As people age, managing multiple medications often becomes a reality. For retired state employees like Kathy Miller and her husband, their medicine cabinet is overflowing with pill bottles aimed at maintaining their health, “Some of them would put him in the hospital if he didn’t take these drugs,” Miller told FOX45.
However, the couple is facing a difficult decision that could jeopardize their access to certain medications – a move not recommended by doctors but driven by cost-cutting measures from the state of Maryland..
Earlier this year, thousands of retired state workers received letters informing them of pending changes to their prescription drug plan. Those who qualify will be transitioned from state benefits to Medicare Part D coverage, a cost-saving strategy for Maryland’s government.
Miller fears the changes could come at the expense of retirees’ well-being. “The medication that’s going to cost me the most is a medication for peripheral neuropathy,” she explains to FOX45. “That medication is going to cost more than $2,700. So, I wonder, can we cut this out?”
Under the state’s current coverage, Miller and her husband are on a single plan. Last year, they paid $824 for all their medications. With Medicare, they’d be forced onto separate plans, facing two premiums and higher drug costs – an estimated $4,700 for the same prescriptions.
“I don’t think it’s fair for the state to do this,” Miller says. “We’re retired, we don’t have time to save up for this.”
The changes, originally passed in a 2011 pension reform bill, were long-delayed due to a lawsuit from retirees arguing the law broke previous contracts. However, a federal appeals court recently overturned a ruling that had allowed retirees to keep their original plans during litigation.
Despite last-minute efforts by Republican lawmakers to restore the previous plan through bills this legislative session, both failed to advance due to a lack of Democratic support.
Political analyst John Dedie criticizes the inaction, suggesting it jeopardizes vulnerable retirees – a group known for high voter turnout. “The problem is the state employees were promised ‘you stay with us when you retire, you’ll have this wonderful benefit package,’” Dedie states.
The governor’s office denies any such promise was made, citing the court’s finding of no contractual agreement. However, Miller claims to have emailed Governor Wes Moore at least 20 times expressing concerns but received no response, despite his pledge to “leave no one behind.”
As the changes loom in 2025, retirees like the Millers face difficult choices about compromising their healthcare or bearing significant cost increases, leaving them feeling abandoned by the state they dedicated their careers to serving.