How Federal Bureaucrats Undermine Health Care Choices for Seniors
This week, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published an editorial entitled “The Trouble With MedPAC.” The piece calls attention to a little-known government board that has an outsized impact on the health care of 35 million seniors. Right now in Washington, a board of seventeen unelected bureaucrats advises Congress on Medicare policy. Unfortunately, that group could be making suggestions that lead to cuts for 54% of all individuals in Medicare.
Seniors Matter for America (SMFA) is committed to advancing a conservative, pro-senior policy agenda. That is why SMFA supports Medicare Advantage (MA). If elected officials listen to bureaucrats instead of American seniors, it will mean deep cuts, less coverage for seniors, and fewer choices in Medicare. SMFA stands with seniors for greater choice and competition.
Medicare Advantage Grows in Popularity And Saves Money for Seniors
In recent years, more and more seniors are choosing to utilize Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, which offer more health care options for retirees. These plans are different from traditional Medicare because they allow seniors to supplement government spending and select from a wide array of private-market plans.
MA plans also save money for seniors. Out-of-pocket costs for seniors in Medicare Advantage are 19% - 24% lower than traditional Medicare. Not surprisingly, these MA plans are becoming more popular than standard Medicare because they offer extra benefits that are tailored to individual seniors’ needs.
In 2025, 54% of seniors in Medicare were using an MA plan instead of traditional Medicare. That adds up to more than 35 million Americans who prefer the choice, quality, and flexibility of MA to other options. Meanwhile, as the WSJ pointed out last week, there are elements inside the government trying to cut government support for these plans.
MedPAC Bureaucrats Lobby for Medicare Advantage Cuts and Against Choice
It's no wonder to see why a program that offers more choice and lower costs would be popular with seniors. Unfortunately, liberals in Washington see the growth of private MA plans as a threat to government-run Medicare programs. Federal bureaucrats are starting to notice the popularity of these MA plans and worry that their monopolies are in jeopardy.
This is the reason that an unelected board of payment advisory bureaucrats in Washington known as MedPAC is criticizing MA plans and overestimating their costs by using unrealistic assumptions and shaky estimates - all for the sake of making Medicare Advantage seem costly compared to the traditional, government-run Medicare programs that they favor. As the WSJ pointed out, “Progressives are now using a recent MedPAC report to push for bigger cuts in Medicare Advantage (MA) that would undermine that program’s demonstrated popularity.” Without the choice and savings that MA plans offer, seniors will be forced into one-size-fits all Medicare. That is what liberal government employees want.
MedPac is not a group elected by voters to write laws or make health care policy. The WSJ Editorial Board rightly called out these bureaucrats for what they are – liberals in the government trying to limit competition. Lawmakers should not let this group dictate cuts to a popular, free-market health care program.
Cuts to MA would mean higher prices for seniors. This would be in direct opposition to President Trump’s commitment to affordability. SMFA will stand with seniors and fight against bureaucrats to protect the freedom and choice offered by Medicare Advantage. Conservatives should fight for choice against liberal bureaucrats who promote substandard government-run health care.