US Pharm
. 2006;3:1.
I don't particularly like it
when someone uses the expression, "I told you so," but when it comes to
Medicare Part D, I must say, I did tell you so ... and I have the proof. It
was exactly one year ago that I wrote an editorial entitled, "What Was
Congress Thinking?" I wrote the column in reaction to an announcement that
Congress had passed a $400 billion drug aid bill called the Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, better known
today as MMA or Medicare Part D. As I write this editorial, Medicare
recipients, state governments, and the Feds are scrambling to make an
ill-conceived and poorly executed law work the way it was supposed to.
At the time, I questioned
why Congress was rushing this bill into law, and the only three answers I
could come up with were votes, votes, and votes. I do think that the
politicians who voted in favor of this law had good intentions of delivering
quality health care to the millions of Medicare beneficiaries who did not have
prescription benefits. My biggest fear then, as it is today, is that the
pharmacist would get financially squeezed even further, and how prophetic I
was.
Since I live and work in New
Jersey, which is also one of the states where I hold a license as a registered
pharmacist, I am naturally more in tune with what is going on in my own
backyard, even though this law has prompted disgruntled pharmacists from all
over the country to contact me. At one point, New Jersey Governor Corzine said
his state is spending $1.3 million a day buying drugs that should be covered
under the new law, but because of glitches in MMA, they weren't. While the
dollar amounts are different, other states were claiming the same thing, which
prompted the federal government to say it would reimburse the states but
declined to say just how much.
I think President Bush, his
entire cabinet, and every member of Congress who voted for the MMA debacle
should be made to join the plan, just to see how complicated and unfair it is
to pharmacists. They should visit their local pharmacist and order their
prescription medications, only to be told that their information is not in the
system and that their lifesaving medication could not be dispensed. Then,
maybe they would get the message ... then again, maybe not.
I know that I am preaching
to the choir, but at the same time, the choir has to become vocal and start
complaining to their elected local and state government officials. Not that I
condoned the recent transit strike in New York, but you have to admit, it got
the attention of every citizen and government official in the tristate area
who depends on the New York transit system. If the government continues to
pick the pockets of pharmacists with costly programs without properly
reimbursing them, we could see pharmacies closing their doors in record
numbers. When the American public can no longer get their prescriptions filled
in what I consider one of the best drug distribution networks in the world,
you can bet that will get their attention. But unlike the case of the transit
workers, once those doors shut, most will not be able to be reopened. It won't
be like the transit workers going back to work and starting up the trains.
What a mess! What has
happened to our health care system over the years is a disgrace. Who really
knows how many lives are being lost because of greedy third parties who only
care about their bottom lines and satisfying their stockholders? Instead of
passing small-minded, politically motivated laws, Congress should start
thinking about its actions and properly reward pharmacists financially for
their years of education, dedicated service, and their valuable role in the
health care system.
Harold E. Cohen, R. Ph.
Editor-in-Chief
To comment on this article, contact editor@uspharmacist.com.