Senate approves sweeping Medicare changes

Sac Bee ^ | 11/25/03 | Mark Sherman - AP

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate gave final congressional approval Tuesday to the most sweeping changes to Medicare since its creation in 1965, including a new prescription drug benefit for 40 million older and disabled Americans. The 54-44 vote sends the bill to President Bush, who is eager to sign it into law.

[NormsRevenge]

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tenn., center, flanked by Sen. John Breaux, D-La., left, and Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., gestures during a Capitol Hill news conference on Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2003 after the Senate gave final approval to the most sweeping changes to Medicare since the program was created in 1965.

AP Photo/Terry Ashe

---

Medicare overhaul opponent Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., center, gestures during a Capitol Hill news conference on Tuesday, Nov. 25, 2003 after the Senate gave final congressional approval to sweeping changes to the program. With Kennedy are Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md.

AP Photo/Terry Ashe

[NormsRevenge]

Ping.

[TrueBeliever9]

Congress has truly come to believe that they work on "Capital Hill" instead of Capitol Hill.

[NittanyLion]

Nice line...I might have to use that if you don't mind...

[goldstategop]

The President is trying to coopt the Democrats issue and create another Richard Nixon landslide a la 1972...

[NormsRevenge]

LOL.. So the demRats ought to be running out of issues pretty soon then, I take it? ;-)

[Isolationist]

Only further proof that the GOP no longer represents conservative values.

[TrueBeliever9]

Feel free to label the Congress with the truth! The "Captial Hill Drugs for Seniors" gang knows that the money will roll back to their pockets!

I would like to see all those democratic senior citizens delivered from perscription drug addiction. But, alas, having worked at a major medical school, I know from whence the money flows - and it is perscription drugs. Senior citizens do not even see that they have been taken over by the pharmecutical companies that have them locked into addiction. Say NO to drugs! Say NO to Capital Hill drug enablers.

[Edit35]

I, for one, am happy the GOP passed this bill. Not only does it flummox the Democrats and leave them flapping their gums, it was also the compassionate thing to do, I believe.

It is voluntary, for one thing, and will cover the low income people who currently have no coverage.

Besides, most states already have a similar prescription plan already that covers a small portion of expensive medications, and I don't hear GOP conservatives or Democrats going ballistic over that.

And doesn't this bill also create medical savings accounts??

I'm really frustrated, hearing and reading all these rigid conservatives who say they would rather bolt to a third party rather than do the practical thing, and join colleagues and try and fix the things you don't like about the bill.

After all, it doesn't even take effect until 2006, and all I'm hearing on talk radio and even on FreepR is doom and gloomers who think the world has come to and end because of this bill.

Sheesh. What gives here.

[FirstPrinciple]

This isn't voluntary. Wait till employers drop prescription drugs package from retirement benefits and seniors will be forced on this plan. Wait till the next miracle drug comes out that every senior wants to much on. That will blow off the lid on the deductibles and make this program absolutely cost prohibitive. At that point there will be no choice but to bring in socialized medicine. This is step 1.

[kcar]

"Only further proof that the GOP no longer represents conservative values."

It seems that the Republicans have become Democrats and the Democrats have become Communist-Socialists. With the Democrats no longer a major national party, the Republicans will need to be challenged by a new political alliance, hopefully a Conservative Party. The ideas of Jeffersonian republicanism needs to be championed somewhere.

[NormsRevenge]

The Founding Fathers knew there would be days like this. (I don't know what that means, mind you, but..) ;-)

[Isolationist]

I agree whole heartily. I’m just amazed at the amount of people who call themselves "conservatives" and automatically supports anything that comes from the Republican Party regardless of it having any conserative principles.

This will eventually lead to mass backlash by true conservatives and you can only use "He’s a better candidate then what the Democrats are offering" because that line is starting to wear thin.

As to the Medicare reform… from what I read this sounds exactly like one of the initiatives that Hillary Clinton proposed during the time that she would "Save Medical Insurance for Americans". I thought it was a crappy idea then and just because it’s 10 years later and coming from the GOP it still doesn’t change the fact it’s still a crappy idea now.

[kcar]

Democrats are utterly unfit to rule. Right now, the Republican argument is dead-on. There really isn't a viable alternative choice as long as the traitorous Rats stand to gain from defection or abstention. A throw-away vote before 2004 would be dangerous - but when the dust settles a splinter may be needed, if only to continue the two-party system. Rats are crumbling as a counter-check.

[RobFromGa]

With the Democrats no longer a major national party

That's a bit strong I think. The Democrats are certainly going to move for the center at some point, and there are more people at the center than at the fringes.

What we need to make sure of is right-center government and keep working the population further right. We can accomplish this by doing things that work and improve people's lives. If you want to get there in one election cycle, you are bound to fail.

This is why I think that the Libertarians could do better as a part of the Republicans than as a stand-alone spoiler. Just my opinions, of course.

[Clintonfatigued]

There is good news and bad news. The good news is that the Republicans have outsmarted the 'Rats by taking the prescription drug issue off the table. The bad news is that the Republicans have outsmarted themselves by actually getting the bill passed. This is a bad, expensive bill, albeit with a few good features in it. Hopefully, the bad parts can be fixed after the 2004 election is over.

[NittanyLion]

I think there's an interesting subplot here, which is why I read your comment with great interest. I know many are predicting the pharma sector will benefit from this, but personally I expect the government to begin price setting and actually diminishing pharma companies' profit margins. In the long-term, I see this as a net loss for "Big Pharma".

I felt somewhat vindicated by the market today, which had pharma companies down about 1.1% - but I believe generic houses were up on the day. But I'm not sure if that's a response to this bill or something else. Do you have strong feelings either way? I'm genuinly interested in hearing more info on this...

(By way of disclosure, I work for a Top 10 Rx manufacturer.)

[ElCapitanAmerica]

[kcar]

Well I did get my elbow into it a bit. But apparently the whole scale has moved so far to the left that the "center" is unacceptably Big government, and the left is just outright worldwide socialism. And I am not sure the Democrats could find the center ever again. My hope is that odious party will fade away, and if so, a Conservative Party - not as a spoiler but as real player, could redefine the viable right-left political spectrum. At the current rate we'll be a collectivist member-state in a couple decades.

[NittanyLion]

Not only does it flummox the Democrats and leave them flapping their gums, it was also the compassionate thing to do, I believe.

I have a question for you. I'm a 25 year old new husband. I'm paying a mortgage as well as grad school for myself and my wife (we both work full time in addition to school). I have monthly bills to pay, although I don't have a new car because the monthly payments would be too expensive. Hopefully we'll soon start a family as well. We're basically a typical new couple trying to carve out a good life for our future family.

I'm very interested to hear, in your mind, why it's compassionate to take money from me and give it to someone else? Why do bureaucrats in DC get to decide that a senior citizen is more deserving of the money I've earned than my family and I?