Copyright 2002 Times Publishing Company St.
Petersburg Times
June 29, 2002 Saturday 0 South Pinellas
Edition
SECTION: NATIONAL; Pg. 1A
LENGTH: 1135 words
HEADLINE:
House bill still has long way to go
BYLINE: SARA
FRITZ
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY: Lawmakers were exhausted at 2:30 a.m. Friday
when a bill to create a prescription drug benefit for seniors finally squeaked
through the House on a narrow 221-208 vote. It was the culmination of months of
tedious cajoling and compromise by House GOP leaders.
Now, the hard part begins.
While the House
action generates some momentum for the long-promised prescription drug coverage,
there is even less of a consensus for a bill in the Senate, which is narrowly
controlled by the Democrats.
And it is hard to imagine
how the two chambers could reconcile their differences in the unlikely event the
Senate acts.
"The chances are obviously slim," said Lee
Goldberg, spokesman for a liberal advocacy group known as the National Committee
to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. "From our point of view, we're
starting from scratch in the Senate."
Yet the
ever-optimistic Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., author of the bill endorsed by the
Democratic leadership in the Senate, refuses to be discouraged.
"I think there are some responsible ways to approach a compromise," he
said, "and I look forward to doing so and seeing the best bill possible signed
into law."
Both parties have long been on record
favoring creation of a drug benefit under Medicare, but Republicans are strongly
opposed to spending more than $350-billion over the next 10 years. Graham's
proposal would cost an estimated $425-billion.
Election-year politics dominate the legislative strategy of both
parties. Neither side wants to be seen as obstructing legislation favorable to
politically active senior citizens, but most lawmakers are not eager enough for
a bill that they would compromise their ideological principles.
In the House, compromise between Republicans and Democrats was not
necessary to pass the bill. The GOP leaders relied primarily on members of their
own party to prevail. Even so, they were surprised by the level of opposition
they encountered in their own ranks. Some Republican conservatives wanted no
bill at all; moderates wanted to make the benefits more generous.
President Bush seemed timid about embracing the House GOP
bill. The White House did not endorse it until Thursday night, when it was clear
the measure would pass. And the president's statement was quick to note that
there are some parts of the bill he does not like.
Republican leaders refused to allow the House to vote on a competing
Medicare drug benefit plan drafted by the Democrats because they feared it might
pass. That, of course, made the Democrats very angry.
Democrats accused the Republicans of designing their bill to help
prescription drug companies, not Medicare beneficiaries.
"Watch out, grandma," shouted Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., before the
vote. "GOP now stands for Get Old People."
Rep. Billy
Tauzin, R-La., co-author of the bill, took offense at Markey's comment.
"We all love our mothers and our fathers," he said. "We
all love our grandparents. How dare you suggest otherwise."
In the Senate, most Republicans and a few Democrats seem to be opposed
to the Graham bill. Because only one-third of the Senate's members are up for
re-election this year, the looming election exerts much less pressure for action
there than it did in the House, where every seat is up.
The first hurdle in the Senate is the Finance Committee, which will
begin consideration of the issue as soon as Congress returns from the
Independence Day recess. Graham will not be the only member of that committee to
offer a proposal for prescription drug coverage.
A few
Republicans have joined with Democratic Sen. John Breaux of Louisiana and
Independent Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont to draft an alternative that is likely
to have broader support in the committee than the Graham bill.
Even though the prospects for getting a bill out of committee are
bleak, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota has said he expects
the full Senate to pass a bill before the August recess.
"I am quite comfortable letting seniors decide between the House-passed
bill and our Senate proposal, which is based on a tried and true delivery system
- giving our seniors consistent coverage, reliable copays and no deductibles,"
said Graham. He added that the House plan is based on "gimmicks, gaps and
gotchas."
Under Graham's bill, prescription benefit
managers would be reimbursed by the government for each expenditure on behalf of
a Medicare beneficiary, the same way that doctors, hospitals and other providers
are currently compensated.
Under the House-passed plan,
however, the drug benefit program would be managed entirely by private insurance
companies in competition for Medicare subscribers.
Currently, there are no private insurers that offer drugs-only
coverage. And former Rep. Bill Gradison, a Republican who until recently headed
the Health Insurance Association of America, created a sensation recently when
he questioned whether insurers would be interested in writing drugs-only
policies.
In order to muster enough support for the
bill in the House, Republicans added money to increase reimbursements under the
existing Medicare program for doctors and hospitals. But the White House
statement suggested Bush would rather put that money into benefits. Without the
support of doctors and hospitals, none of the bills under consideration are
likely to pass.
- Information from the Associated Press
was used in this report.
Document 220 of 532. 