Via Medskool the NYT continues its jihad against Medicare Advantage:
Federal officials said that the fastest-growing type of Medicare Advantage plan generally does not coordinate care, does not save money for Medicare and has been at the center of marketing abuses.
The article does not name the “federal officials,” but one suspects that they are congressional aids working for Democrats who wish to undermine the MA program. The article also fails to mention that the NAACP opposes reductions in MA plans.
This is a consistent feature of the Gray Lady’s MA coverage. Its editors seem completely unmoved by the benefits Medicare Advantage provides to minority seniors. Grace-Marie Turner describes these positive effects as follows:
Medicare Advantage plans have served as an important safety net for [minority seniors], offering more comprehensive benefits and more predictable costs than traditional Medicare.
Nonetheless, the NYT is unremittingly hostile to the MA program. In fact, Paul Krugman recently referred to the NAACP and the League of United Latin American Citizens as useful idiots because of their support for the MA program.
There have indeed been marketing abuses associated with MA, but that doesn’t explain the NYT’s weird antipathy to the program. It is reminiscent of the paper’s hostility toward school choice, another project favored by minorities. Is there a way of explaining this without using the “R” word?
Post a Comment