Military Officer - April 2008 - (Page 32) washingtonscene and warning bells.” While some offer reassurances that recruiting and retention goals are being met, he noted that’s only being achieved by paying record bonuses and extracting incredible levels of sacrifice from troops and families that everyone in America recognizes as grossly unfair and unsustainable. “We have to grow much larger force levels as quickly as humanly possible, regardless of how long we stay in Iraq,” Strobridge said. “We have an obligation to be better prepared for the next unexpected contingency than we were for this one.” Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.), the subcommittee’s ranking Republican, concluded the hearing by thanking Strobridge and the other witnesses for their ongoing work with the subcommittee on multiple priorities. McHugh said he and Davis agree on the importance of seeking additional funding from the Budget Committee to be able to address as many of the priorities identified by the witnesses as possible. For brand-name drugs in retail stores, the Pentagon proposes raising the TRICARE copayment from $9 to $25. The HayGroup survey indicates almost half of civilian employers (45 percent) charge less than that. For brand-name, non-formulary medications, the TRICARE copayment would rise from $22 to $45 — more than 69 percent of what civilian plans charge. The chart at left shows the percentage of civilian retail pharmacy plans that offer lower copayments for medications. It distinguishes between the current copayment structure and the DoD proposal for FY 2009. In fact, many civilian plans are reducing or eliminating copayments for generic drugs and medications used to treat chronic diseases like diabetes, because studies have found higher copayments actually deter many patients from taking medications that reduce the need for much higher-cost procedures later in life. For one data point, MOAA’s own employee plan (Blue Cross Blue Shield) offers our employees retail medications for copayments of $10 (generic), $20 (brandname), and $35 (non-formulary brandname) — lower across the board than proposed for military beneficiaries. The TRICARE copayments also would exceed those offered under many plans available to legislators and federal civilians. Most telling of all, Wal-Mart offers more than 360 medications at a copayment of only $4 to anyone who walks in the door. Perhaps the purpose of the Pentagonproposed fee hikes is to push more beneficiaries to use Wal-Mart rather than their TRICARE benefit. That certainly would save DoD money. But it wouldn’t make military people feel very good about their health coverage. MOAA thinks military beneficiaries’ extraordinary service and sacrifice have earned them the best health coverage in America, and it’s an insult to propose shifting them to second-tier pharmacy coverage. Civilian Pharmacy Plans Versus Proposed DoD Increases This chart shows the percentage of civilian employer pharmacy plans offering lower copayments than current TRICARE prescription coverage, versus what percentage would offer lower copayments if DoDrecommended copayment increases are approved. Generic 2% 87% Brand Name Formulary TRICARE Rx: Second Class? Fee hikes would put benefit behind civilian plans. 1% 45% Brand Name Non-Formulary R 13% I Current 69% I Proposed aising military pharmacy copayments by 100 percent to 400 percent, as recommended in the FY 2009 Defense budget proposal, would put military pharmacy benefits among the lower half of civilian plans, according to the HayGroup 2007 Benefits Prevalence Report. For generic drugs purchased in retail pharmacies, the defense budget proposes raising the beneficiary copayment from $3 to $15. According to HayGroup, 87 percent of civilian employer plans charge less than that for generic drugs, with almost 20 percent charging $5 or less. 32 MILITARY OFFICER APRIL 2008
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.