Elder Law Prof Blog

KFF's Medicare Part D Q & A

Get answers to your Part D questions at KFF's weekly Medicare Part D Q & A column.  Recent topics addressed here include:

*Veterans and Part D

*The Part D penalty--how it works

*Part D and Nursing Home Residents

*Part D and Medicare Supplemental Policies

Federal judge strikes down DC law intended to keep drug costs down

A federal judge ruled yesterday that a District law designed to reduce the price of prescription drugs is unconstitutional and blocked its implementation.

U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon said the law, passed this fall, violates constitutional protections of interstate commerce and goes against the will of Congress.

The law makes it illegal for pharmaceutical companies to sell prescription drugs at an "excessive price" in the District. It defines excessive as being 30 percent higher than the price in such "high-income countries" as Germany, Canada, Australia and Britain.

Pharmaceutical industry groups, which had filed the legal challenge in October, applauded the decision. D.C. Council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), the law's author, said the city should appeal.

Read the rest of this story in the Washington Post.

VA Adds Nearly 2 Million Records to Online Gravesite Locator

The burial locations of more than 5 million veterans for whom the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has provided grave markers are now available on the Internet, as well as the information inscribed on the markers.

Online since April 2004, the nationwide gravesite locator (http://gravelocator.cem.va.gov) helps veterans' families, former comrades-in-arms and others find the graves of veterans.

VA recently added 1.9 million records for veterans buried primarily in private cemeteries to its database. The gravesite locator previously carried records on 3 million veterans buried in VA national cemeteries since the Civil War, and in state veterans cemeteries and Arlington National Cemetery since 1999.

"The expansion of this innovative program continues VA’s commitment to using Internet technology to fulfill the important mission of memorializing our nation’s veterans," said the Honorable R. James Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans Affairs. "By adding records to our online database, VA also helps families research their genealogy and ensures that future generations of Americans will be able to honor these veterans for their service."

The new records date from January 1997, the earliest time for which electronic records exist. The information comes from applications made for these veterans’ headstones or markers. Beyond the 5 million records now available, VA continues to add approximately 1,000 new records to the database each day.

Last year, VA furnished nearly 369,000 inscribed headstones and markers for veterans’ graves worldwide.

Internet users only need to provide the last name of the deceased veteran or dependent. Typically, the information available includes name, birth and death dates, rank, branch of service and the address and phone number of the cemetery.

Veterans whose discharges are other than dishonorable, their spouses and dependent children may be buried in a national cemetery, regardless of where they live. No advance reservations are made. VA provides perpetual care, as well as a headstone or marker, a burial flag and a memorial certificate to survivors.

Information on VA burial benefits can be obtained from national cemetery offices, from a VA Web site at www.cem.va.gov or by calling VA regional offices toll-free at 1-800-827-1000.

Veterans' and their spouses miss out on pensions

Nearly 2 million poor veterans or their impoverished widows are likely missing out on as much as $22 billion a year in pensions from the U.S. government, but the Department of Veterans Affairs has had only limited success in finding them.

Widows are hardest hit. According to a VA estimate, only one in seven of the survivors of the nation's deceased soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who likely could qualify for the pension actually get the monthly checks.

What's more, participation in the program is falling, according to a Knight Ridder analysis of VA records. The reason for the lax participation, a VA study said, is that poor veterans generally "are completely unaware that the program exists."

"Veterans simply don't know about it," said Despina Hatton, who runs a senior law program for residents of Washoe County, Nev., that seeks to help veterans or their widows receive the benefit.

Read more from Knight Ridder via the Buffalo News.

Look before you leap: True cost of a Part D plan might be more than you think.

From the Center for Medicare Advocacy:

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) says that cost is one of the factors beneficiaries   should consider when choosing a Medicare prescription drug plan.  Yet calculating costs can be an onerous task.  In fact, CMS cautions against   trying to calculate the potential costs of enrollment “by hand” and recommends that beneficiaries rely on the calculations achieved through the web tools available on www.medicare.gov.

