James C. Capretta | Real Clear Policy
Alex Azar says he is willing to be as disruptive as necessary to bring more consumer-driven discipline to the provision of medical services. Nothing would be more disruptive to today’s inefficient market than meaningful and understandable price information that consumers — and private insurers — could use to find high-value, low-cost care.
Tara O’Neill Hayes, E21
Joseph Antos et al. | USC-Brookings Schaeffer Initiative for Health Policy
In their new report, Joseph Antos et al. propose two key changes to the MA bidding process to lower prices and enhance choice for consumers. The authors propose revising the current contracting process to focus on promoting price competition, as well as standardizing the benefits offered under MA plans to improve comparison shopping and provide a common basis for plan bids. The authors estimate their proposal would save the federal government $10 billion annually and reduce Medicare Part B premiums across both MA and traditional Medicare beneficiaries by approximately 2 percent a year.
The case for reforming competitive bidding in Medicare Advantage
Joseph Antos et al. | Health Affairs
Research suggests that the current MA bidding structure does not strongly promote competition, allowing plans to bid above their true costs and to retain rebate dollars instead of fully pass savings through to beneficiaries. To address these concerns, Joseph Antos and his coauthors propose to reform bidding in Medicare Advantage, replacing the current inefficient structure with one that standardizes most MA insurance products and revises the current contracting process to focus on promoting price competition.