HOUSE PASSES MEDICARE DRUG BILL

fox news ^ | Nov 23, 2003

[RobFromGa]

WASHINGTON

[CMClay]

Republicrats and the Democracons,
take your pick.
...Jeez, the Libertarians aren't looking so looney now. :(

[CWOJackson]

But it sounds so much better for the unappeasables.

[FRgal4u]

I am split with this bill

I don't like the cost and absolutely do not like the "potential costs"..

I don't like the lack of private options in the Bill (a test in 2010 is just too lame for my taste)

but..

I like the increase fundings in the poorest or the poor
increase fundings in the rural regions
and absolutely like to see the dims going nuts about AARP desserting them

for 2004 - it may/mayhelp the prez's election -

if the economy is good with steady jobs creation (wich i think it will) plus Iraq getting better (which I think it will), Bush maynot need the Medicare Bill at all - one thing for certain, no matter how hard the dems will argue about the contents of the bill, next april, every seniors will get a card and get immediate 15% or so in drug discounts, and he can run around the country and say, look "I get you this discount", the dems will be in the pickle jar...

as for filibuster in the senate, I heard somewhere that Dasshole will not support the move - I know Ken Conrad is for the Bill (from North Dakota), maybe there are more than 60 votes in the senate for the bill, thus making filibuster a moot pt.

If the Bill is passed, the only strategy the dims can play is look, there are this and that in the bill and you may not like it, but heck, we will fix it for you, and the Republicans won't...but this is a far cry to implement the fullblown dims sponsored free-for-all bill and use that as the #1 issue in 04 should the economy and iraq is sorta off the table...

[petercooper]

The Democrats will grumble and complain that this is the best they can do, and it's better than nothing. They'll tell seniors that had they been in power this bill would be far larger, and blame the GOP for their stinginess. We'll have zero political benefit from this, because the Dems will always promise to outspend the GOP. But a little more money will be stolen from me every paycheck, thanks to the Republican Party.

Exactly right. This is a sad day for conservatives. Granny should pay for her own damn drugs!

[Wait4Truth]

I checked over at DU...they are furious because Bush will get credit for giving seniors prescription drugs. That makes me happy. I think this passage is a win for Bush even though we have a few disgruntled conservatives here. Bush delivered to seniors...clinton didn't. Period.

[CWOJackson]

Exactly.

I think a lot of people have mixed feelings over this bill. I don't like new government programs but I also wonder what affect this will have on drug costs across the board? That could have a net good impact so I'll have to wait and see on that.

At the same time, I realize a senior prescription drug bill was going to happen sooner or later anyway. I have no doubt that this one will be easier to take then the alternative...and as you say, this is driving the dems crazy.

[AmericaUnited]

When Republicans expand socialism, what does it matter who controls the House? When Republicans steal freedom or property, what does it matter who controls the House?

If this becomes law, I will not be voting for Republicans or Democrats.

Well I remember when Reagan (the greatest POTUS in my lifetime) was criticized again and gain by the perpetual whiner conservative class while he was in office.

Reagan was for big government because he didn't abolish one agency and even expanded some.

Reagan was a closet one worlder who packed his cabinet with same. stole freedom by the of the banking laws passed.

Reagan stole freedoms/liberties by signing certain banking secrecy laws and issuing certain executive orders.

Reagan was a socialist because of the big spending/deficits.

Etc, etc., whine, whine, whine.

The same losers who now call themselves things like "Reagan Renaissance" or "Regan Man", were the very same ones promising not to vote for Reagan the different reasons mentioned above.

[RJCogburn]

Since not one in a hundred here on FR has read the bill and knows many of the details (including me)

That can almost certainly apply to most members of Congress.

It has been described as one of the biggest expansions of government in decades in other reports posted here. It is a $400BILLION thingy.

What more do you need to know before you relinquish those reservations?

[Wait4Truth]

Nancy Pelosi threatened her RATS bigtime. It was hillarious. Unfortunately for her, 16 of them voted with the Republicans. The other day, Gephardt made the most telling comment. He said, "It's a Republican bill - therefore, it's a bad bill." That says it all.

The AARP said 1000 members had cancelled their memeberships. Out of 35 million, that's peanuts. President Bush just took the sacred cow away from the RATS...you gotta love it.

[CPT Clay]

Do you think the 6 or so pubbie senators that will fillibuster will give dems enough cover for '04?

[NittanyLion]

I checked over at DU...they are furious because Bush will get credit for giving seniors prescription drugs. That makes me happy. I think this passage is a win for Bush even though we have a few disgruntled conservatives here. Bush delivered to seniors...clinton didn't. Period.

Do you fully understand the consequences of this? Seniors who currently have coverage may very likely end up with worse coverage than they currently enjoy. Profit margins of pharma companies will be negatively impacted, and as a result less money will be available to reinvest in R&D. Major long-term damage to pharmaceutical innovation will be the legacy of this bill. (Not to mention more income redistribution)

And will this help the GOP? The Democrats will continue to promise seniors more benefits should they be elected - they'll always outspend the GOP. It's not a foregone conclusion that this will gain any votes for the GOP.

I'm astonished that folks like yourself can be "happy" over this bill. At what point does real-world impact outweigh potential short-term political benefit? Who cares if the folks at DU are unhappy - they're too stupid to understand the import of this bill anyway, and are merely upset that "their side" lost. For the same reason you're happy that "your side" won. But this isn't a game, you know.

[StriperSniper]

The AARP said 1000 members had cancelled their memeberships.

I think every one has called C-SPAN in the last two days. ;-)

(And half of them 'were' Republicans until this bill, uh huh.)

[CWOJackson]

I was just listening to one of our local U.S. Representatives (Jim McDermott, D-Washington) on the radio. He is outraged. According to him, and I assume he has read most of the text, this bill leads into privatization. Gasp!

[Wait4Truth]

The ones that cancelled were the screaming liberal types. DU had some kind of a campaign going on regarding that. It was too funny. If all they could muster was 1000 cancellations, most seniors in the rest of the 35 million must be ok with this bill.

[StriperSniper]

Frist is doing a Presser right now on C-SPAN.

[Wait4Truth]

RATS: "The Republicans are destroying Medicare by giving prescription drugs to seniors"...does anyone really think that is going to play with the general public?

[Wait4Truth]

Thanks!

[StriperSniper]

Oh well, over. I had just turned off 'Big Game Fishing The World' on ESPN and found it. ;-)

Durbin on C-SPAN2 now lying with the 'wither on the vine' line again.

[BlazingArizona]

As I have noted elsewhere, even the loyal Bushbots seem absent in the rationalizations on this monstrosity.

This bill is a perfect example of why I am not a Republican. Congress could have given the people a real savings on medication without spending any public money by legalizing imported drugs. But no - better to socialize another huge chunk ofthe economy than p*ss off an important source of campaign cash.

[StriperSniper]

Durbin demonizing HMOs, that creation of the Swimmer.