Many times the cost of a plan can be deceptive.  A plan with the lowest premium is not the best option if its formulary, or covered drug list, does not include the medicines a beneficiary takes or if its network of pharmacies does not include the drug   store a beneficiary uses.  We know that plans can change the prices of   their drugs weekly so that what appears to be the cheapest plan one week may   not be the cheapest plan the next week.  CMS has even suspended   providing information about some plans on its prescription drug plan finder because of discrepancies in information about drug costs.  We know also   that, starting in March, plans will be able to remove drugs from their   formularies or change their tiers or cost-sharing levels. 

Even after a beneficiary does the calculations, the plan with the lowest cost on a yearly basis may still not   be the best option.  Plan benefit structures vary greatly. Some require beneficiaries to pay more up-front at the beginning of the year, while some require beneficiaries to pay more at the end of the year. Because most   Medicare beneficiaries live on fixed incomes, they may want to consider their   overall expenses and when they want to incur larger prescription drug costs.  A beneficiary may be more comfortable paying a little extra for a drug plan in order to pay steady amount out-of-pocket throughout the year   or at certain times of the year.  The calculations can be particularly significant for beneficiaries with large drug costs who are not eligible for   the low-income subsidy, or “extra help.” 

 

Read the rest of the story at CMA.

Reminder:  Avoid the calculator!  It doesn't work propertly.  Your only hope is to work through the various plans by hand.  Of course, the whole Part D program is set up to allow insureres to bait and switch drugs, so there is no guarantee that what you see it what you'll get.  If that makes you angry--contact your Congresspersons and demand accountability.
 

Senate leaves coal in seniors' stockings

The Senate has voted to approve a reconciliation budget bill sent by the Conference Committee.  The bill cuts programs that assist seniors, the poor, and the middle class.  Among other things, the bill extends the Medicaid look back period to 5 years.  It also eliminates  energy assistance funding for low income individuals--a program that greatly benefits  fixed-income seniors who need special protection from heating costs when prices rise drastically, as they are expected to this winter.

Due to a procedural glitch, thought, the bill can't become law because it contained minor differences from that approved by the House earlier this week.  The House won't be able to vote on this budget until it reconvenes in January.

For the full text of this  Republican-supported legislation, visit http://www.rules.house.gov/109/text/s1932cr/109s1932_text.pdf.

For more information on the elimination of energy assistance, visit the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

To register your disapproval of this bugdet bill, contact your Congresspersons now.  They may be on vacation, but their email boxes are still open!

Elderly criminals sell pain pills to buy food

Dottie Neeley, 87, was fingerprinted, photographed and thrown in jail, imprisoned as much by the tubing from her oxygen tank as by the concrete and steel around her.

The woman - who spent two days in jail after her arrest last December - is among a growing number of Kentucky senior citizens charged in a crackdown on a crime authorities say is rampant in Appalachia: Elderly people are reselling their painkillers and other medications to addicts.

"When a person is on Social Security, drawing $500 a month, and they can sell their pain pills for $10 apiece, they'll take half of them for themselves and sell the other half to pay their electric bills or buy groceries," Floyd County jailer Roger Webb said.

Since April 2004, Operation UNITE, a Kentucky anti-drug task force crated largely in response to rampant abuse of the powerful and sometimes lethal painkiller OxyContin, has charged more than 40 people 60 or older with selling primarily prescription drugs in the mountains.

"It used to be a rare occasion to have an elderly inmate," Webb said. "Five years ago it was a rarity."

Read more in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Ed:  Hmmm.  What's criminal:  an 87 year old selling her medications to buy food, or a system that doesn't ensure than an 87 year old can have her drugs and eat food too?

White House Conference on Aging Vote on Top 50 Resolutions

Here are some examples:

Res. 1 Provide Financial and Other Economic Incentives and Policy Changes to
Encourage and Facilitate Increased Retirement Savings

Res. 4 Establish Principles to Strengthen Social Security

Res. 5 Foster Innovations in Financing Long-Term Care Services to Increase Options
Available to Consumers

Res. 7 Strengthen Law Enforcement Efforts at the Federal, State, and Local Level to
Investigate and Prosecute Cases of Elder Financial Crime

Res. 9 Modernize the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Program

Res. 10 Strengthen the Social Security Disability Insurance Program

Res. 11 Remove Barriers to the Retention and Hiring of Older Workers, Including Age
Discrimination

Res. 12 Promote Incentives for Older Workers to Continue Working and Improve
Employment Training and Retraining Programs to Better Serve Older Workers

Res. 14 Expand Opportunities for Developing Innovative Housing Designs for Seniors’
Needs

Res. 15 Encourage Redesign of Senior Centers for Broad Appeal and Community
Participation

Res. 17 Reauthorize The Older Americans Act Within The First Six Months Following
The 2005 White House Conference On Aging

Res. 18 Encourage Community Designs to Promote Livable Communities that Enable
Aging in Place

Read the rest.

