GOP Prescription Drug Bill Passes

AP ^ | JUNE 28 | DAVID ESPO

[mykdsmom]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans pushed Medicare prescription drug legislation through a weary House early Friday, rejecting Democratic claims the bill was an election-year gimmick that would do little to help senior citizens.

The 221-208 vote fell largely along party lines, and sent the measure to an uncertain fate in the Senate.

``This bill is a giant step forward for seniors in America,'' said Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn. ``This is the greatest leap forward for women in health care since the founding of Medicare.''

In a debate that stretched well past midnight, Democrats countered the legislation marked the latest in a long string of GOP attacks on a program created in 1965. ``There's no assured benefits and there's no set premiums because the Republicans are privatizing Medicare,'' said Rep. James McDermott, D-Wash. ``They are giving this whole benefit to the private insurance companies.''

The legislation provides $320 billion over the next decade to establish a system of Medicare prescription drug coverage through the private insurance industry. The program would begin in 2005.

Costs would be heavily subsidized for low-income Medicare beneficiaries. Under a typical plan, others would pay a monthly premium of roughly $33 and an annual deductible of about $250.

The government would pay 80 percent of the next $1,000 of drug costs and 50 percent of the subsequent $1,000.

All beneficiaries — low-income included — would have to pick up the tab beyond that, until they reached $3,700 in out-of-pocket expenses, at which time all additional costs would be covered.

The measure also provides billions of dollars in increased Medicare payments to hospitals, doctors and nursing facilities.

Democrats said the Republican bill was more loophole than coverage — focusing principally on the gap between $2,000 and $3,700.

``They are so intent on trickery and deception and illusion,'' Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri said of the Republicans.

``They are so interested in politics and the next election rather than doing simply what is right for the American people,'' the Democratic leader added at a news conference hours before the debate began.

Democrats prepared a far more costly alternative that would offer a new government-run prescription drug benefit under Medicare. It included a $25 monthly premium, a $100 deductible and no gap in coverage.

Cost estimates ranged from $800 billion to $1 trillion or more for the plan, but no official figures were available.

Republicans expressed confidence they would prevail, as they have on a series of their priorities over the past 18 months. ``We haven't failed yet,'' Thomas told reporters, even though the GOP has the narrowest House majority either party has possessed in decades.

Passage would send the measure to the Senate, where prospects for enactment were clouded.

The House vote was prelude to an election-year battle on an issue of paramount concern to senior citizens, a group that votes in disproportionately large numbers in midterm elections.

Republican strategists said passage of the bill through the House would help their candidates blunt the inevitable Democratic campaign commercial attacks. Polling shows that Democrats are heavily favored over Republicans in their handling of the issue — 48 percent to 31 percent in one private GOP poll.

But if the 2000 campaign is any guide, Republicans will be ready with their own commercials, trumpeting passage of a plan offering prescription drug coverage to 39 million Americans on Medicare.

Democrats argued that the GOP measure, as written, would mean huge profits for the pharmaceutical industry and would lead the way to privatizing the health care program established in 1965.

There was little doubt that the drug industry favored the measure. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the industry's trade group, has spent millions of dollars helping finance television commercials in scattered locations to support the measure. Republicans said their approach would give senior citizens access to prescription drug coverage through the private insurance market. They circulated an estimate from the Congressional Budget Office that 89 percent of all beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare would participate in the prescription drug program. Another 7 percent of all beneficiaries have other coverage, the CBO said.

In the run-up to the vote, GOP leaders sought to win the support of several Republicans seeking changes or additions to the measure.

Some conservatives objected to the creation of a new government benefit program that was guaranteed for all seniors, while others objected to the price tag.

Others sought inclusion of provisions to bring down the cost of prescription drugs, such as importation of U.S.-made pharmaceuticals sold more cheaply abroad and revised patent rules to make low-cost generic drugs more available.

[brat]

``They are so intent on trickery and deception and illusion,'' Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri said of the Republicans"

Do you believe this? BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHA! I really don't know how they say these things with a straight face!

[Humidston]

``This bill is a giant step forward for seniors in America,'' said Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn. ``This is the greatest leap forward for women in health care since the founding of Medicare.''

Man, I get sooo sick of Republicans tooting the liberal horn and jumping on the bandwagon toward socialism!!

[Timesink]

To paraphrase FDR, "The only thing they have to offer is ... FEAR ITSELF!"

[Lancey Howard]

This is exactly the kind of issue that demonstrates why it is so difficult for Republicans to win and keep the House. The rats contrive some phony issue or another with some welfare-style "solution"; then the Republicans feel heat because the scumbag liberal newsrooms are geared up to call Republicans stingy and "for the rich" and "against the poor" and so on. So the Republicans seize the issue, reluctantly, and proceed to fashion a fiscally responsible (at least, as "fiscally responsible" as you can be when fashioning a new welfare-state program) "solution". The Democrats, in the minority and with absolutely nothing to lose, counter with their own typical, mind-numbingly costly, "Wheeee..!-It's-Christmas-Every-Day!" proposal designed to still make the Republicans look stingy and "not doing enough". And the scumbag liberal newsrooms are right there to help their Democrats make the strategy work.

[Sabertooth]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans pushed Medicare prescription drug legislation through a weary House early Friday, rejecting Democratic claims the bill was an election-year gimmick that would do little to help senior citizens.

...In a debate that stretched well past midnight, Democrats countered the legislation marked the latest in a long string of GOP attacks on a program created in 1965. ``There's no assured benefits and there's no set premiums because the Republicans are privatizing Medicare,'' said Rep. James McDermott, D-Wash. ``They are giving this whole benefit to the private insurance companies.''

...The legislation provides $320 billion over the next decade to establish a system of Medicare prescription drug coverage through the private insurance industry. The program would begin in 2005.

