Judge Dismisses Suit Brought by Plaintiffs Seeking to Opt Out of Medicare

U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer dismissed a suit brought by a group of men seeking to cease their Medicare Part A coverage. In an opinion [.pdf] issued today, Collyer wrote that while the plaintiffs, which include former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, had a point that they are caught in a bind – the statute dictates that they can only opt out of Medicare Part A by forfeiting all of their Social Security retirement benefits – the court did not find that the government is required to provide a different way out.

The plaintiffs are three men over age 65 who want to opt out of Medicare coverage, arguing in their complaint that Medicare Part A coverage is inferior because of budget constraints and that staying enrolled in Medicare Part A could put their private coverage at risk. They also claim that they are entitled to less privacy under Medicare Part A coverage.

In the complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the men claimed that the rules governing Social Security retirement benefits dictated that they could only pull out from Medicare coverage by forfeiting their Social Security benefits entirely. They argued that this statutory scheme is at odds with the Social Security Act and unconstitutional.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Social Security Administration were named as defendants. A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Justice declined to comment on Collyer's decision.

Frank Northam of Washington’s Webster Chamberlain & Bean represented the plaintiffs. He could not immediately be reached for comment.

Collyer wrote that she agreed the men are “trapped in a government program intended for their benefit,” but that the statutory scheme in question is legal, since the laws governing Medicare are clear that anyone entitled to Social Security retirement benefits is automatically enrolled in Medicare Part A when they turn 65.

“Requiring a mechanism for Plaintiffs and others in their situation to “disenroll” would be contrary to congressional intent, which was to provide “mandatory” benefits under Medicare Part A for those receiving Social Security Retirement benefits,” she wrote.

Updated at 7:25 p.m. to identify former House Majority Leader Dick Armey as one of the plaintiffs.

Comments

[Jan]

I am opting out of both A and B as I do not need either one. I live in Europe and dont need either so take my lousey social security and I still am the winner. If people could opt out easier there would be a landslide of us boomers ready to go so the government (Bill Clinton) tries to twist our arms so we stay but some of us dont have to. I am embarrassed to be an American. Thats forved on me too

[T. Conklin]

I am saddened by this ruling. I want to opt out of Medicare for a very good reason. I live outside the US for 10 months or more a year and it won't cover me at all! If I opt out, I can continue my eligibility for my Health Savings Account and continue to pay cash for my medical care here in France. This ruling sucks royally. Congress needs to fix this. I have pain into Medicare during my working years and simply want to leave without benefits. Is that so bad?

[Ken Phillips]

What if you don't join Medicare part A?

[Nancy Nonini]

In response to the question about VA coverage, a veteran eligible for health coverage benefits through the VA can defer Parts B and D. However, Part B will help cover the veteran if he/she has to be transported by ambulance or for any doctor fees while in a non-VA hospital, as in an emergency stay (before being transported to a VA facility). If you have VA drug coverage, you can refuse Part D coverage when you become eligible but take Part D coverage later and not be subject to the Part D premium penalty for late enrollment.

[Challa == Austin, TX]

Can an over 65 Veteran disenroll from Medicare part A and Part B (for which the Veteran pays for by deduction from his monthly Social Security Benefits)because he has just as good, if not better coverage through the VA? Why pay for Part B -- even Part D -- when he never uses them? Through the VA, he pays $8 co-pay for one month's supply of prescription medication, whereas with part D, not only does he pay much more than that as co-pay, but also pays for premiums to have part D.

[Jill Smith]

The "three men" -- isn't one of them Dick Armey, former Congressman?