Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (497193)	11/23/2003 7:17:06 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Kennedy vows filibuster of Medicare bill Massachusetts Democrat says House 'rigged vote' From Ted Barrett CNN Washington Bureau Saturday, November 22, 2003 Posted: 10:23 PM EST (0323 GMT) anage alerts \| What is this? WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Medicare bill that eeked through the House early Saturday after last-minute 'yes' votes from wavering Republicans is headed to the Senate early next week. But a senior Democrat has vowed to snare the Republican legislation. Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts said Saturday that he and presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry, also of Massachusetts, will filibuster the Medicare bill. "What happened in the House of Representatives in the dead of night was Florida 2000 all over again," Kennedy said in a written statement, referring to the disputed and protracted vote count in that state's presidential balloting. "It was a rigged vote. Republicans are playing politics with Medicare, and our seniors will pay the price. "But I have a deal for them. Give this bill a fair vote in the House, and I'll drop my filibuster in the Senate." In a vote that congressional leaders held open for almost three hours, the House narrowly passed the Medicare and prescription drug bill about 6 a.m. Saturday. Democrats held a slight lead in the vote count for most of the session. But the Republicans, who control the chamber, refused to close the vote. GOP leaders and President Bush -- who made several middle-of-the-night phone calls to wavering members -- scrounged up more votes. They persuaded two junior members, Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter of Idaho and Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, to vote yes, tipping the scale in favor of the GOP-written bill. "The president and I had a conversation, and I did what I think was the right thing for the country," a visibly distressed Franks told a reporter while leaving the Capitol. Otter said House Republican leaders pulled him and six other conservatives into a small room and told them that if they didn't support the bill, moderate Republicans would move to take up the original Senate bill, which some consider more liberal. Democratic opponents took to the Senate floor to complain that the proposal would reward insurers and drug manufacturers at the expense of older Americans and would undermine Medicare, The Associated Press reported. The changes, which include options for private health care coverage, would virtually remake the Medicare program, requiring older Americans earning more than $80,000 a year to pay a higher premium, for the first time, for nonhospital coverage, according to the AP. The bill also would create new tax-preferred health accounts, open to individuals with high-deductible insurance policies, the AP reported. (Full story) House Democrats were stunned when the votes changed and their expected victory was lost. A few Democrats switched their votes from "no" to "yes" once the GOP had its victory. The final tally was 220 to 215. The boost given the Republicans' effort by AARP's endorsement of the plan has come under attack from a number of the group's own members, some of whom have accused it of being influenced by the millions of dollars it gets in royalties for insurance marketed under the AARP name. In an interview with CNN, AARP chief executive William Novelli acknowledged that his group markets insurance products to its members but said, "We have a wall set up between that marketing and the policy work that we do." Opponents of the bill say previous attempts to steer Medicare patients into HMOs have led the healthier ones -- who cost less to treat -- to join the managed care plans. Those patients would have cost Medicare far less than the plans were paid for them, said Uwe Reinhardt, a professor of health economics at Princeton University. Those patients who opt to stay in the traditional plan would likely be sicker and -- on a per capita basis -- about 30 percent more expensive to treat, even though both groups would get the same payment from the government per enrollee, Reinhardt said. "You have the [managed care] plans trying to cherry pick the healthier elderly, leaving the sicker in traditional Medicare. That riskier mix of elderly would drive up the cost" for the traditional program, he said. Bush and Republican lawmakers, however, say the competition will drive down costs.