In November, three days before he retired,
Lt. Gen. (Dr.) Edgar R. Anderson, Jr., the USAF surgeon general, told
Air Force News Service that the Air Force could no longer deliver on
the promise of lifetime, no-cost health care at military medical facilities.
More than a third of the military hospitals that existed in the US in
1987 will be closed by 1997. Meanwhile, the retired military population
has grown by leaps and bounds. The system can't handle the patient load.
Years ago in simpler times, generations of military members were promised
health-care benefits for the rest of their lives to offset the lower
pay and other exigencies of career service. That promise became even
more important as the cost of medical care rose to unprecedented levels.
Today, it is regarded as the number one noncash benefit.
From the 1960s on, direct care in military medical facilities was supplemented
by the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services
(CHAMPUS). Planners did not foresee the inversion and overload on military
hospital facilities that lay ahead in the 1980s and 1990s when force
cuts set up a decline in medical infrastructure just as the large Cold
War force was reaching retirement age. More than half a million retired
beneficiaries lost access to military hospitals and clinics because of
base closures.
Older retirees are hit especially hard. Military health programs close
abruptly for them when they move over to Medicare at age 65. Up to now,
military hospitals have been treating Medicare eligibles on a space-available
basis, but that is wearing thin.
A provision called "subvention" would allow Medicare to reimburse
the Defense Department for care provided to these older retirees, but
Congress adjourned last fall without approving such subvention. A new
bill will be introduced this year. It would particularly help the 55
percent of the over-65, Medicare-eligible military retirees who live
within 40 miles of one of the military hospitals that remain.
As the Military Coalition said in testimony to Congress last year, the
perception that military retirees have better-than-average health-care
benefits is a myth. According to a 1994 survey by Hay Associates, the
majority of corporate employers provide at least some coverage in addition
to Medicare for their retirees. Military retirees must buy their own
Medigap policies. It is further telling that about two million of the
8.4 million persons eligible for military medical care have obtained
private health insurance instead.
Two years ago, budgeteers floated the preposterous notion that medical
care for retirees was a "contingent benefit" rather than an
entitlement. They have since retreated from that position under a barrage
of evidence to the contrary. Government officials no longer deny that
the promise of lifetime health care was made, although they continue
to hedge about whether it was "contractual" or only a "moral
commitment."
Either way, what the government says it will ultimately deliver for
most retirees is some sort of civilian health-care program with enrollment
fees and copayments. The centerpiece of the plan is Tricare, a series
of managed-care options for active-duty and retired military families.
Implementation is under way, and surveys say that those who have tried
Tricare like it. Former Surgeon General Anderson said that one of the
first things he was going to do after retirement was sign up for Tricare.
Under the option called Tricare Prime, patients are treated in military
facilities when care is available there and by contract physicians when
it isn't. Enrollment is free for the active-duty force, $460 a year for
retired military families. Retirees who do not live in a Tricare Prime
service area near a military hospital get Tricare Standard--previously
known as CHAMPUS--which involves burdensome paperwork and has costly
deductibles and copayments.
Many retirees, especially those without access to Tricare Prime, would
like to join the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which covers
4.1 million federal beneficiaries. It offers a wide choice of doctors
and excellent medical coverage. (It also avoids some of the problems
of Tricare, such as vague and uncertain reciprocity agreements among
the 12 geographic regions.) FEHBP is the health-care plan that members
of Congress chose for themselves. A variation is "FEHBP-65," which
would allow Medicare eligibles to enroll. The $1,377 premium for a family
buys better coverage at less cost than Medicare supplements provide.
When the possibilities are arrayed, it is clear that one size does not
fit all. The Air Force Association and the Military Coalition have taken
the position that at least three options, supported and funded as necessary
by the federal government, are required.
- Continued access, via subvention funding, to military
hospitals for retirees after age 65.
- Tricare, for retirees who can take good advantage
of it, for active-duty families who cannot afford
enrollment fees in other programs, and because military
doctors need patients other than healthy young people
to maintain military readiness and medical proficiency.
- FEHBP, for those, especially older retirees, whose
needs are not well met by the other options.
This isn't the way that either military members or the government thought
40 years ago that things would work out, but under the circumstances,
it is the least--the very least--the government can do to redeem its
obligation and to meet the health-care needs of those who served.