HOUSE PASSES MEDICARE DRUG BILL

fox news ^ | Nov 23, 2003

[RobFromGa]

WASHINGTON

[OldFriend]

Oh, I see.

9/11 is a mere diversion from YOUR truth.

[Consort]

You lost.

[NittanyLion]

Let me ask you both a straightforward question: is conservatism a winning ideology? If we embrace conservative ideals at all times, will the outcome of our policies be successful and win liberals/undecideds to the conservative side?

If you truly believe the answer is "Yes", why are you working against conservatism?

[Consort]

...is conservatism a winning ideology?

Not if it's dominated by a bunch of "do it my way or no way" "Ideologically Correct" "dog-in-the-manger" purists who put ideology over country, party, and common sense.

If we embrace conservative ideals at all times, will the outcome of our policies be successful and win liberals/undecideds to the conservative side?

Not if the whackos scare them away.

...why are you working against conservatism?

I hope you now have a better understanding how misguided your question is and just who working against conservatism.

[KZele]

Can anyone tell me where I can read the medicare bill online?
Thank you.

[NittanyLion]

LOL. IOW, conservatives can't afford to be influenced by those purist "wackos" who believe $400 billion government programs are wrong. I read you loud and clear...

[Consort]

On C-SPAN2 last night, Republican Senators, in particular Senators Grassley and Murkowski gave an extensive descriptions of the prescription drug bill in response to misinformation spewed by the Democrats. The debates in both houses have gone in depth on the bill. I watched much of it. I doubt that the conference report will be available on line until a final bill is written, but I'm not sure.

[Consort]

...conservatives can't afford to be influenced by those purist "wackos" who believe $400 billion government programs are wrong.

That is correct. They can't afford that. So start paying attention to only the level-headed conservatives who oppose government spending and tune out the weirdos.

I read you loud and clear...

No you don't, as your next posts will show.

[Consort]

The info you want may be here.

[snopercod]

Discretionary spending up 25% under G.W.B.

[nonliberal]

I am ashamed to be a Republican.

[NittanyLion]

So start paying attention to only the level-headed conservatives who oppose government spending and tune out the weirdos.

Already done. Take Paul Gigot, for example. He agrees with my position...is he a weirdo in your book?

[dsc]

"Poverty won is because it became very lucrative never to work. You could have a home provided for you, all the food you could hope to eat, free electricity, free heat, free telephone, free clothes, free health care and much more if you never chose to work. Now the indigents of the third world have caught on to that idea and they're coming on over."

Yes, that's the way I see it.

[AmericaUnited]

Have you looked at electoral data from the US? Most elections are close and fairly evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. And the trend over the last dozen or so elections as been toward even closer elections.

I'm not sure you understand what you just said. With elections that close, tell me how a POTUS can take all hardline conservative positions and get elected or re-elected. HE CAN NOT! Only certain delusional people think otherwise.

[AmericaUnited]

See #214 above.

Now please tell everyone how a Republican POTUS can take all hardline conservative positions and get elected or re-elected. Wait, I know... its better watch from the sidelines powerless as the left destroys the country. At least you can have a smug look on your face and claim that you had nothing to do with any of it.

[bonesmccoy]

The idiots yelling about opposition to this bill are just that... IDIOTS!

The bill takes gigantic leaps to reel the line in on liberal democratic controls over healthcare.

I never thought I would live to see a day when Ted Kennedy would be so beguiling as to entice conservatives with his rhetoric.

TONIGHT takes the cake!

[AmericaUnited]

I am considering some of those thoughts. If a 50,000 ton freight train is barreling down the tracks, you can either try to stop it and get smashed or divert it onto a track more to your liking.

[NittanyLion]

Now please tell everyone how a Republican POTUS can take all hardline conservative positions and get elected or re-elected.

Hardline conservative? This bill is liberal. I expect that, at a minimum, a conservative will not advance the cause of liberalism. When a conservative remedy is not available, a conservative will choose nothing over the antithesis of their principles.

[Peach]

I encourage all to read this article carefully, especially the 10th paragraph, where the Kaiser foundation permits one to calculate their cost benefit analysis under the proposed bill (which stinks):



Article Last Updated: Sunday, November 23, 2003 - 7:25:08 AM PST


Not much of a benefit
THE latest version of the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003 was announced last weekend in Washington by the Medicare conference committee.

Supporters from organizations such as AARP see it as a compromise that would provide coverage to people with low incomes and relief to those with high drug costs.

However, a poll last week by Hart Research showed that 65 percent of AARP members want Congress to go back to the drawing board. Many members of Congress already have canceled their membership in AARP, and some grassroots organizations such as Moveon.org advocate mass membership cancellations.

Opponents, such as the Alliance for Retired Americans, are mobilizing their members to take action. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, called the overhaul "a cruel hoax that dismantles Medicare and does not provide seniors an affordable, defined, guaranteed Medicare prescription benefit."

This proposed largest overhaul in Medicare's history would have a huge impact on current beneficiaries and baby boomers for years to come. The administration is aiming for quick passage. Advocacy organizations have asked Congress to give consumers adequate time to study the roughly 1,000-page proposal.

According to a Consumers Union analysis, the proposal "not only falls embarrassingly short of giving seniors a real drug benefit, it likely will threaten Medicare's viability." The analysis finds:

The funds set aside for the drug benefit cover only 22 percent of expected costs, leaving consumers to pay the rest of the bill.

The plan takes a big step toward unregulated privatization by requiring competition between private health plans and Medicare while subsidizing the private health plans and allowing them to select the healthiest beneficiaries.

Private benefit managers determine which drugs are included in private plans. These decisions will have no transparency, methodology or public accountability.

The plan, which would not take effect until 2006, actually prohibits the government from negotiating deep prescription drug discounts for consumers. If drug costs continue their historical rates of increase, the average Medicare recipient paying $2,318 in 2003 without coverage will pay $2,911 out-of-pocket in 2007 with coverage. To calculate your drug costs under the plan, visit the Kaiser Family Foundation Web site at www.kaisernetwork.org/static/kncalc.cfm

Information provided by Rep. Pete Stark's office warns his East Bay constituents that:

The bill, if passed, will leave 2 to 3 million retirees without employer-provided prescription drug coverage; will leave up to 6 million of the poorest Medicare beneficiaries with less drug coverage than they have now; and will saddle millions of seniors with rising Medicare premiums if they refuse to join an HMO.

A cost containment provision would create a so-called "crisis" when an arbitrary cap on general revenue funding is reached, which would be used to advance radical cuts to the program, including benefit cuts.

Drug importation would be permitted only from Canada, and only if the U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary certifies that no safety risk exists.

Hopefully, Congress has not taken a vote before publication of this column and before you have had an opportunity to make your opinion known to legislators.

Visit the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities' Web site at www.cbpp.org; call your local Congressional office; contact AARP, www.aarp.org or (800) 424-3410; or the Alliance for Retired Americans, www.retiredamericans.org, (888) 373-6497.

Sandra J. Cohen, R.N., and Roger Cormier are consultants who help East Bay families plan and coordinate care of an older relative at home or in a care facility. Reach them at (510) 652-3377 or (925) 945-8855 or e-mail go@eldercaremanagers.com or visit www.ElderCareManagers.com

[Peach]

Here's the link to that article:

http://www.timesstar.com/Stories/0,1413,125~1549~1786421,00.html