<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><span></span></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div><span></span></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div><span></span></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div>Is this what happens under a Republican-controlled congress?</div><div><br></div><div>Privatization of health care insurance for military retirees?????</div><div><br></div><div><b>If it works, DON'T FIX IT ! ! !</b></div><div><br></div><div>I am a disabled retiree (with a service-connected disability rated at 45%). I would HATE to have to pay commercial health insurance premiums . . . and hope I am covered if I should ever have to be admitted to the hospital.</div><div><br></div><div>Courtesy of the Army Times.</div><div><br></div><div>--------------------------------------</div><div><br></div><div><div style="text-align: start;"><b>Commission Calls for Abolishing TriCare</b></div><span class="abody" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">A congressional commission has called for an overhaul of the military health system that does away with Tricare, changes the medical command structure and seeks to improve Defense Department coordination with Veterans Affairs.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">The goal of the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission’s plan according to its final report released Jan. 29, is to preserve the quality of combat</span><span class="abody"> care that saved many troops’ lives in Iraq and Afghanistan but also improve access to health treatment for those who use the system.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">Under the recommendations, active- duty members and mobilized reservists still would receive medical care from the U.S. military, with easier access to specialty care in the civilian sector if they need it.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">But their family members, and retirees under 65 and their families, would be covered through commercial insurers, similar to</span><span class="abody"> plans run under the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">Active-duty families would get an allowance to cover their insurance premiums, called the Basic Allowance for Health Care.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">Retirees below Medicare-eligible age would pay their premiums out of pocket, though at a lower cost thancivilianplansas“recognition” of their service, under the plan.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">The program would be run from the Office of Personnel Management, just as the FEHBP is, negating</span><span class="abody"> the need for the huge Tricare contract management and oversight structure that exists in the Pentagon, according to the report.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-align: start;">But this would not be FEHBP, commission members stressed, because that program doesn’t offer options appropriate for military beneficiaries with their unique requirements, including the availability of military treatment facilities and readiness demands, the commission wrote.</div><div style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">“By moving toward private insurance, beneficiaries of the plan would have improved access to health care. ... It also solves some of the issues with mobilization and</span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> </span><span style="text-align: justify; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">place monthly pension checks with 401(k)-style investment accounts. That suggested the government contributions should be at least 16.5 percent of basic pay, with higher rates for deployed service members or high-demand career f ields.</span></div></span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">That plan went nowhere after it</span><span class="abody"> was criticized by troops, disavowed by the Pentagon leadership and landed with a thud on Capitol Hill.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">Last March, the Pentagon’s personnel and readiness office broke its long silence and offered several detailed and complex alternatives to the current system: hybrid options</span><span class="abody"> that included both a TSP with government contributions and smaller, partial pension checks before traditional retirement age.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">That plan also included some lump-sum payments for troops staying at least 20 years, offering a “transitionpay”equaltoasmuchas</span><span class="abody"> three years’ basic pay.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">The nine-member commission is chaired by Maldon. Other members include Pressler, Dov Zakheim, Edmund Giambastiani, Peter Chiarelli, Bob Kerrey, Christopher Carney, Michael Higgins and Stephen Buyer.</span><span class="abody"> N</span><span class="abody"> care they now have, under the plan.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">The commission also recommends that DoD create a four-star Joint Readiness Command that would lead much of the portion of the Joint Staff that is responsible for readiness. This structure, commissioners said, would improve coordination across the services in treatment, transportation and care for injured and ill troops.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;"><span class="abody">“Joint readiness today is at a high level because we’ve just been through more than a decade of war. This seeks to preserve that function,”</span><span class="abody"> Daigle said.</span><span class="abody">The commission also suggests changes to programs for beneficiaries with special needs, to more closely align them with state Medicaid programs — something advocates have sought in recent years.</span></div></span><span class="abody" style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">The commission also called for improving coordination between DoD and VA health services, to include creating a uniform drug formulary for smooth transition of prescriptions, establishing standard reimbursement and completing the effort to create a joint electronic health record system.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">The report estimates changes to the health programs could cut the Pentagon budget by $26.5 billion from fiscal 2016 to fiscal 2020 and save $6.7 billion a year by 2033.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">Unlike the retirement portion of the report, which would apply only to new recruits, the health care portion of the recommendations would affect all family members, retirees and their families — except for those on Tricare For Life — once signed into law.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">Joyce Raezer, executive director of the National Military Family Association, said she polled 20 military spouses shortly after the report was released and said most were “intrigued” by the recommendations, particularly the prospect of greater choice.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">“Generally, the option for choice in this arrangement ... they like that. The Tricare bureaucracy is cumbersome,” Raezer said.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">But spouses added they would need help understanding their options and choosing plans, and they also wondered how such a system would work across state lines and overseas.</div><div style="text-align: start;"><br></div><div style="text-align: start;">“The biggest concern is about education,” Raezer said. “We have been educating the whole country about health care with the Affordable Care Act right now. This means we’d need to educate retirees and family members</div></span></span></div><div><br></div><div>--------------------------------------<br><br><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">"Moscow Cares"</span></div><div><a href="http://www.moscowcares.com/" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><font color="#000000">http://www.MoscowCares.com</font></a></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> </span></div><div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Tom Hansen</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Moscow, Idaho</span></div></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>