...The measure also provides billions of dollars in increased Medicare payments to hospitals, doctors and nursing facilities.

...Democrats prepared a far more costly alternative that would offer a new government-run prescription drug benefit under Medicare. It included a $25 monthly premium, a $100 deductible and no gap in coverage.

Cost estimates ranged from $800 billion to $1 trillion or more for the plan, but no official figures were available.

So what we have here is $320 billion in new spending on a prescription drug program for seniors. Despite the fact that there is no true Constitutional authority for such a program, this is the price tag for President Bush to keep the "me too" pandering promise he made to counter Al Gore's prescription drug program in the 2000 election.

$320 billion.

If Campaign Finance Reform is upheld by the Supreme Court, will this type of voteer whoremongering from the public coffers still be legal?

And if not, will it be effective?

The GOP puts up $320 billion, and the Democrats call their pander-piker bluff, and up the ante to $1 trillion. Gee, of the seniors whose votes are for sale, to which party will they whore themselves out?

So much for out-pandering the Democrats... all we've done is set the table for them to expand a huge, new, tax-sucking largesse.

Thus ends this latest lesson in "Taking the Democrat's issues AWAY from them™."

[Sabertooth]

This is exactly the kind of issue that demonstrates why it is so difficult for Republicans to win and keep the House.

As I was warned earlier today, "You're either with us or against us."

Just keep saying, "Bush is a GENIUS!™" or "When we take back the SENATE!™"

I feel better just posting it.

[RJCogburn]

Democratic claims the bill was an election-year gimmick

The dems are correct. The dems' bill is worse, but the repubs are phonies here, too.

[rhombus]

Democratic claims the bill was an election-year gimmick The dems are correct. The dems' bill is worse, but the repubs are phonies here, too.

Don't tell us, tell a bunch of frightened, voting seniors.

[Go Gordon]

Democrats prepared a far more costly alternative that would offer a new government-run prescription drug benefit under Medicare. It included a $25 monthly premium, a $100 deductible and no gap in coverage......and

``They are so interested in politics and the next election rather than doing simply what is right for the American people,'' the Democratic leader added at a news conference hours before the debate began.

Once, just once, I'd love to see some pubbie hold a major league press conference and announce that he is crafting new legislation that would provide prescription drugs to every US citizen for free. Then announce that the cost of the program would be roughly $1 TRILLION a year.

Pubbie: "If anyone is against this plan, it is because they are partisan politicians only interested in the next election. Now, does anyone have any questions?"

Reporter: "A trillion dollars a year sounds pretty expensive, how can we afford it?"

Pubbie: "Oh, we can't afford it. It would bankrupt the government in less than 6 months, but at least you can get free drugs. Thats why I'm also proposing a PROGRESSIVE change in the fundamental tax structure. It will also mean we can do away with our silly old tax code. And the best part, is you don't need to file a tax return. You see, instead of you getting a paycheck each week, everyone's entire salary is sent to us here in Washington. Once a month, we'll send you a check equal to what we think you should get based on the size of your family."

Liberal Reporterette: "How long will this take to implement?"

Pubbie: "Do you know John McEnroe?"

[Guillermo]

Whatever the cost estimates are now, quadruple them and you may possibly be approaching the true figure.

I'm glad the GOP is leading the charge against Socialism.

Problem is, people always want something for nothing, so when the Democrats say "Let's start paying for ______" the GOP has no choice but to come up with a plan of thier own. Either way, it's socialism.

[Linda Liberty]

Now that we have sequenced the genome and are coming to understand life in some detail, it will be possible sometime in this century, possibly within 20 years, to cure not only cancer but old age. Once that happens people will be able to live several hundred years before dying from accident or violence (and no doubt further efforts would then be made to lower accident rates).

IMO its a really interesting question whether this will happen during my lifetime, or too late for me, because frankly I don't want to die any time soon and getting old sucks too.

If congress passes a prescription drug benefit, within 5 years they will be legislating how much they will pay for drugs, and basically refusing to cover the research expense on new drugs, and much of the research will then simply dry up. This will quite literally be a death sentence for everybody reading this.

[Redbob]

Somebody explain to me again why I should pay for someone else's drugs?

Oh, right: It's that "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," thing.

[Redbob]

In some corner of Hell, Karl Marx is laughing at Denny Hastert - and preparing a comfy seat for him.

[fogarty]

"The legislation provides $320 billion over the next decade to establish a system of Medicare prescription drug coverage through the private insurance industry. "

A billion here, a hundred billion there....pretty soon you're talking real money. (/sarcasm) So glad the GOP and Bush are cutting back on unnecessary spending....

[Teacher317]

From another thread:

Let's see:

• GWB : 74%
• War going well. Can't attack him there.
• Q1 GDP = 6.1% growth.
• Pledge of Allegiance flap = good for Republicans.
• Leading Pres. candidate John Kerry looked pathetic on MTP Sunday.
• SCOTUS says school vouchers constitutional.
• GWB launches new Middle East initive based on free elections. Widely praised.
  
• Jews heading towards Republican party.
• DemocRat issues overshadowed by war.

It was really going well for a few days there... I'd be tempted to give this one a "pass", but I have to wonder why we are passing EVERY Lefty issue so that "they'll have nothing to run on". Isn't the GOP willing to take a stand against them on anything??? If we can't say that a $320, 000, 000, 000 handout for a single small Socialist program is too much, then when will we say it?

[JohnGalt]

Another hand-out to the alleged greatest generation...what a joke.

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

What's next? Will the rest of us be forced to pay the seniors car insurance?

It's the relatives and children of the seniors that should be helping them out, not the taxpayers.

[Sabertooth]

(((ping))))

[ppaul]

GOP RINO Prescription Drug Bill Passes