The Corner

Bedtime for Benzos

There is a fascinating new story from ProPublica that tells us an awful lot about how government works.

Conservatives often rail against Medicare Part D, the Bush-era expansion of Medicare coverage that, among other things, helped finance prescription drugs for seniors. Yet when the program was first passed in 2003, Congress did put in a number of safeguards to contain spending. For one thing, Medicare was barred from financing a number of drugs that many state Medicaid programs excluded from coverage, including Valium, Xanax, Ativan, and other powerful prescription tranquilizers.

As it turns out, these tranquilizers are routinely abused, and they are particularly dangerous for older Americans, as they greatly increase the risk of serious falls and injuries. Given that Medicare pays when beneficiaries hurt themselves as a result of their reliance on these benzodiazepines (or “benzos,” as they’re also known), this strikes me as a perfectly reasonable stance to take. Of course, ProPublica reporters Charles Ornstein and Ryann Grochowski Jones suggest that there was no grand design behind this decision. Indeed, one of their interviewees, Andrew Sperling, head of federal legislative advocacy for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, believes that the decision to exclude benzos from coverage was a drafting error. That sounds about right. Can you imagine Congress deliberately protecting taxpayers from paying for prescription drugs that are very likely to harm their users?

We might not like federal meddling when it comes to the drugs we take, but of course Medicare wasn’t preventing doctors from writing prescriptions for benzos or patients from buying and taking them, provided they did so with their own money. Rather, the law simply held that if you were going to take benzos, well, you had to pay for them yourself.

But this accidental bout of sanity has come to an end. ProPublica reports that Congress eventually reversed its position, and 2013 was the first year in which Medicare Part D covered benzos. And in that one year alone, Medicare paid for 40 million prescriptions, at a cost of over $377 million. However, very few of these prescriptions were actually new prescriptions. Because benzos are relatively cheap (the most popular of them have been available in generic form for years), patients were quite happy to pay for them out of pocket. So the only thing that’s changed is that the federal government is now paying for these drugs. To be sure, there are seniors who can now use the money they might have otherwise spent on benzos on something else, and an extra $120 isn’t anything to scoff at for someone on a fixed income. It’s just not that clear that the federal government should be spending $120 per benzo user on paying for benzos rather than, say, some other intervention that might make them less likely to fall and injure themselves. Or could it be that we as a country are perfectly happy to medicate older Americans to death?

Part of me thinks that we shouldn’t blame Congress for this imbroglio. It was inevitable that medical providers, patients, and pharmaceutical companies would press for the federal government to pick up the tab for benzos. And besides, benzos are just a small part of America’s larger painkiller epidemic.​The deeper problem, I suspect, is that there are so many older Americans who are painfully isolated, which makes drugs that dull their pain very attractive. 

Reihan Salam — Reihan Salam is executive editor of National Review and a National Review Institute policy fellow.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More