|
E-mail this page to a friend!
Senior Citizen Politics
Democrats Face Opposition on Bills to Negotiate Drug
Prices, Plug 'Donut Hole'
Provision added
secretly by Hastert to help
home-state Medicare Advantage company may get eliminated
 December 18, 2006 – The Democrat's promise of a
bill early next year to force the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for better prices on
Medicare drugs appears to have a problem, according to the latest report
from KaiserNetwork.org. And, there are problems seen in trying to pass
other parts of their health care agenda, including getting rid of the
infamous 'donut hole' in the drug program, where senior citizens have no
coverage.
 Democratic Health Care Agenda Faces Obstacles Next
Year
Democrats next year likely will seek to pass
legislation that would require
CMS to negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies on prices
for medications under the Medicare prescription drug benefit, but
approval of such legislation will require them to "win over some
Republicans and one of their own," the
Albany Times Union reports.
Such legislation would require 60 votes, nine more
than the Democratic majority, to ensure passage in the Senate, and
incoming
Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-Mont.) has voted
against similar legislation three times, according to the Times Union
(Dlouhy,
Albany Times Union, 12/17).
In addition, a promise to "be more fiscally
responsible than their Republican predecessors" might limit the ability
of Democrats to pass legislation that would eliminate the Medicare
prescription drug benefit "doughnut hole," a proposal that would cost an
estimated $5 billion annually, the
Christian Science Monitor reports.
Under the doughnut hole, Medicare beneficiaries are
responsible for 100% of annual prescription drug costs between $2,250
and $5,100. According to incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.),
Democrats plans enforce pay-as-you-go rules that require lawmakers to
offset proposals that would increase federal spending with tax increases
or spending reductions in other areas.
Bob Bixby -- director of the Concord Coalition, a
budget watchdog group -- said, "If you do make the prescription drug
benefit more generous, that could get very, very expensive, and there's
no obvious way to pay for that" (Grier,
Christian Science Monitor, 12/14).
Union Might Benefit
The Democratic takeover of Congress next year is
likely to improve the ability of the
American Federation of Government Employees, which represents about
700,000 federal employees, to negotiate on health benefits and other
issues, the
Washington Post reports.
Incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)
said that he plans to work to limit increases in health insurance
premiums and ensure wage increases for federal employees and try to
create a "more cooperative relationship with the White House."
Beth Moten, legislative and political director for
AFGE, said, "We expect the Democratic Congress to support the federal
employees with regard to wages, health insurance and retirement."
AFGE President John Gage said that under the Bush
administration, the ability of the union to "sit down with the agencies
and work out problems and differences has really declined" (Goldfarb,
Washington Post, 12/18).
Appropriations Bills
In related news, Democrats last week announced
plans to seek a continuing resolution to fund most federal agencies at
fiscal year 2006 levels until Sept. 30, 2007, the
Washington Post reports. Congress this year approved
only two of 11 FY 2007 appropriations bills and passed a CR to fund most
federal agencies until February 2007.
According to the
Post,
"Democrats will make some adjustments" in a new CR, "especially in the
Department of Veterans Affairs health care system, which needs $3
billion more just to keep covering all the veterans it covers now."
Incoming
House Appropriations Committee Chair David Obey (D-Wis.) said, "We
did not call the shots here. We will try to provide modest adjustments
where we can, but a lot of people will be left short"
(Weisman/Montgomery,
Washington Post, 12/17).
Hastert Medicare Advantage Provision
In other congressional news, the
Post
on Saturday examined reaction to a Medicare Advantage
provision that outgoing House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) "quietly
inserted" in a tax, trade and health care bill approved earlier this
month (Birnbaum,
Washington Post, 12/16).
The provision suspends enrollment deadlines for
certain Medicare Advantage plans -- which include those operated by
Illinois-based
Aon;
Sterling Life Insurance Company, an Aon subsidiary; and potentially
other insurers.
The provision allows beneficiaries to enroll in the
Medicare Advantage plans at any time during the year, rather than from
Nov. 15 through Dec. 31 (Kaiser
Daily Health Policy Report, 12/15).
Baucus said that the provision "creates an unlevel
playing field" for Medicare Advantage plans. Outgoing Senate Finance
Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said that he was "disappointed
in the process that led to the provision being included in the bill."
Baucus, Grassley and incoming Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
said that they might seek to eliminate the provision from the bill after
Congress reconvenes next year (Washington
Post, 12/16).
Editorials
●
Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Hastert "thumbed his
nose at American voters and fellow lawmakers by sneaking a last-minute
amendment through Congress aimed at benefiting a big insurance company
in his home state," a
Journal-Constitution editorial states. "He should be
ashamed -- but he probably isn't," the editorial concludes (Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, 12/18).
●
New
York Times: "The incoming Democratic chairmen of
Congress' appropriations committees announced last week that a big chunk
of the federal government will operate next year under 2006 budgets," a
Times
editorial states, adding that this decision "will allow the new Congress
to focus on programs where the needs are great -- and rising -- like
veterans' health care and low-income housing." The editorial states that
President Bush "is to blame" for the failure of Congress to approve nine
of 11 FY 2007 appropriations bills and that Bush next year must "step up
... to ask for more money as needed" (New
York Times, 12/18).
Click to More Senior News on the
Front Page
Copyright: SeniorJournal.com |