Ed:  I wonder if these are anything like my New Year's resolutions....

GAO chief blasts federal lawmakers for ignoring elder issues

From the Houston Chronicle:

The nation's chief accountability officer scolded the federal government Monday for avoiding problems with Social Security and Medicare, criticizing the existing benefits systems as outdated for baby boomers moving toward retirement.

The "demographic tidal wave" of retirements will place a hefty strain on taxpayers unless Congress imposes spending caps on itself and restructures some entitlement programs, U.S. Comptroller General David Walker said at a conference on the nation's elderly.

"This wave will not recede, and we are not prepared," said Walker, head of the Government Accountability Office, the congressional office that conducts audits and reviews government efficiency.

In a speech to delegates at the White House Conference on Aging, which is held once a decade, Walker warned that such changes will be far more difficult to enact in the future, when older Americans become a larger proportion of the voting population.

The consequences of inaction would grow as well, he said. By 2040, balancing the federal budget would require either a 60 percent cut in federal spending or tax increases that would more than double the current tax burden, according to projections by the GAO.

President Bush's attempts this year to overhaul Social Security foundered because retirees feared that his plan to create private accounts would undermine the popular program.

Henry Aaron, a senior economist at the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution, said the doomsday scenarios projected by some Social Security reformists were overblown.

"The problem is really rather small and can be dealt with quite readily," using modest spending cuts, tax increases and changes to eligibility requirements, he said.

Walker's recommendations for Social Security included pay-as-you-go rules for spending and automatic cuts in the event of budget overruns.

Just as important, he said, are changes to Medicare and Medicaid, the nation's health-care programs for the elderly and poor. To sustain the widely used programs, he said, the government might consider raising the age of eligibility for Medicare and increasing the income floor for Medicaid.

Walker spoke at the White House Conference on Aging.

Center for Medicare Advocacy and Other Advocacy Groups Direct Letter to McClellan of CMS

Here's the text of a letter that a the Center for Medicare Advocacy,  Consumers Union, and the National Senior Citizens Law Center have sent to CMS director Mark McClellan regarding Part D as it relates to retiree benefits and the possible loss of dependent/spousal health insurance for PArt D enrollees:

Dear Dr. McClellan:

The Center for Medicare Advocacy, Consumers Union, the National Senior
Citizens Law Center and other organizations working on Part D
issues are increasingly alarmed at the continuing confusion about and dire
consequences to Medicare beneficiaries and their spouses of the potential
loss of all retiree health benefits when a beneficiary enrolls in a Part D
plan.  This situation has a particularly severe impact on dual eligibles
who are auto enrolled into Part D plans and whose spouses count on their
retiree benefits for all health care coverage.

While individuals with retiree coverage that is creditable under Part D are
supposed to be flagged and notified of the possible consequences of signing
up for Part D, this notification did not occur for dual eligibles, and
employers have no obligation to inform their retirees and current employees
about the loss of all health benefits, where that would occur.

The following example, received by our office recently, explains one version of the
situation:

Our 80+ year old client is in a nursing home on  Medicaid.  His 61 year old
wife is in the community, working parttime, and is on health insurance
through his retiree benefits.  She is not on Medicare.  He received a notice
that the retiree plan he has better prescription benefits than Part D.
Also included in the letter is the fact that if he participates in part D
he will lose his retiree benefits.  The dilemma is that he will be enrolled
automatically into a Part D plan because he is in a nursing home, and it appears
that his wife will lose her benefits.  What recourse is there?

There are many permutations of the above example, some including issues related
to Medicaid coverage, to Part B coverage and to the availability of the low income subsidy.

