Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Urges Congress to Deliver on Prescription Drugs for Medicare
Fox News / AP ^ | May 18, 2002 | By Ken Guggenheim

Posted on 05/18/2002 7:17:29 PM PDT by Uncle Bill

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:33:32 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]


(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: bush; frlibrarians; medicare; prescriptiondrugs; socialist; socializedmedicine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 05/18/2002 7:17:30 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sarcasm; RLK

Aid flows to illegal Aliens

Hospital Bankruptcies Seen Rising

2 posted on 05/18/2002 7:35:01 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Askel5

3 posted on 05/18/2002 7:39:04 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: *Socialized Medicine;*FR Librarians

4 posted on 05/18/2002 7:53:52 PM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
Why don't you go back to DU, basher!

He's soooo brilliant! Can't you see, by being a socialist, he's beating the democrats at their own game! Then eventually, he'll turn around and spank them!

There's not a day that goes by that I don't thank God George Bush is our President!

Hey everybody, let's sing! "Our an awe-some Bush!

</MASSIVE, gut wrenching, vomit inducing sarcasm!>...

I'm taking a play from the Bush political playbook by getting the flames out of the way, so the REAL Conservatives can get their say!!!


5 posted on 05/18/2002 8:08:15 PM PDT by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RLK; Askel5
Medicare Fraud: Chicago M.D. Charges 187 Patients in One Day - "the doctor billed Medicare for treating people who were already dead"

Only One Side On Medicare

Media Research Center
By L. Brent Bozell III
July 1, 1999

As the hourglass of the Clinton presidency empties toward an end, the networks are trying to wrap up this party the way they began: promoting more socialized medicine. The big network anchors and reporters have unilaterally decided that this very long scandal phase of the Clinton years is over, and now we must march on to the exciting thought of growing the government, to speak in their vernacular.

Bill Clinton has announced triumphantly that the feds somehow have found an additional trillion dollars in federal surpluses coming out our ears, so it is our patriotic duty to spend this taxpayer bounty on Medicare beneficiaries. Clinton proposes we start by subsidizing prescriptions. Okay, how much of this surplus would be spent? CBS reporters surprisingly warned several times it would be "expensive." But they were the exception. For most of the press, the mantra was cost, schmost, we just gotta have it.

On NBC's "Today," co-host Katie Couric was unequivocal in her endorsement: "It sounds like a no-brainer. Seniors spend billions of dollars on prescription drugs every year, often putting them in terrible financial situations. So what's wrong with this plan?"

Later on the same show, NBC reporter Lisa Myers warned of the savage drug market: "Seniors without the bargaining muscle also must deal with rising overall drug prices, up 68 percent in the last eight years. Now the average prescription costs $37, the average brand name drug almost $52. Pharmacist Jack Collins says he sees a serious, perhaps deadly toll on elderly customers."

Call it Medi-scare Redux: if you don't do what liberals want, people will die!

Myers suggested a solution to this epidemic of drug-deficient retirees: "The President's plan, however, will try to change that and require that seniors be given a discount of about ten percent on all drug purchases. O'Laughlin [a Medicare beneficiary who led the story] says every little bit helps and hopes Medicare will finally begin to meet her changing needs, so that she can both stay well and afford to live well." So now we have a new entitlement: the right not to be burdened by large prescription bills.

But that evening on ABC's "World News Tonight," reporter John Cochran suggested Bill Clinton's plan was actually too little. "For many older people the Clinton plan is welcomed, but it would hardly solve the problems of those who have huge drug bills every month. That would include the Mitchells, who live in Florida," he declared, introducing his sympathetic characters. "Sixty-eight-year-old Willie has kidney problems, heart problems, and diabetes. The Mitchells' combined income each month from Social Security is only $1,200. Last month Willie's drug bill alone was more than $1,000. To make it through each month he cuts back on food and on medications, cutting his pills into quarters."

