oday study of this question found that only a small minority of senior citizens is actually in such a situation. Of the one-third of seniors without prescription-drug coverage, many of them are poor enough to qualify for Medicaid coverage, which could relieve them of some of their out-of-pocket drug costs. Those who are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid are usually affluent enough to pay their own bills. They may have higher average out-of-pocket costs to fill their prescriptions, but at the same time they are able to pay it and don’t mind doing so. In fact, many choose to go this route rather than paying premiums on private supplemental coverage.The numbers and evidence from the prescription-drug coverage analysis, along with the information about the proposed Medicare reform, suggest that the presidential candidates are proposing a solution that sounds good to all senior citizens, since they are proposing that all seniors would be covered under the plan, but that in reality will still leave the same individuals with the highest drug costs with huge prescription-drug bills to pay, due to the limits of the coverage.Why would the presidential candidates be so adamant about a redistribution of taxpayer dollars that seems to be unnecessary? I’m sure it has to do with the fact that voter turnout increases with age. During the last presidential election in 1996, nearly three-fourths of people 70 years old and up voted, compared to only 35% of registered voters under 25. Senior citizens were expected to be the key “swing voters” in this year’s presidential election, so it is no wonder that both candidates have been in favor of adding a prescription-drug benefit to Medicare at the expense of taxpayers. But if senior citizens are really not in need of this new prescription-drug benefit, and if other drug coverage is available to most of them, and in fact already owned by over two-thirds of them, who ...