The recourse, as we understand it, is for our writer's client to opt out of Part D - to
disenroll from the plan into which he has been auto enrolled.  But we are
hearing that the avenues available for disenrolling are not always user
friendly; moreover, it is not clear that all beneficiaries will even
understand the full consequences of staying in or disenrolling from Part D.
And, while a dual eligible may choose in or out of Part D at any time, the
loss of retiree coverage on January 1, 2006 may be irretrievable.  Another complication,
of course, is that, in the example above, the client's LIS will not be available
to him without Part D.

A complication that arose in NY (it is far from clear whether it
has been corrected yet) and may apply elsewhere derives from the state
requiring Part D as a condition of Medicaid coverage but the employer
prohibiting Part D if the employee and spouse wish to retain retiree
benefits.

Many of these situations are correctable by the intervention of advocates
and we have, indeed, been successful in rectifying the situations when we
contact employers individually.  But we are concerned about those who have
no one to advocate on their behalf or who do not get good information about
how their employer is addressing this particularly harmful circumstance.

Only 21 days remain until the end of the year. We urge you to create
immediately an interim process, until a more complete solution can be
devised, that would allow a grace period for the correction of mistakes made
with respect to these exceedingly complex coverage decisions. For those
employers that receive the employer subsidy, you might make receipt of the
subsidy conditioned on having such a grace period. For other employers, you
might raise the visibility and seriousness of the issue and urge them to
create such a period. There may be additional creative ways to address this
very serious issue.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Ed:  Tell your congressmen what you think.

White House Conference on Aging begins today

The once-a-decade White House Conference on Aging begins in Washington, D.C. today.  Read all about it in USA Today (which covers the conference in its "Life" section rather than as news) or go all out and visit the official website. 

KFF explains, analyzes Florida Medicaid waiver

On October 19, 2005, CMS approved a Section 1115 waiver, allowing Florida to make fundamental changes in its Medicaid program. The state is seeking to improve predictability of Medicaid spending and reduce the rate of spending growth through the waiver. It is also looking to increase personal responsibility, market competition, and participation in private coverage.

Florida’s approach could have significant national implications if it becomes a model for other states. Under the waiver, the program will move toward a defined contribution program in which the state will allot risk adjusted premiums to beneficiaries to choose among different coverage options. Managed care plans will gain new authority to determine benefits for adults, subject to state approval, and the state will establish a new annual maximum benefit limit for adults. Beneficiaries will also be able to “opt-out” of Medicaid and use their risk-adjusted premium to subsidize the purchase of employer-sponsored or individual coverage if it is available.

Interested in knowing more?  Read the Fact Sheet, entitled Florida Medicaid Waiver: Key Program Changes and Issues

Low income Medicare beneficiaries: apply for Part D assistance on-line at SSA

SSA maintains a website that allows persons who may qualify for low-income assistance for Part D to apply via an on-line form.  More than 70% of those who may qualify for assistance have yet to apply.  Go here to access the form.

Report: Health picture grim for aging boomers

Half of the oldest baby boomers have high blood pressure and two of every five are obese, making them vulnerable to severe health consequences as they grow older and guaranteeing society will face a substantial bill for their care, the federal government said Thursday.

And though some indicators of health are improving, with life expectancy rising and deaths from certain cancers reduced, those trends may reverse as the oldest boomers pass into old age, the government warned.

The predictions of Americans' health come from a 550-page statistical abstract, "Health, United States, 2005," released Thursday by the National Center for Health Statistics, an arm of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The report examines statistical measures of health from smoking during pregnancy to deaths from workplace accidents and plots them against trends in insurance, doctor visits and health care spending. But it pays particular attention to the current and future health of Americans who are between 55 and 64 — a group that encompasses the last few members of the World War II generation and the leading edge of the postwar baby boom.

"It's a very large and fast-growing group whose situation now gives us a preview of what is to come," said Amy Bernstein, the study director. "They are starting to develop major chronic disease health problems at the same time that employer-sponsored health care is retracting and the cost of care is increasing."

More from The Oxford Press Business.

The full report is available from the National Center for Health Statistics.

GAO Report: VETERANS’ DISABILITY BENEFITS/Claims Processing Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement

From the GAO on Dec.7, 2005.  Here's a summary of the report's contents....

The Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, asked GAO to report on the claims processing challenges and opportunities facing the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation and pension program. For years, the claims process has been the subject of concern and attention within VA and by the Congress and veterans service organizations. Their concerns include long waits for decisions, large claims backlogs, and inaccurate decisions.

Our work and media reports of significant discrepancies in average disability payments from state to state have also highlighted concerns over the consistency of decision making within VA. In January 2003, we designated federal disability programs, including VA’s compensation and pension programs, as a high-risk area because of continuing challenges to improving the timeliness and consistency of its disability decisions and the need to modernize programs. VA’s outdated disability determination process does not reflect a current view of the relationship between impairments and work capacity. Advances in medicine and technology have allowed some individuals with disabilities to live more independently and work more effectively.

The Department of Veterans Affairs continues to experience challenges processing veterans’ disability compensation and pension claims including large numbers of pending claims and lengthy processing times. While VA made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the size and age of its inventory of pending claims, it has lost ground since the end of fiscal year 2003. For example, pending claims increased by over one-third from the end of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal year 2005. Meanwhile, VA faces continuing questions about its ability to ensure that veterans get consistent decisions across its 57 regional offices. GAO recommended in August 2002 that VA study the consistency of decisions made by different regional offices, identify acceptable levels of decision-making variation, and reduce variations found to be unacceptable. Several factors may impede VA’s ability to significantly improve its claims processing performance. These include the potential impacts of laws, court decisions, and increases in the number and complexity of claims received.

The full report is available here. 

GAO Report: VETERANS’ DISABILITY BENEFITS/Claims Processing Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement

From the GAO on Dec.7, 2005.  Here's a summary of the report's contents....

The Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, asked GAO to report on the claims processing challenges and opportunities facing the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation and pension program. For years, the claims process has been the subject of concern and attention within VA and by the Congress and veterans service organizations. Their concerns include long waits for decisions, large claims backlogs, and inaccurate decisions.

Our work and media reports of significant discrepancies in average disability payments from state to state have also highlighted concerns over the consistency of decision making within VA. In January 2003, we designated federal disability programs, including VA’s compensation and pension programs, as a high-risk area because of continuing challenges to improving the timeliness and consistency of its disability decisions and the need to modernize programs. VA’s outdated disability determination process does not reflect a current view of the relationship between impairments and work capacity. Advances in medicine and technology have allowed some individuals with disabilities to live more independently and work more effectively.

The Department of Veterans Affairs continues to experience challenges processing veterans’ disability compensation and pension claims including large numbers of pending claims and lengthy processing times. While VA made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the size and age of its inventory of pending claims, it has lost ground since the end of fiscal year 2003. For example, pending claims increased by over one-third from the end of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal year 2005. Meanwhile, VA faces continuing questions about its ability to ensure that veterans get consistent decisions across its 57 regional offices. GAO recommended in August 2002 that VA study the consistency of decisions made by different regional offices, identify acceptable levels of decision-making variation, and reduce variations found to be unacceptable. Several factors may impede VA’s ability to significantly improve its claims processing performance. These include the potential impacts of laws, court decisions, and increases in the number and complexity of claims received.

The full report is available here. 

Not JUST elder law: Poindexter

From Wordsmith Word-a-Day:

This week's theme: eponyms.

poindexter (POIN-dek-stuhr) noun

   An extremely intelligent but socially inept person.

[After Poindexter, a character in the animated series Felix the Cat.]

Poindexter is a synonym of nerd or geek. In the cartoon, Poindexter is the
nephew of The Professor, the arch-enemy of Felix the Cat. The creator of
the cartoon series is said to have named the character Poindexter after his
lawyer. Here is a picture: http://felixthecat.com/friends-poindexter.htm

Visit Wordsmith.org!


Law professors, take note!

Will Medicare Part D enrollment deadline be extended?

