There’s been a lot of debate lately about which Medicare savings program is the most effective, and what it costs the government.
And as we head into a new year, we asked two experts to weigh in.
In a piece for The American Conservatives, Jonathan Zittrain and Jason Furman, senior vice presidents at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, offer some interesting takeaways from the current Medicare savings debate.
They argue that the Medicare Advantage program, which is a key part of the ACA, is a much better option.
The ACA allows seniors to enroll in the Medicare program, and it provides a higher level of benefits than Medicare does now.
But that’s not the case with the Medicare savings and loan program, Zittra said.
Medicare Advantage pays a higher percentage of the cost of health care than Medicare is currently paying.
In 2019, Medicare is paying a much lower percentage of its costs than the program is paying now.
Zittrain points out that in 2020, Medicare’s payment to the federal government will be $9.8 trillion.
Medicare’s payments will be about $4.6 trillion in 2019.
The savings that Medicare is receiving are about $3.6 billion, and they’re all coming from Medicare Advantage payments.
The savings from Medicare savings will be higher because Medicare is not the only program that gets money from Medicare Savings, Zettrain said.
The federal government is providing $3 billion in funding each year to other programs.
Zettrain points to other savings that can come from the Medicare Savings program.
One example is the new, $50 billion Health Savings Accounts, which can be used to help pay for private insurance.
Another program that can be a great benefit for Medicare is the Medicare Tax Credit, which helps low-income seniors get financial assistance to help with their medical bills.
These savings programs can help pay out of pocket expenses for Medicare.
Zickrain points that, if Medicare were to get its $10.6trillion share of the savings from the ACA in 2019, it would be responsible for $3 trillion.
That’s about one-quarter of the current deficit.
That’s why the administration has proposed funding the Medicare tax credit in 2020.
That could give seniors some additional financial assistance.
But, as Zittrains point out, it doesn’t provide the same level of support that Medicare has in the future.
Zattrain points also to a program called the Medical Savings Account, which pays a smaller percentage of costs for Medicare than the Medicare Benefits and Services Tax Credit.
This is because the medical savings account pays for all the costs of medical care, not just Medicare’s.
That means the money that Medicare gets from the tax credit and the medical account is going to pay for a larger share of overall costs.
Zilzinger pointed out that if we get rid of the tax credits and medical accounts, Medicare savings would be lower.
This would help Medicare as it moves toward the next phase of the law.
But the government will have to come up with an alternative solution to the long-term fiscal problems that the ACA has caused.
Medicaid savings would still be higher than the ACA savings, Zilzion said.
That would be because, like the Medicare Borrower Protection Program, which the ACA created to protect those who have borrowed money to buy private insurance, the savings in the Medicaid savings program are smaller than the savings the federal budget would have received if the ACA were not in place.
This is not to say that the savings coming from the Medicaid program would be less than what the ACA saves.
But they’re not equal to what the federal funds could have been getting from the savings programs.