Cochran continued to hammer home the flaws in Clinton's underfinanced plan: "Under the Clinton plan Willie would only get $83 a month, not enough and he is skeptical Washington politicians will do even that much." Cochran concluded with his selected victim's best pitch: "His doctor urged him to go to Mexico, where drugs are cheaper. But as a war veteran who paid taxes all his life, Willie can't understand why his own government can't help more."

With that kind of emotional heart-tugging, how could you oppose the proposed new spending?

But Couric, Cochran, Myers, and Co. aren't bothering to look at some facts. James Frogue of the Heritage Foundation found a very different picture. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average senior spent $637 out of pocket on prescription and non-prescription drugs in 1997. This contrasts with the $1,193 that same senior spent on "dining out." The National Academy of Social Insurance, in a recent study, found that the median amount spent by seniors out of pocket on drugs is $200, meaning that 50 percent of America's seniors spend less than $200 annually on drugs. That also means victims like Willie Mitchell, with his monthly $1000 drug bill, is utterly atypical of seniors, and focusing on him is competely typical for panicked network reporters.

Frogue also notes that Clinton would increase the burden on the administrators of Medicare, the Health Care Financing Administration. The need for some cost control would then lead to limiting the number of drugs available to recipients. While HCFA is already struggling with 800 million annual claims from Medicare Part A and B, "the additional administrative load involved in overseeing Medicare Part D (prescription drugs), with potentially over a billion claims, would be an administrative nightmare."

But the networks don't really care about the gory administrative details, as long as they've riveted their audiences with scary stories that sell the false security of statism, and the resulting electoral success of their liberal Democrat friends.

On the Medicare thing, just do
what I did. Ok. Yeah, yeah, you got it.

6 posted on 05/18/2002 8:11:46 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Inspector Harry Callahan
Uncle Bill bump.
8 posted on 05/18/2002 8:14:22 PM PDT by nunya bidness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
Politicians or special interests who want to impose their "Great Ideas" on the taxpayers should instead use the Tax Me More program. With Tax Me More they can collect money from willing donors to pay for their "Great Ideas" and pet projects. After all, if the "Great Idea" really has merit, its supporters should have no trouble getting sufficient money from willing donors to make that "Great Idea" a success. If they can't, then maybe it wasn't such a "Great Idea", after all.

We'll be taking contributions soon.

9 posted on 05/18/2002 8:14:32 PM PDT by jimkress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
..."Lawmakers are proposing more spending for Medicare than the $190 billion over 10 years that Bush put into his budget. In the House, Republicans have a $350 billion, 10-year plan. In the Senate, a pair of Democrats have a plan estimated at $450 billion to $500 billion, though it doesn't include 10 full years"....

ROTFLMAO!!! Now that's rich.......since when has fedgov ever proposed spending amount x and actually only spending amount x? Fedgov habitually underestimates the costs of anything and everything they do!!!

Unfriggin believable.....$19 billion a year (St. George), $35 billion a year (the wimps) and $50+ and counting billion a year using the traitors figures.

I'd hate to look back to what they said Mediscare would cost back when they first decided they would have the program [I have read the figures previously] and compare it to what the real world figures were--even back when they first started it up.

As I recall listening to congressional hearings, Mediscare recipients only pay about 1/3 of the actual cost of what it costs to insure them--the taxpayer makes up the difference....and now, we're being asked to just hand over another chunk of change to by votes for politicians.

10 posted on 05/18/2002 8:17:13 PM PDT by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: Uncle Bill

Looks like some bad medicine, Uncle Bill.

How did I know you weren't gonna be having any?
12 posted on 05/18/2002 8:17:44 PM PDT by Askel5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill
Actually you can rob Peter to pay Paul. You can make prescription drug benefits for seniors part of medicare. Then all you have to do is raise the social security deduction for medicare and presto, you have the prescription drug costs covered.

This allows the government to decide who gets drugs and who doesn't qualify. I hope the program is administered more appropriately than our drug program for education. If not, we are going to see a lot of seniors eligible for the stupor inducing drugs that students are on.