From KFF/The Hill

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) said that he has adequate support to pass a bill that would extend the enrollment period for the new Medicare prescription drug benefit until Dec. 31, 2006, The Hill reports. Under current law, Medicare beneficiaries have until May 15, 2006, to enroll in the prescription drug benefit without penalty. Nelson spokesperson Brian Gulley said, "We are going to try to attach our language to the first available vehicle when we come back in January." He added, "It would be the quickest way to get our language passed, as opposed to having to go through the committee gantlet. We have to get this thing passed as quickly as we can." Last month, Nelson attempted to attach the bill as an amendment to a budget reconciliation package, but the legislation failed to receive the 60 votes required to waive a stipulation that ruled the amendment out of order; senators voted 51-47 to waive the stipulation. According to Gulley, the vote indicated the bipartisan support required to pass the bill. "As the vote reflected, we had bipartisan support, and we will be able to obtain a majority when we run this amendment to a bill not dealing with the budget," he said. All Democratic senators present -- as well as Sens. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), George Voinovich (R-Ohio), Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and John Warner (R-Va.) -- voted to waive the stipulation. However, a "strong lobbying push from the Bush administration" could change some of the votes in the future, according to the Hill

Kaiser.edu: Tutorials on Medicare Part D

Check out Kaiser.edu for a great assortment of resources explaining Medicare Part D.  The main page contains a "background brief" with loads of links to KFF and other resources for those writing about Part D--or just trying to figure the damn thing out for themselves or a parent or friend.

Canada: NDP pledges more help for seniors with home care and long term care

As reported by CCN Matthews:

NDP Leader Jack Layton today announced the NDP plan to increase home care and long-term care for seniors.

"Seniors built Canada. They looked after us, but we're not looking after them," Layton said at the Oakwood Terrace long-term care facility in Darmouth. "We owe them dignity and respect. We owe them the best care we can get them, where and when they need it."

Layton committed to a $1 billion annual transfer to provinces tied to improvements in home care. The transfer will provide home care for up to another 100,000 Canadians who require the service. Layton also committed to a $500 million annual transfer tied to the creation of new long-term-care spaces. Provinces will use the transfers to meet the local needs of seniors.

The improvements to home care and long-term care will allow seniors to live in dignity, provide respite and assistance to family members and release hospital beds for acute-care cases, Layton said.

"We can't fix everything in a day. But we can start by getting our priorities right," Layton said.

TWO COMMITMENTS ON HEALTH CARE

Dignity and respect for our seniors

DECEMBER 8, 2005 - We respect the past contributions and present needs of Canadian seniors. We believe that a full range of publicly-funded and regulated supports must be available for seniors -- from home care, through assisted living, to palliative care.

In recognition of the changing public health care needs presented by the reality of an aging population, we will introduce two new transfers: a Home Care Transfer of $1 billion annually to fund home care for 100,000 families; and, a new Long-Term Care Transfer of $500 million in each of four years to be used by provinces to increase the number of long-term-care beds.

But the federal government must do more than just sign cheques - new public health care dollars must address new concerns within the framework of our public health care system. Therefore, these transfers will be linked to pan-Canadian principles (such as those contained in the Canada Health Act) and negotiated with the provinces as such.

1. The Homecare Transfer

The Romanow Commission recognized that home care is one of the fastest growing parts of the health care system. The Commission also found growing evidence that investing in home care can save money while improving care and the quality of life for people who would otherwise be institutionalized.

As such, our commitment to a new Home Care Transfer includes a commitment to the full implementation of the Recommendations found in Chapter 8 of the Romanow Report, Homecare: The Next Essential Service. Our plan will include expansion of home care services for mental health case management, post-acute patients, and for palliative care services to support people in their last six months of life.

2. The Long-Term Care Transfer

At the same time, strengthening our ability to deliver high quality, institutional-based care is another growing challenge faced by public health care. The transfer will be used by provinces for either capital or operating expenses, following an assessment of local needs. If all funding went to the creation of new spaces, as many as 40,000 new long-term-care spaces would be created over four years.

Long-term care for seniors is a critical starting point for any plan to reduce waitlists. Currently, 10-25% of acute-care beds are occupied by seniors who are waiting for long-term care beds. Expanding good quality, well-regulated, affordable long-term care will reduce pressure on hospitals, cut surgery waitlists, and allow seniors to live with the dignity they deserve.

A new Long-Term Care Transfer will be a first, practical step to support the launch of an achievable publicly regulated long-term care expansion plan, one that will provide needed public funds to help seniors to live with respect and in comfort, while taking the pressure off emergency and acute-care beds in resource-challenged hospitals.

We will provide additional details on these commitments when we release our platform later in the campaign.