Is it just a propaganda offensive from drug companies and their GOP allies, or is the prescription-drug benefit actually working?

Is it possible that the Medicare prescription-drug program has been a success?

According to yesterday's Washington Post ("Success of Drug Plan Challenges Democrats; Medicare Benefit's Cost Beat Estimates"), it "has proven cheaper and more popular than anyone imagined."

It's not entirely surprising to learn that "drug-company lobbyists, Bush administration officials and many congressional Republicans are preparing to block any effort to increase federal control over drug prices, saying the Medicare benefit is working well."

Already this sounds suspicious, though, because "increase federal control over drug prices" is lobbyist-speak for what most of us would describe as "try to alter the prohibition in the drug-benefit enabling legislation which explicitly banned the government from attempting to negotiate lower drug prices." You do have to wonder--even though you know of course that Washington Post editors and reporters would never, ever let themselves be used as propagandists for the administration and its private-sector partners in the drug and insurance industries.

However, Lori Montgomery and Christopher Lee do report:

Polls indicate that more than 80 percent of enrollees are satisfied, even though nearly half chose plans with no coverage in the doughnut hole, a gap that opens when a senior's drug costs reach $2,250 and closes when out-of-pocket expenses reach $3,600. By the latest estimates, 3 million to 4 million seniors will hit the doughnut hole this year and pay full price for drugs while also paying drug-plan premiums.

The cost of the program has been lower than expected, about $26 billion in 2006, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The cost was projected to rise to $45 billion next year, but Medicare has received new bids indicating that its average per-person subsidy could drop by 15 percent in 2007, to $79.90 a month.

Urban Institute President Robert D. Reischauer, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, called that a remarkable record for a new federal program.

As someone who has written on a number of occasions that the program was a scam being perpetrated on senior citizens for the benefit of the drug and insurance companies (who certainly seem to be making out like bandits from it), I would love to know if I've been wrong. I admit that I'm unrepentantly suspicious, since it doesn't seem logical that everyone involved is coming out ahead financially and the cost is lower than anyone anticipated. If it is true, I'm inclined to think that it goes beyond good news into the realm of the miraculous.

In which case, I guess we should all shout "Hallelujah!" But first, could we have some independent verification? Believe it or not, this would not be the first time that the Bush administration has used the strategy of getting its story out first, even though the story turns out to be a pack of lies. By my count, it would be closer to, uh, the zillionth time. And I'm embarrassed to have to point out that on a fair number of those occasions, the Washington Post indeed has lent its news space to the propaganda campaign.

Perhaps Mr. Krugman, whose interest in the Medicare prescription-drug benefit is well-established, will be looking into it?