Cohen M A, Kumar N, McGuire T, Wallack S S
LifePlans and JDC-Brookdale Institute.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1992 Fall;17(3):403-23; discussion 435-8. doi: 10.1215/03616878-17-3-403.
Congress is considering proposals to improve its financing of long-term care. The key issue is whether it should support a social insurance program or a program targeted to a population group defined by income and assets. Social insurance is expensive, costing between $15 and $20 billion. For the most part, it provides benefits--primarily asset protection--to middle- and upper-income individuals. An improved Medicaid program, costing about $8 billion, benefits lower-income individuals but does not protect those with higher incomes. These two options cannot be viewed independently from trends in the private market. Sales of private long-term care policies have grown and between 30 percent and 40 percent of the elderly can be considered potential buyers. If private alternatives are available for those individuals who need asset protection, the case for a more targeted public approach--along with reliance on the private sector--becomes more compelling. Congress should consider a program that enhances Medicaid; improves consumer education; assists states in regulating long-term care policies, so as to enhance consumer protection and confidence; and clarifies taxes on long-term care insurance to encourage workers and the elderly to protect themselves against catastrophic expenses.
国会正在考虑一些提案,以改善其对长期护理的资金投入。关键问题在于,它是应该支持一项社会保险计划,还是支持一项针对由收入和资产界定的特定人群的计划。社会保险成本高昂,花费在150亿至200亿美元之间。在很大程度上,它为中高收入个人提供福利——主要是资产保护。改进后的医疗补助计划成本约为80亿美元,惠及低收入个人,但无法保护高收入人群。这两种选择不能脱离私人市场的趋势单独看待。私人长期护理保险的销售额有所增长,30%至40%的老年人可被视为潜在买家。如果有私人替代方案可供那些需要资产保护的个人选择,那么采取更具针对性的公共政策——同时依靠私营部门——的理由就变得更加充分。国会应考虑一项能加强医疗补助计划的方案;改善消费者教育;协助各州监管长期护理保险政策,以增强消费者保护和信心;并明确长期护理保险的税收,以鼓励工人和老年人保护自己免受灾难性费用的影响。