Lott casts key vote to save Medicare bill he opposes

Associated Press ^ | 11-24-03 | MARK SHERMAN

[Oldeconomybuyer]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Cast aside as leader by his colleagues, Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., was the man Republicans needed Monday to clear the path to approving the Medicare prescription drug bill that he opposes.

At stake was not just the $395 billion bill, which Democrats were attempting to halt with procedural roadblocks, but also the political prestige of Lott's successor as Republican leader, Tennessee surgeon Bill Frist.

[rivercat]

You cut off your noses off to spite your face types are humorous.

Whoa, deja vu! I was on the other side of the pragmatism argument during the CA Recall voting. I voted for Arnold, realizing that he was better than Cruz. All I'm saying is that Bush is going crazy trying to out Democrat the Democrats with spending. We need to reign him in before it's too late.

[Republican Wildcat]

They'd have never submitted this bill.

If this bill had failed in the House, the liberal Republicans would have joined with the Democrats to get a discharge petition to bring up the original Senate bill. That's why many of the conservatives decided to vote for this one.

This is very risky...they seem to be counting on keeping control to make changes later. The margin in the Senate will have to increase (and most of them must not be of the Olympia Snowe cloth) in order for any future changes to be made. Social Security privatization is also badly needed. The pyramid is about to collapse.

[Republican Wildcat]

I also understand the bill sponsors a study to investigate why 6% of current beneficiaries account for 50% of the cost and how to get this under control.

Not sure what the result or the means to get there are, though.

[jrp]

I read somewhere the MSA provision doesn't kick in until 2010 and then only in a few selected cities. Does the Senate version differ - i.e. MSAs for all starting in 2004?
If so, that is good news, assuming it survives reconciliation with the House bill.

[Pukin Dog]

Social Security privatization is also badly needed. The pyramid is about to collapse.

Now, how long do you think it will take for some smart young congressman to propose a bill that would allow unused money from individual health accounts to go into personal retirement accounts? It could happen.

[Saundra Duffy]

Now if he'd just do something about that hair!

[what's up]

I don't know. The article below led me to think the MSA's were imminent; however, when I read the article no time frame is mentioned at all.

Click HERE

[MichiganConservative]

led me to think the MSA's were imminent

According to this, the MSA's are in limited areas in about 7 years.

Boortz

[WillRain]

I'm not willing to bash Lott when I have so much respect for Lindsey Graham. If he lacked priniple he should not have been so hard to sway given he's a lock for re-election no matter what he does.

I'm NOT a big Lott backer, he has disapointed me often, but I'll let this go.

It's nice to see though, who the Pubbies are who want to be Democrat-lite instead of men of principle. I think all of us will note will who votes for passage of this bill in both the House and the Senate.

Time to seperate the men from the boys.

[what's up]

Maybe I read the article too fast, or maybe I just missed something, but I did not see the MSA's referenced. Could you post the reference if you have a chance?

[Lurker]

Yes, it can.

L

[Lurker]

And you 'vote for Pubbies no matter what they do' types are even scarier than the Dems.

This bill is going to suck trillions of dollars out of the Federal Budget that could be going for defense.

As I said before, I never thought I'd see the day that you would be in favor of a 'free drugs for everybody' bill. But, you've never really impressed me with your intellect, so I guess I shouldn't be suprised.

L

[MichiganConservative]

I think this is what Boortz was saying about the reforms: "Democrats wanted to filibuster this bill – not because they opposed the drug benefit, but because there were some weak-as-a-kitten proposals for private-sector competition in a limited number of cities about seven years from now."

It does not mention MSAs specifically, but it does fit in with someone's earlier comment that they thought the MSAs were to take effect in 2010.

[what's up]

I don't think this refers to MSA's; I believe Boortz is referring to the provision that allows private insurance companies to compete directly with Medicare in select cities in 7 years. (And by the way, IMO this is also an excellent proposal.)

I would like a definitive statement about the timeframe of the MSA's being put into effect...I'm hoping it's immediate!

[luckydevi]

You can spin this all day long. There is a reason why every conservative think tank was against the bill.

"This bill will add at least $400 billion in deficits over the coming decade. Worse, (the) AARP and others have made it quite clear that they see this bill as just the opening gambit. They will be back, year after year, petitioning Congress to massively expand this already oversized new entitlement. Hillary Clinton's wish for ever-increasing government control over the American health care system will come true"
--Dick Armey

AND IT WILL BE DONE BY REPUBLICANS

[luckydevi]

Hell no

[NittanyLion]

Can either of you provide some info on the Club for Growth? I've only heard the name...

[NittanyLion]

My understanding is that MSAs will become available in 2010. In limited areas. I think ultimately MSAs are the way healthcare will need to go (so that people can raise their deductibles as money is saved), but IMO getting them in exchange for a $400 billion entitlement program is hardly worth it. We likely could've fought for and obtained MSAs period - in exchange for nothing.

[NittanyLion]

I went back and checked the bill, and it looks as though MSAs will be implemented at the same time as the bill. Only the competition piece is held off until 2010.

[Uncle Miltie]

Club for Growth is Steven Moore's organization, primarily funding conservative challengers to incumbent RINOs to remove them or scare them straight. It also funds conservatives against liberals in competitive races only. It is focused on Congress. It is a fiscally conservative shop, and does not make distinctions or judgments on social policy. They have had great success focusing big money on a very few races that can tip the scales.

Steven Moore is a former CATO top guy, so you have the libertarian flavor of fiscal conservatism. Many other straight conservatives are on the board. Located at: www.clubforgrowth.com

I like those guys a lot, and I've contributed in the past. I'm always looking for the most effective vehicle for conservatism that I can fund. I think they are it, unless someone can point me in a better direction.