peace of mind that comes from the financial security of having long-term care insurance is important in these troubled times.  Even greater is the quality care this will provide you or a loved one as you continue to live and enjoy the life of a New Senior.

Image by wcm1111 via Flickr

The current administration intends to cut $500 billion from Medicare.  This is not a good sign since the largest generation in the history of the United States is ready to be eligible for this government program – one that has helped those over 65 since the mid-‘60s.  Already the popular Medicare Advantage, a mostly HMO plan and the choice for one out of five, is under attack and enrollees in some parts of the country could lose a third of their health care benefits.

Those with regular Medicare coverage will also be affected as government payments to participating hospitals and physicians will be cut by 30% over the next three years.  So the boomers turning 65 may have a difficult time finding medical providers to cover them.  And those already in the system may find fewer covered services and an increase in the premiums for the supplemental or gap plans that are designed to pick up the costs not included under Medicare.

Preventive care may be cut rather than encouraged, which may result in a short-term savings but produce longer-term problems that actually raise medical costs.  Many tests and procedures will no longer qualify under new Medicare regulations.  These range from MRIs and CT scans to hip and knee replacement surgeries and even some cancer and heart disease treatments.   

An additional 32 million new people will be covered under the new health care bill.  But insurers are not able to set annual limits or lifetime caps, and they must guarantee coverage of children now and probably others later.  So the government needs to look for places to cut from older Americans in order to pay for younger people’s coverage. 

What is over looked is that many receiving insurance are at the same income level as folks on Medicare.  However, the newly insured may be able to increase their earnings, while those 65+ can not.  This kind of re-distribution of resources means New Seniors will be penalized, even after working and paying taxes throughout their entire lives.

Things can certainly get worse, because the administration’s newly appointed Medicare Chief is an avid fan of the British system, the National Health Service.  This single-pay plan is known for poor quality care and rationing of health services.  Will this lead to the dreaded death panels, which some have predicted? 

These are just a few reasons why New Seniors and the boomers turning 65 need to be concerned, so vote in November for those who will fight for real health care reform.  

Image by Samuraijohnny via Flickr

The so-called health care reform bill that was pushed through Congress – after arm-twisting, backroom deals and out-right lying – won’t be fully implemented until 2014.  By that time, based on a straight line projection of the increase just experienced, my wife’s basic plan will double. 

A call to the insurance company resulted in plenty of non-answers, double-talk and false sympathy.  Not only was this frustrating, it has become just plain scary for a retired couple that has seen nearly a third of our savings and much of our home equity vanish over the past couple of years, with no signs of short-term recovery.

On top of this, our family physician sold his practice to a younger doctor who has raised the rates for office visits, but the insurance company’s allowable charges have not increased.  We can’t be the only ones feeling the squeeze.  Am I wrong to suspect the current administration is turning a blind-eye to increases from health insurance companies, doctors, hospitals and those who do the lab tests, x-rays and other services? 

My wife recently underwent the first surgery of her life.  We could not believe the costs to date and the statements are still coming in.  We have yet to find out what portion of these bills will be covered and what we must pay.  They say it will take a couple of months before we receive all the charges.  I wonder if the fact that she actually used the insurance we’ve been paying for over decades will mean another increase is on the way.

There’s no doubt in my mind that we need health care reform.  But what we got instead was 32 million more people on the insured roles, half of whom will be on Medicaid.  This means the ones who have paid their premiums over the years are expected to bear the load for those unwilling or unable to buy insurance.  And the insurance companies are raising rates to hedge against the added cost they expect to incur. 

This suggests the entire health care system needs to be scrutinized from top to bottom and revamped where needed.  We know something is wrong when $500 billion is going to be cut from Medicare and the administration claims this will be offset by tightening up on waste, fraud and abuse.  Wouldn’t you think the folks in Washington would have fixed these problems long ago instead of hoping to accomplish this sometime in the future?

It’s time to change the existing health care bill and do something to protect the people who have tried to do the right thing but somehow got caught an ongoing political battle.  We should not be the ones to suffer through higher premiums, lower quality care or both.       

