THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, August 31, 1994 TAG: 9408310015
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 57 lines
Just a few weeks before the House and Senate Democratic leadership recognized reality and declared comprehensive health-care reform all but dead for this year, the American Association of Retired Persons announced its endorsement of the bureaucratic and tax-laden Mitchell and Gephardt Democratic health-care bills. It must have been one of history's few recorded instances of climbing aboard a sinking ship.
It's also a cautionary tale in taking seriously the pronouncements of Washington lobbies as to what their members ``want.'' AARP said that it polled its members before making its decision. But the endorsement ignited a switchboard explosion at the powerful Washington lobby's headquarters. Thousands of angry members called, charging that the organization was endorsing a plan more likely to hurt seniors than help them.
Like the National Education Association, organized labor and many other Washington lobbies, the AARP leadership tilts leftward far more than its membership does. AARP has not done badly by aggressively promoting bigger and costlier government. Last year, the organization received $85.9 million in government grants.
Many of AARP's members, however, obviously understand better than its leadership that the elderly - who need health care the most - are far more likely to be short-changed by any government health- care scheme.
The AARP states it backed both bills partly because they contain price controls to help those who can't afford drugs. But the regulations will just restrict the number of drugs available, denying many seniors the drugs they can get now.
In both plans, doctors would be forced to choose from government-approved lists of drugs. This measure is designed to keep costs down, but in states where it has been tried, hospitalizations have increased because needed drugs were not on the list. So much for the projected savings. Worse, the plan hurt those who needed the drugs that were not listed.
The two plans would also set drug prices by a government formula that restricts increases, but also restricts profits. Drug companies' incentive to undertake the extensive research and development process to produce new drugs would be slim to nil. And drugs are only one sector of the huge health-care industry that would be harmed by the Democratic proposals.
Older people are well-informed on the issue: A July survey by Luntz Research showed 40 percent of those over 65 think ClintonCare would hurt them. Only 9.7 percent expected health-care reform to improve things.
Six years ago, AARP pushed through Congress a ``catastrophic'' health-insurance plan that Congress was forced to repeal a year later when senior citizens discovered how much it would really cost them. The memory of that fiasco ought to remind AARP and Congress of the dangerous game they are playing with the nation's health-care system. by CNB