http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/19/politics/19CND-DRUG.html
ASHINGTON,
June 19 — A Republican bill to provide prescription drug benefits to the elderly
was approved early today by one House committee, but became bogged down in
another panel, where Democrats denounced the legislation as a gift to the drug
industry in return for large campaign contributions.
Despite the partisan fight, the legislation still appeared to be headed for a vote on the House floor next week, just before lawmakers take a recess for the Fourth of July holiday.
By a vote of 22 to 16, the House Ways and Means Committee approved the bill, which authorizes the government to pay tens of billions of dollars in subsidies to insurance companies to induce them to offer drug coverage to Medicare beneficiaries. Medicare generally does not pay for prescription drugs outside a hospital, and nearly one-third of the 40 million elderly and disabled Medicare beneficiaries have no insurance for such costs.
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce began voting today on nearly identical legislation, after Republicans chopped it up into 12 separate bills — a procedural tactic that limited the Democrats' ability to offer amendments.
The Republican proposal, generally supported by President Bush, provides $310 billion over 10 years for Medicare drug benefits, a goal long sought by the elderly. But Democrats said the Republicans were beholden to the drug industry, and they said this relationship was symbolized by the fact that the Energy and Commerce Committee quit work this afternoon so Republicans could attend a fund-raising dinner organized with major assistance from the drug industry.
"The bill is a political payoff, a nice payback, to the pharmaceutical industry," said Representative Frank Pallone Jr., Democrat of New Jersey. Representative Sherrod Brown, Democrat of Ohio, said: "It's outrageous, and it shows the corrosive influence of corporate money in Congress and on the Republicans."
Representative Thomas M. Davis III of Virginia, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, which is coordinating efforts to keep the House under Republican control, said: "It's the height of hypocrisy for Democrats to point the finger at us. Less than 10 percent of the money being raised tonight comes from drug companies. The Democrats depend even more heavily on money from special interests, like trial lawyers and labor unions."
Drug companies support the Republicans' general approach, which depends on competing private insurers to devise and market drug insurance policies. Republicans explicitly prohibit the federal government from setting drug prices or establishing a uniform list of preferred drugs.
Even so, many drug company executives say they are apprehensive that the Republican bill could eventually lead to some form of price regulation, or at least government pressure on drug companies to hold down prices. Under current law, with no additional benefits, Medicare spending is expected to soar more than 90 percent, to $490 billion in 2012, from $252 billion last year, and Congress is continually looking for ways to slow that growth.
The chief actuary of the Medicare program, Richard S. Foster, a civil servant, predicted today that at least 95 percent of Medicare beneficiaries would voluntarily sign up for the drug benefits offered under the House Republican bill.
The Health Insurance Association of America opposed a similar bill passed by the House two years ago, saying that it would appeal almost exclusively to people with high drug expenses. But Donald A. Young, president of the association, said the new bill offered more generous benefits. As a result, Dr. Young said, more people will sign up for drug coverage, and "there is now a much better chance that our members will offer the benefit."
But the Democratic-controlled Senate is willing to spend much more money and has shown little interest in private-sector model favored by President Bush and many Republicans.
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.