I don’t want to sound like an old codger, but I am one of the New Seniors.  This means I’m over 65, yet not so far past that age to sit by and watch the country change before my eyes without so much as making a comment or expressing dismay regarding the direction America is going. 

If you’re satisfied with what’s happening in Washington and believe the trailing generations – your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren – will be afforded as much or more opportunities than you had, this article is not for you.  However, if you share my concerns about Americans needing to re-familiarize ourselves with the philosophies, values and traditions that made us the great democracy we are, and feel the republic is slipping away from the people, then I’m reaching out to you.

It was amazing to hear how many parents of adult children were pleased about the portion of the recently signed health care that permits offspring 26 or younger to be covered under mom and dad’s insurance policy.  On the surface, this seems like a good way to provide the kids with health insurance.  But what does it do as far as motivating them to get out of school, get a job and start taking care of themselves?  If they’re not capable of this, will there be an addendum to the health care bill sometime in the future that allows kids to be on the parent’s policy until 30, 35 or older?  Or maybe until they get married or move out of the basement, whichever comes first?

Besides making the kids more dependent on their parents, this legislation sets in motion an unhealthy notion that someone will always take care of them.  If not mom and dad then the government.  This is further supported by the student loan program being included in the final legislation.  What do loans have to do with health care, anyway?  Nothing.  However, the government, based on past performance, won’t be as aggressive in enforcing repayment.  That makes them more like grants than loans.

So, if the kids are not going to be responsible for the costs of their higher education or their health insurance premiums, what will make them want to be independent and functioning contributors to society?  Maybe preparation for employment in the health care industry or a job in the public sector (federal, state or local) would be best.  The unions in these fields are strong, it’s difficult to get fired and the benefits are good – now and in retirement.  Think this is cynical?  More people are employed by the public sector than ever before and the pay differential often favors public jobs as opposed to working in private business.  That’s quite a swing from when we were seeking employment.

With a growing government workforce and more and more people being covered by some kind of entitlement program (of the 32 million new people eligible for health care insurance, half will be on the rolls of Medicaid), the average person can easily become dependent on the government rather than themselves.  Is that the America we knew?  Is this the kind of country you want for your loved ones.  If not, New Seniors must let their voices be heard.  And we must do it now.

Image by Nancee_art via Flickr

Why blame us?  Because we are no longer the revenue source we once were. This year Social Security (SS) will pay paying out more in benefits than it takes in for the first time since 1982.  The reason is simple.  In 1960 there were 5 workers for each person receiving SS.  This number fell to just 2 workers for each recipient in 2010.  The problem is soon to be compounded with the first of the 76 million baby boomers reaching 65 next year.  In fact, millions of boomers will turn 65 every year until 2030. 

The SS contributions by individuals and their employers never made it to a lockbox, so it could be invested for the future.  Instead Congress, over the years, spent the money it collected on unfunded projects, leaving the American citizens with a great big I.O.U.  Due to  this lack of foresight the government must borrow money from China, Japan and other countries.  The effect this will have on the national debt as the SS recipient pool increases in the years ahead is not a pretty prospect.

Months of debate stirred the murky waters of health care reform and brought many issues to the surface.  For starters, the government intends to cut $500 billion from Medicare.  This is to be accomplished by reducing waste, fraud and abuse – something that could and should have been done as a matter of course, but was not.  Seniors can expect current benefits plans to be altered with the result being lower quality of care, fewer patient choices, higher costs and/or more taxation.

As politicians revisit the floundering heath care bill, it is unclear what will emerge.  In the meantime, insurance premiums continue to increase while SS cost of living adjustments (COLA) are frozen for the next two years.  Will Washington do anything to help retirees on fixed incomes during these difficult times?  Or, must we fend for ourselves and hope lost savings will be recovered, home prices rebound and the economy improves enough to make us financially healthier than we are now?

We are not looking for handouts.  We paid into the system for years and were promised certain benefits.  We expect them, because it’s our money.  Unfortunately, the SS funds are gone and Medicare is under the budget knife as the retiree population continues to grow.  This adds up to great concern about the future.  Our earning days are over, or soon will be, so we can’t generate more income.  If our elected representatives don’t consider us worth preserving, then we must replace these tone-deaf politicians with people who respect our situations and are willing to respond to the needs of all New Seniors.

Image via

“Many older workers can’t wait to retire, while many younger workers desperately need work.  My plan enables older workers to take early retirement, thereby freeing up those jobs for younger workers who are currently unemployed.  If just 25% of eligible workers choose to retire early, we can very quickly open one million job opportunities.  These are not temporary jobs, but permanent jobs that already exist in our economy, even under the current recessionary circumstances,” said Kucinich.

To many, this might seem like a sound idea, since more than two-thirds of workers elect to take early retirement based on Social Security (SS) rules offering reduced benefits at age 62.  The Congressman’s plan would reduce the eligibility age to 60 for the first million (25% of those eligible) who are willing to retire, now.  The money would come from the funds already allocated for job stimulus and health insurance would be covered by a different federal spending act.  This is still the taxpayers’ money.  Right? 

The broad concern about such a move is that it does not create new jobs; instead this simply replaces one worker with another.   In essence it takes a productive, experienced worker and replaces them with one that is younger but untrained.  Of course, the argument may be that the newer one will do the job for less money and fewer benefits.  

Public sector employees may welcome early retirement, since they usually receive better benefits after leaving the workforce than do those from the private sector.  Unfortunately, taxpayers are saddle with these retirement benefits (up to a whopping 90% of what they got while on the job) for the rest of the employee’s life.  And if they so choose, the employee is young enough at age 60 to find another job, with the net result to them being more income than before.  This also means taking a job that might have been filled by someone who is already unemployed.  Does this make sense?

Pre-boomers know what its like to plan for retirement and many of us have made the transition.  We know it’s not as easy as those who have yet to go through the process think it is.  The prospects of living another 25 or more years is worrisome when our fixed incomes are affected by the financial market volatility and out-of-control government spending.  On top of this we are faced with a freeze on SS benefit increases and a $500 billion decrease in the Medicare budget. 

The 65+ market is about to experience a population explosion as boomers become New Seniors next year.  Before fixing anything else, well-meaning politicians need to talk to those of us living in retirement before trying to add more people to our roles.

Image via

Democrats cannot write bills behind closed doors and try to jam legislation through based on their current power in Washington.  By the same token, Republican have got to stop hiding in the weeds and taking shots at everything the opposing party does.  Rather, it’s time to go back to the peoples’ business.  This means agreeing that the health care system needs to undergo significant change over an extended period of time but in a common-sense, fiscally-responsible, bi-partisan manner.  Otherwise, the finger pointing and bickering in Washington will spell the end of the careers for many politicians.

It’s not rocket science.  Health insurance costs continue to climb.  Too many Americans are without coverage.  Waste, fraud and abuse abounds within the system.  The problems can’t be addressed or fixed all at once.  So, let’s agree that health care is going to be studied immediately and adjusted over time with the goal being coverage we can afford and quality of care second to none.  We can figure out how to make this work, but do the politicians, the insurance companies and the medical organizations must come together, forget their own agendas and start considering what’s best for the citizens of this country?

As part of the pre-boomer generation (those born between 1930 and 1945), I remember how people from all walks of life came together and fought our enemies in World War II.  Folks forgot about labels.  We weren’t Democrats or Republicans we were Americans pulling together in a common cause.  If addressed honestly, health care can be something that unites rather than divides us.

Remember, health care accounts for about a sixth of our economy.  This is a real concern when combined with a deficit beyond belief, out-of-control government spending and a double-digit unemployment rate that just won’t go day.  On top of this, there are more spending plans waiting to be introduced in Congress.  The only thing to do is to stop Washington from doing what it’s been doing or we’re going to keep getting what we’ve been getting.  Translated, this means no new spending.  Prioritize the country’s need.  And re-evaluate where our money is going now and where it needs to go in the future.

At the same time, businesses around the country need to join in the fight to keep America afloat and bring it back to the land of opportunity.  This requires the best minds we have focusing on what they know best to get the job done.  By applying this same kind of discipline to health care reform, we will undoubtedly end up with something that meets the needs of each individual American.  And, that’s good for all of us.