Vice President Kamala Harris recently unveiled a new initiative, "Medicare at Home," which aims to cover the costs of in-home care for seniors.
However, economists and experts have voiced concerns that the plan will cost significantly more than the campaign's projections, potentially burdening taxpayers with tens of billions of dollars in additional expenses, as reported by The New York Post.
Harris, 59, introduced her plan during a media blitz, stating, Its just about helping an aging parent or person you know prepare a meal, put their sweater on, while alleviating the financial strain of transferring loved ones to residential care facilities. The initiative would fund health aides to assist seniors who are unable to independently perform activities of daily living like bathing, eating, and going to the bathroom and/or face serious cognitive impairment, according to a press release from the Harris campaign.
Despite the campaign's reference to a Brookings Institution white paper estimating the program's cost at $40 billion, the proposal lacks detailed information on how it will be fully funded. The campaign suggests that the costs will be covered by negotiating lower prescription drug prices, cracking down on pharmaceutical benefit managers, addressing Medicare fraud, and implementing international tax reform.
The Democratic vice president also promises that the benefit will extend to all of our nations seniors and those with disabilities on Medicare, which currently serves at least 67 million Americans. However, Mark Warshawsky, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) focused on long-term care issues, expressed skepticism about the plan's affordability. He told the Post that the plan will be very expensive for the taxpayer and will carry a much larger price tag than the Democratic campaign is estimating to expand in-home care, which currently costs $130 billion nationwide.
Warshawsky's view of the plan is largely negative, stating, these costs are currently covered by a range of both private and public spending already. And then for those that cant, Medicaid covers these expenses. He further pointed out that Medicaid already covers almost half of long-term care costs in the country.
Warshawsky also criticized the potential reliance on immigrants as in-home health aides, suggesting that the government may need to increase immigration to meet the demand. He also questioned the $40 billion estimate from the Brookings Institution, arguing that it is based on a very limited and tightly defined program.
Michael Cannon, health policy studies director at the libertarian Cato Institute, was even more critical, describing the proposal as irresponsible, corrupt, and insane. He accused Harris of attempting to buy votes from Medicare enrollees and their middle-aged children in an election year.
The AEI fellow also criticized the campaign's claim that the government would save money by providing home care as opposed to nursing home care. He argued that even with a sliding scale to provide more coverage for those of modest incomes and cost-sharing for seniors with higher incomes, the costs would still be significant. An AARP report found that family members of seniors with health needs were providing an additional $600 billion in unpaid care as of 2021.
Richard Stern, the director of the Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget at the Heritage Foundation, warned that the plan would increase federal spending and create more inflationary pressures. Nicholas Johns, the Senior Policy and Government Affairs Manager for National Taxpayers Union, echoed this sentiment, stating that policies should be focusing on reducing barriers to entry for home health workers and helping seniors save more for retirement by cutting taxes.
Samuel Gregg, a political economist at the American Institute for Economic Research, argued that the proposal would exacerbate Americas entitlement spending problem. He said, Vice President Harriss proposal for expanding Medicare will only exacerbate Americas entitlement spending problem. Entitlements are the biggest element of the federal budget and the biggest driver of Americas metastasizing public debt a problem that many Americans are deeply worried about. Harris should be looking for ways to streamline Medicare and all our entitlement programs not making them bigger.
The proposal's unveiling comes after Harris has distanced herself from her previous support for Medicare for All and the elimination of private health insurance. Her campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Login