Most likely, since the two actions took place in the same month.
You have to remember though, that Bob Kerrey was just a kid from Lincoln Nebraska with a pharmacy degree, at the time, not a locally well know businessman and politician, let alone a nationally known figure. Actually, he's Joesph R. Kerrey, which surprised me the first time I saw the plaque in the Nebraska state capital, since I'd met "Bob" over 15 years earlier, and had some degree of contact in the intervening years, although none since then, but never knew he was "Joeseph R.".
Perhaps so, but the point of the article is that the Navy decided that a Commissioned Officer instead of the Enlisted Man was more deserving. I don't know if Kerrey was deserving, but he has my admiration for his service none the less. The man lost a limb! But Kerrey benefited from that recognition in his career outside the military.
The thrust here is that the enlisted man deserved the same award, not that Kerrey didn't. The enlisted man spent the rest of his career in the military. With that MOH while in the military, his recognition would have been nothing more than great respect from all who met him, officers and enlisted men, not a seat in the US Senate and great wealth to follow as a result.
Yet he did not receive the award because he was just an Enlisted Man and the Navy had an officer in the cue at the same time.
If those are the facts here, it's nothing against Kerrey. It's just another example of the military bureaucrats doing what they do best... screwing enlisted men.