13 posted on 05/18/2002 8:17:52 PM PDT by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rowdee
Let's hear it for the greediest generation. Sorry, seniors, I'm paying too much in taxes as it is. You're about to kill your host.
14 posted on 05/18/2002 8:19:40 PM PDT by Pining_4_TX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jimkress
It must be spreading 8-)
15 posted on 05/18/2002 8:31:00 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pining_4_TX
They were sold a bill of goods just like so many of the rest of us were sold some sort of bill of goods. And then when they retired, they were locked into a system they can't get out of.....and they still have to pay for the cost of regulations just like the rest of us which are passed through to consumers. I believe many are terrified of being put out on the crime-ridden/drug laden streets and so are willing to accept or take these handouts wiping it out of their mind what had to happen in order for this to be accomplished.

And it isn't going to get any better with the education system locked in place that we have. Until we start with the changing people one at a time to understanding what made this nation great, we will continue the spiral into socialism/communism as was predicted--without firing a shot....

Personally, I don't see any hope, especially when you look at what is supposedly a website of 'conservative' voices/thought and the vast majority act as cheerleaders for the 'conservative' version of socialism/communism!!!

16 posted on 05/18/2002 8:36:51 PM PDT by Rowdee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rowdee; Askel5; RLK
"Nothing is more permanent as a temporary government program."
Milton Friedman


February 27, 2002

For Immediate Release
Contact: Jim Manley/Stephanie Cutter
(202) 224-2633

Medicare is a solemn promise to senior citizens. It says, "Work hard. Pay into the system, and we will guarantee you health security in your retirement years." But that promise is broken every day, because Medicare does not cover the cost of needed prescription drugs.

When it comes to prescription drugs, the elderly face a double whammy. Costs are going up, and coverage is going down. Even before the recession, private retiree health coverage was collapsing. Now a wave of corporate bankruptcies is leaving more and more retirees out in the cold. Only a Medicare prescription drug benefit can provide the safe, solid, affordable coverage senior citizens need.

Mending the broken promise of Medicare should be a bipartisan priority. But under the President's program, tax cuts for the wealthy come first and prescription drugs for the elderly come last. The Administration's budget calls $600 billion for more tax breaks for the wealthy, but less than one-third that amount for prescription drugs. That's the wrong priority. It's less than the Republican Congress authorized just last year -- and it is much, much less than senior citizens need.

The Bush Plan would cover less than 13 percent the elderly's prescription drug costs. Trying to meet the needs of senior citizens under the Administration's budget is like trying to fit an elephant into a breadbox. If the Bush program were enacted tomorrow, senior citizens would still be forced to choose between food on the table and the medicines their doctors prescribe.

Senior citizens deserve Medicare coverage of prescription drugs. It is a priority for the American people. It is a priority for Democrats. And it should be a priority for the Congress as well.

Democrats will fight until the broken promise of Medicare is mended, and every senior citizen can afford the prescription drugs they need. We urge the President and the Republicans in Congress to join us in this fight.


"And then, of course, there's Senator Edward Kennedy. And the folks at the Crawford Coffee Shop would be somewhat shocked when I told them I actually like the fellow. He is a fabulous United States senator."

17 posted on 05/18/2002 8:43:25 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nunya bidness
18 posted on 05/18/2002 8:45:05 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: Rowdee
"Personally, I don't see any hope, especially when you look at what is supposedly a website of 'conservative' voices/thought and the vast majority act as cheerleaders for the 'conservative' version of socialism/communism!!!"

Yes, but they're winning in their mind. They just haven't figured out yet that the prize that they will reap for their children and their grandchildren is totalitarianism. Or worse, some know it, but would care less, as long as an "R" is stamped on their forehead, and they get their checks and services, cocktail party invitations, and a picture of Bush. American citizens are the problem. Socialist politicians like George W. Bush are a dime a dozen.

20 posted on 05/18/2002 8:57:44 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson