Guardian: "More than 47 million Americans receiving Social Security will get a 2.7 percent increase - an extra $25, on average - in their monthly checks next year, but much of the increase will be eaten up by higher Medicare premiums. However, the average retiree will see only a little over half of that increase because the government announced last month that monthly Medicare premiums for doctor visits are going up by $11.60 a month next year, a record in dollar terms." Worse, the poorest retirees - those with the smallest SS checks, may see their ENTIRE increase wiped out by Medicare. The only guarantee the Bush admin. is giving these seniors is that they won't have their benefits lowered by the premium. Such a deal!

This extensively sourced report was done in November 2003 by a group in Wisconsin concerned about the welfare of the state's seniors. The group found that the scheme includes gaping holes in coverage: " The deal includes a structure for coverage not seen by any private or public insurance plan. It does not provide any consistent coverage as drug costs go up After paying a mandatory $275 deductible and a monthly premium of $35-175, 75% of drug costs between $276- 2,201 will be covered" and 95% of catastrophic drug costs above $5,044 will be covered. However, participants with drug costs between $2,201-5,044 will - unbelievably! - get no help. In addition, the report predicted that 32-37% of seniors would lose the employer-sponsored prescription plans they already had, despite the $16 billion in employer subsidies included in the plan.

It has been made extremely clear that the vast majority of Medicare recipients do not like and do not wish to participate in the super complex boondoggle euphemistically known as Medicare Reform. But to try to entice seniors into the scheme and give the Bush campaign a deceptively impressive soundbyte, the HHS has announced that "nearly two million low-income Americans on Medicare will soon be automatically eligible for prescription discounts through the Medicare Drug Discount card and qualify for an additional $1,200 in savings over the next 14 months." I.e. YOU COULD ALREADY BE A WINNER!!! Trouble is, the "additional $1,200 in savings is no advantage when senior's existing plans may save them twice that much! But as ever, Bush's "sound byte-brained" pundits don't need real facts. They'll just proclaim - completely misleadingly - that "2 million seniors are signed up" for the "great plan."

Now here's some typical Bush administration logic for ya! The Medicare Reform prescription drug discount plan (better known as the 'Soak the Seniors Scheme') was so complicated that a pathetically low percentage of seniors actually signed up for it. Of course that was the plan all along - promise 'em everything but make it impossible for them to access the promised goods! Now, needing a good sound byte, the White House is planning to announce "enhancements" (i.e., Further Complications!) to the drug discount plan to give the illusion that they are actually doing something on healthcare! Yep, that's all a complicated boondoggle of a scheme needs- MORE complications!

Bush and his media minions schemed to have the biggest increase in Medicare premiums in the program's history announced the night before the Labor Day Weekend, just as Hurricane Frances threatened. But seniors didn't miss the trick and they are fighting mad. Edward F. Coyle, executive director, Alliance for Retired Americans, said 'This record-breaking increase... is yet again further evidence of the Bush Administration's callous disregard for the well-being and retirement security concerns of older Americans. Seniors on fixed incomes are caught in an ever-tightening squeeze and are today paying record-high prices for gasoline, milk, prescription drugs and, now, doctor visits. It's clear George Bush continues to favor the interests of drug companies and HMOs over those of hard-working older Americans. He's made clear his choice and come Election Day seniors will make their voices heard.' "

Boston Globe: "Medicare premiums for doctor visits will rise 17% next year, the Bush administration said yesterday. The $11.60-a-month increase is the largest in the program's 40-year history. Monthly payments for Part B of the government health care program for older and disabled Americans...will jump to $78.20 from $66.60." The spin being served up by Bush's chief Medicare/Medicaid snake oil salesmasn, "Dr." Mark McClellan to explain this price gouging, which came on the heals of the news that prescription drug costs have TRIPLED since Medicare "reform" went thru, is not only ridiculous, it is an insult to all seniors because it obviously assumes they are all gullible, stupid, or senile.''The new premiums reflect an enhanced Medicare that is providing seniors and people with disabilities with strengthened access to physician services and new preventive benefits," says Dr. Moonshine.

Newsday: "Medical problems associated with obesity already are covered by Medicare. So why the concern to give Medicare beneficiaries this "benefit" now? [Because Bush] wants to change the way Medicare is now discussed. In fact, Bush's Medicare reform was an exercise in legislative chicanery and rhetorical misrepresentation of its purposes. While including a modest, convoluted drug benefit... the was, and is, a stealth attack on the program's fundamental character. Attention has shifted to three topics: investigations of misleading fiscal estimates, reports that elderly majorities are critical of the law, and evidence that the nation's drug firms had a lot to do with the provision preventing Medicare from using its market power to bargain with pharmaceutical firms on price. As every student of the industry knows, the United States is the only industrial democracy in the world to regulate drugs without using governmental legal or purchasing power to moderate prices."

This must be another example of that "compassionate conservative thing": Bush's Medicare folks have bumped one-third of all handicapped people from qualifying for motorized wheelchairs."Power Mobility Coalition Director Eric Sokol stated, the cuts in power mobility coverage are counterproductive, since access to motorized chairs produces proven cost savings. A recent study found that power mobility saves the Medicare program over $11,000 (per person) when compared to similarly situated beneficiaries without power mobility over a three-year period. Sokol added that "the products and services provided by PMC members give freedom and independence back to those who cannot walk. Power mobility allows these beneficiaries to lead more active, full and healthier lives experiencing fewer falls, fewer hospitalizations, and less need for skilled nursing care."

Because cancer drugs are typically powerful, cell-killing toxics that must be used with great care to be effective while not causing potentially lethal side effects, many oncologists opt to dispense chemotherapy treatments to their elderly patients in their offices. It also avoids subjecting patients to having to go through hospital "cattle calls" to get the treatments (where the risk of exposure to resistant infections, btw, is many times higher). Now Bush says that doctor office-based chemotherapy treatment is a "luxury" that should be eliminated altogether. Their "excuse" - the doctors overcharge for the drugs. But the doctors say they do this to offset the Medicare underpayment for their practice expenses such as nurses, equipment and treatment rooms. Without this offset, they say, they will be forced to send their patients to hospitals for treatment.

NY Times reports, "New government estimates suggest that employers will reduce or eliminate prescription drug benefits for 3.8 million retirees when Medicare offers such coverage in 2006. That represents one-third of all the retirees with employer-sponsored drug coverage, according to documents from the Department of Health and Human Services. No aspect of the new Medicare law causes more concern among retirees than the possibility that they might lose benefits they already have. Democrats are likely to cite the new estimates as evidence to support their contention that the new law will prompt some employers to curtail drug coverage for retirees, forcing them, in some cases, to rely on Medicare's leaner benefits. Republicans do not want to see the government supplant employers in providing drug benefits to retirees."

You know those shady furniture stores that have big signs perpetually proclaiming 'EVERYTHING HALF OFF!" - except it turns out to be half off a price that was first marked up 100%, thereby wiping out any discount? Well, that's apparently the model for the Bush 'Medicare Reform" scam. AP: "Drug makers raised prescription prices by nearly triple the rate of inflation in the first three months of this year -- just before Medicare began its pharmacy discount card program -- negating much of the savings the government promised to seniors, according to AARP [the hypocritical outfit that helped get the scam passed in the first place]. The gap between inflation and price increases is especially significant for older Americans who rely on Social Security income. Social Security increases are based on the Consumer Price Index" - rather than drug baron whims.

Canada.com: "The Bush administration will give '50,000 lucky individuals' chosen in a lottery up to a 16-month jump on Medicare prescription drug coverage, paying for costly medications for cancer and other illnesses this year. Tommy Thompson estimated that 500,000 to 600,000 Medicare recipients without prescription drug coverage are eligible for the program. More than 450,000 others must wait until prescription drug insurance under Medicare begins in 2006. The law limits the new program to 50,000 people and $500 million, at least $200 million of which must be spent on oral cancer drugs that can cost tens of thousands of dollars a year. Treatments for multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and six other illnesses that can be administered at home also will be covered. Similar drugs often are paid for when dispensed in doctors' offices and hospitals."

Under the GOP/Bush Medicare Scam (er...Reform), seniors can now look forward to paying at least 50% more for the 20 most commonly prescribed name brand drugs than they would have when the federal government had the right to bargain with drug companies for lower prices. The proof: the same drugs cost vets 50-59% less because the VA still has that bargaining power. And vets represent a smaller "consumer pool" than seniors. Once again, the Bush cartel proves that it a) Lies to get what it wants for its corporate pals, and b) Sacrifices the well-being of the nation's most vulnerable citizens to promote its agenda.

Newsday: "As the clock winds down to the start of the Medicare drug discount card program Tuesday, there are few signs that seniors are jumping on board. Seniors still are coming into Canada for Prescription Drugs, a storefront in Lake Worth, Fla., to order their medication. The Minnesota Federation of Seniors still is planning its monthly bus trip to Canada so seniors can buy cheaper drugs. And the New York State Alliance for Retired Americans still is ironing out details for a similar trip from New York City to Canada next month." In short, seniors have recognized the Bushie "reform" for what it is: a scam.

As the June 1 launch date for the Medicare discount drug card program nears, millions of elderly and disabled Americans are grappling with a bewildering array of choices Enrollees can select only one card and can switch cards only once. So participants are scrambling to find the one card that offers the best prices for the drugs they take. But the card sponsors and drug manufacturers have made that task nearly impossible as prices are changing even before the program has begun...Under Medicare rules, card sponsors can change their prices once a week. So a card that's best for a senior citizen one week may be the worst the next week

The Bush/GOP Medicare Reform scam is more complicated to work through than the worst the IRS could offer. Writes Ellen Goodman: "As one 91-year-old in Cleveland told a reporter, 'You'll have to hire a $500-an-hour attorney to find out if you'll save 5 cents.' The website is impenetrable.... The 800 number is so overloaded that it kept hanging up... And that's just the beginning. All in all, there are more than 70 drug discounters, each offering different prices for 209 drugs. Want Lipitor, Allegra, Vioxx, and Lotrel? You can check the prices at each of the discounters in your zip code, buy yourself a spreadsheet, and by the time you're finished, you'll need to add a little Xanax... The Bush administration... sees citizens as shoppers.... Indeed, when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert gave his pep talk on the discount drug cards to seniors, he sounded as if he were on a loudspeaker at Home Depot." The difference, though is that you may actually come out ahead at Home Depot.

Back before the NeoCons took over Congress in the mid-1990s, AARP was in essence a consumer advocacy group that tried to makes sure that seniors got the best breaks possible from the government and as consumers. Then came Newt Gingrich and the NeoCon scheme to take over the US government. Part of the plan was to trash all social service programs, including Medicare, throwing millions of Americans onto the mercy of ruthless, greedy corporations. Meanwhile, the NeoCons worked hard to increase the power and reduce the accountability of these same corporations. The result: an AARP that is now dedicated to corporate interests. This MUST READ article outlines the entire sickening chain of events.

The Alliance of Retired Americans: "Bush said the 2003 Medicare Law he championed was designed to give seniors peace of mind -- it has done just the opposite. Seniors were promised a drug benefit that would be affordable and accessible; instead, they are saddled with something conspired by drug companies and HMO's and designed to generate profits for special interests at the expense of America's seniors. Seniors aren't the fools George Bush and the Republican- controlled Congress take them to be. They know they've been duped and they know a sham when they see one. This administration has sold out America's seniors and turned the business of administering health care to our nation's respected elders over to those whose only interest is in tallying profits. What is guaranteed is 100 percent confusion. No one in their right mind can make sense of how the cards are going to work, what drugs will be offered and where by what plans, or what paltry savings might be recognized."

"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission voted Thursday to allow employers to reduce or eliminate health benefits for retirees when they become eligible for Medicare at age 65... saying that such cuts do not violate the civil rights law banning age discrimination. The vote was 3 to 1, with Republicans lining up in favor of the rule and a Democrat opposing it... AARP, which represents millions of Americans age 50 and older, strenuously objected. The new rule creates a potentially explosive political issue, because it will create anxiety for many of the 12 million Medicare beneficiaries who also receive health benefits from their former employers... Stuart J. Ishimaru, who cast the only no vote, said: 'I came to the commission as a civil rights lawyer. Before making an exemption to a major civil rights law, you need a compelling reason, which I have not seen.' The proper role of the commission, [he] said, is not to make health policy, but to protect people from discrimination."

Bush agreed to let Condi testify in exchange for blanket exec privilege in other matters. Now that "privilege" is getting a workout. This week, "A senior White House official and the former Medicare administrator, central figures in a controversy over the cost of the new prescription drug law, declined to appear before a House committee yesterday, defying Democrats who had sought their testimony. Citing executive privilege, the White House refused to send Doug Badger, the special assistant to the president for health policy, to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee. The former Medicare administrator, Thomas Scully, who no longer works for the government, wrote the committee a letter saying he had been busy traveling and would be unable to appear." Said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX): Badger is the "the Condoleezza Rice of health care."

The Take Back Medicare Campaign is gaining momentum. Says TBM: "HMOs will get $46 billion taxpayer dollars from the Bush Medicare deal -- three times the amount the Bush team told us before the deal became law -- and the analyst who wanted to tell the truth was threatened with losing his job. In the midst of the tangle of investigations and scandal, there is something concrete we can demand of Congress: 'Take the Money Back from the HMOs!'" Sign the petition and pass the link on to a senior citizen you care about!

"Less than four months after he signed it into law on Dec. 8, Bush's Medicare-reform dream has turned into a nightmare and a potential drag on his bid for re-election. - The Bush administration deliberately didn't tell Congress that the measure could cost more than $100 billion more than advertised. - House Republican leaders abused House rules to push the measure to a narrow victory. There are also allegations of threats and bribes that are under investigation. - The Bush administration spent millions of taxpayer dollars on public service TV ads touting the Medicare reform law that look suspiciously like Bush campaign commercials. Those, too, are now under investigation. - Polls show that a majority of Americans don't like the Medicare reforms. 'It's something that's eating away at the credibility of the administration in an election year on a bill that he (Bush) thought was a building block for his re-election,' said Stephen Hess."

Nathan Newman writes, "In a classic Friday information dump, the Bush administration allowed Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, to release the data to Congress that he had previously been illegally told to withhold. And the details show why they didn't want it released: Instead of $14 billion in corporate welfare being paid to private health plans, the total will be $46 billion over ten years. 32% of Medicare beneficiaries will be pushed into private managed care plans by 2009. Traditional Medicare will be systematically undermined through cutting payments to doctors- 'payments to doctors under Medicare's fee schedule will decline each year from 2006 to 2012, while spending for inpatient hospital services and skilled nursing homes... will decline in 2006 and 2007.'... Nasty partisan spying is still not on the scale of lies that fundamentally distort decisions over how we spend hundreds of billions of dollars each year on our Medicare system. Someone should go to jail. Soon."

"The government's top expert on Medicare costs was warned that he would be fired if he told key lawmakers about a series of Bush administration cost estimates that could have torpedoed congressional passage of the White House-backed Medicare prescription-drug plan. ...Five months before the November House vote, the government's chief Medicare actuary had estimated that a similar plan the Senate was considering would cost $551 billion over 10 years...Richard S. Foster, the chief actuary... told colleagues last June that he would be fired if he revealed numbers relating to the higher estimate to lawmakers."

Instead of increasing spending directly on the needs of American seniors, the Bush administration, in true corporazi style, plans to increase funding to pay for a "special program" to "educate" seniors on the drug-industry giveaway Medicare "Reform" plan! What's fishy about this is the fact that Tommy Thompson says the educational program will be administered through the State Health Insurance Assistance Programs (SHIPs) - which are manned largely by VOLUNTEERs. We want to know, WHO is actually getting that $31 million. Certainly not our senior citizens.

AP reports: "Opponents of the new Medicare prescription drug law have recruited Walter Cronkite for a campaign that highlights what they see as the law's shortcomings. Cronkite, the 87-year-old broadcasting legend, appears in and narrates an 11-minute video that the non-profit Families USA plans to send to 10,000 senior citizen centers and retirement communities to explain changes in Medicare. 'Instead of doing a tax-financed 30-second political ad that uses actors, we use one of the most respected journalists in America and provide detailed information about the new law,' executive director Ron Pollack said in an interview. Families USA plans to spend $500,000 on the campaign, which also will include events in two dozen cities. The group worked closely with congressional Democrats who tried to defeat the Medicare legislation last year."

"Seniors with the most generous drug coverage were more likely than those with no or limited coverage to use the most costly prescription pain medication for osteoarthritis, even when less expensive over- the-counter drugs could be substituted, according to a new study." Researchers from the Universities of Pennsylvania and Maryland warn that the study findings have great implications for the "reformed" Medicare program prescription scheme (to be implemented in 2006). Not only does this pattern lead to poorer patients being saddled with more side effects (cheaper drugs cause greater gastrointestinal problems), it may lead "to overuse of more expensive prescription drugs, Medicare could experience unexpectedly high costs without a corresponding improvement in health care quality and outcomes."

"The details surrounding the new Medicare legislation become more sinister every day... Now, the White House has unveiled a new television advertising initiative -- distributed by the media firm working for the president's reelection campaign -- to defend the Medicare bill using $9.5 million in funds from the Department of Health and Human Services, with another $3.1 million allocated for print, radio, and Spanish-language ads. ...The president should pull these misleading and blatantly political ads off the air immediately. Even the conservative National Taxpayers Union has called for the president's Medicare ad to be pulled, stating the ad looks like 'an election-year ploy rather than a genuine public service announcement'... and Congress should investigate whether federal laws were violated."

"The Alliance for Retired Americans today called on the Republican National Committee to reimburse American taxpayers the more than $12 million of public money used by the Bush administration to finance a media campaign that promotes the new Medicare prescription drug law, charging the advertisements are blatantly political and don't provide a public service. The print and broadcast campaign was launched by the White House in response to growing criticism about the politically volatile Medicare drug benefit. 'The president and Karl Rove know they created a prescription drug law that seniors simply don't accept,' said Alliance Executive Director Ed Coyle, whose nationwide grassroots organization represents more than 3 million seniors and campaigned against passage of the Medicare bill," So the White House decided to fight back using tax dollars to fund a partisan propaganda campaign.

"The new Medicare ads urge citizens to call 1-800-MEDICARE to hear more about the new law. And in 'Big Brother' style, when you call that number you have to actually say out loud 'Medicare improvement' in order to get information. The information you then receive is filled with distortions... The hotline claims that seniors will be able to find 'immediate savings between 10% to 15% from a new drug discount card program.' But the cards, which were written into the bill by one of Bush's closest business associates, actually do not guarantee any savings at all. The hotline also says the new prescription drug program under Medicare 'will provide significant savings for seniors.' But as the Center for Economic and Policy Research notes, 'seniors in the middle income quintile will pay an average of $1,650 a year in out-of-pocket expenses for prescription drugs in 2006 - a figure nearly 60% more than they paid in 2000.'"

NY Times reports: "A leading House Democrat has called on Speaker J. Dennis Hastert to initiate an ethics investigation into accusations of bribery during last November's vote on the new Medicare drug plan, warning that Democrats will conduct their own inquiry if the House leader does not act... Mr. Hoyer's letter is the latest example of growing unrest with what Democrats see as heavy-handed Republican operation of the House and a failure to rein in questionable behavior by some members. House Democrats have said they intend to make Republican stewardship an issue in this year's campaigns."

The Wall Street Journal now reports that the White House quietly added "a little-noticed provision" to the Medicare bill that allows companies to severely reduce - or almost completely terminate - their retirees' drug coverage without the penalties Bush promised he would enforce to protect seniors.

"Democrats, denouncing the arm-twisting tactics used to pass the bill in the House, vowed Monday to rewrite the law to reduce the role of private health plans, to increase drug benefits and to authorize the government to negotiate drug prices... Within hours after Mr. Bush signed the Medicare law on Dec. 8, Democrats and labor unions held a rally on Capitol Hill. 'We have only just begun to fight,' Senator Edward M. Kennedy said... On Jan. 16, the administration is scheduled to announce higher Medicare payment rates for private health plans, including HMO's. Democrats said they would attack the rates as a giveaway to the insurance industry. In March and April, Congress is likely to debate a budget for the coming year. Democrats will offer amendments to increase the drug benefit. In May, insurers will start issuing government-approved drug discount cards to Medicare beneficiaries. Democrats will cite studies saying such cards produce small savings."

"Late last year, Bush promised retirees that 'if there's a Medicare reform bill signed by me, corporations have no intention to dump retirees [from their existing drug coverage]...What we're talking about is trust.' The White House and its congressional allies backed up Bush's assertion by claiming the bill included a special tax subsidy to 'encourage employers' to retain prescription-drug coverage' for their retirees' and not to cut them off. But just three months after Bush's pledge, the Wall Street Journal now reports that the White House quietly added 'a little-noticed provision' to the bill that allows companies to severely reduce - or almost completely terminate - their retirees' drug coverage 'without losing out on the new subsidy.' In other words, the president did not just break his promise to sign a bill that prevents seniors from losing their existing drug coverage. He actually acted to reward companies who cut off their retirees with a lavish new tax break."

"Just two days after Bush signed the new, drug industry-backed Medicare law, the White House announced the details of the Medicare discount drug card program, in which Medicare will contract with private, pharmaceutical benefit management (PBMs) companies to endorse existing discount cards. The cards have been assailed for not guaranteeing any price discounts, while potentially driving millions to these PBMs. So why, then, is the resident so adamant about the cards? For one thing, he has extremely close financial, professional and political ties to AdvancePCS - the company that stands to make a windfall off the program. Specifically, Bush is close friends with CEO David Halbert...'before starting what would become AdvancePCS, David Halbert helped clean up a deal with Harken Energy that had prompted an SEC investigation of George W. Bush.' Halbert then invited Bush to become one of the original investors in AdvancePCS - a transaction that made the resident up to $1 million."

The SF Chronicle reports: "'The Medicare vote will be remembered as one of the lowest moments in the history of the House,' Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco said Monday during a sometimes raucous debate over a motion she introduced calling on the House GOP leaders 'to prevent any further abuse' of voting rules. 'Not one member of the elected leadership of the majority will show his face on the floor to defend' the vote, she said, to applause from her fellow Democrats. The House voted to table Pelosi's motion 207-182. Pelosi... knew she would lose, but figured the tough tactics used by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and Majority Leader Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, could mobilize her party and raise money for the 2004 election campaign. 'I brought this privileged resolution to the floor,' Pelosi said, 'because there were public rumors of bribery of $100,000 to a member of this House.' There were scattered shouts of 'Shame, shame,' among the Democrats."

Gallup reports: "Fewer than half of adults aged 65 and older (46%) support the new prescription drug benefit, while 39% oppose it. And senior citizens actually oppose the changes made in Medicare provisions, by a 44% to 38% margin... Senior citizens are most concerned that drug companies will benefit too much (58% 'very concerned') and that the plan will not go far enough to help seniors pay for their prescriptions (56%). Just under half say that the changes will be too complicated to understand (49%) and that the plan will force some recipients into HMOs (48%)... Just 15% of adults aged 65 and older say the new benefit will help them with the amount of money they pay for prescriptions. About one in five seniors say the benefit will hurt them, and slightly fewer than 6 in 10 say it will not have any effect at all... 53% of Americans aged 18 to 64 say Medicare will not be available to people their age when they reach age 65, compared with 45% who think it will be available. "

The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has blasted the Bush Medicare Plan as not only worse than useless, but a huge economic albatross that will come home to roost in the future, bleeding the US economy while doing less for the elderly than the present system does now. At the root of the problem: the Bill is, in essence, represents a big pipeline from the federal government and pockets of the elderly into the coffers of the drug barons and HMOs. They are the sole real beneficiaries of the scheme. There is almost no provision for generic drugs, reimported drugs, or price controls (right now, Medicare can negotiate down drug prices). Two million retirees will lose the coverage they now have. How can the creeps who voted for this bill sleep at night.

WINNERS: Pharmaceutical industry will reap additional profits estimated at $139 billion over the next 10 years. Private insurance companies will get $12 billion. Doctors, hospitals and other care providers in rural areas will get a total of $25 billion over 10 years. HMOs, hospitals and physicians will be paid more by the government for treating Medicare beneficiaries. Businesses will reap $86 billion worth of payments and tax benefits. LOSERS: Millions of seniors whose prescription drug bills are between $2,250 and $5,100 per year. They will have no coverage but must still pay monthly premiums. Millions of retirees whose employer-provided drug coverage is threatened. More than six million "dual eligibles" - currently enrolled in both Medicaid and Medicare - who will be moved to Medicare but may lose essential drug coverage from Medicaid. Four million seniors who will not qualify for low-income protections because of a restrictive "assets" test.

"Bush has been insisting that seniors should get the same choices that members of Congress and other federal employees get. But the astonishingly complex Medicare plan voted on by Congress a few days ago is far more limited than what the legislators and bureaucrats have. And a provision that would have given the lawmakers and federal workers the same drug coverage as Medicare seniors was struck from the bill because their existing coverage is far more generous than what seniors will get. A lawmaker with $3,500 worth of drug bills a year, just about the average cost of drugs for the average senior in America, would pay $875 in costs. In 2006 the average senior meeting the assets test (no more than $20,000 in savings per couple) with $3,500 in drug bills would pay a total of $2,420 - $420 in estimated premiums, a $250 deductible, 20% of the next $2,000 and all costs after $2,250."

"Seniors will face annual increases in premiums and deductibles - and a growing gap in coverage - for the prescription drugs they buy under the new Medicare law, budget analysts say... After just one year, the Congressional Budget Office projects that seniors would see their $250 deductible and the $2,850 gap for which there is no coverage both jump 10%. By 2013, the eighth year of the program, the deductible and the coverage gap are both projected to grow by 78%. In other words, seniors would pay a $445 deductible and those with the largest drug bills would be entirely responsible for more than $5,000 in drug costs. 'I think these numbers will come as a shock to consumers and they are pretty optimistic projections based on what drug costs are going to do,' said Gail Shearer, a health policy analyst at Consumers Union and an opponent of the legislation."

"Senior citizens angry over the AARP's endorsement of the Medicare bill are ripping up or burning their AARP membership cards and flooding the lobbying group's Internet message board with complaints in what could be the biggest revolt in its ranks since the 1980s. Many fear the Republican-backed bill approved by Congress on Tuesday will harm senior citizens, and they say the AARP -- the nation's most influential retiree lobby, with 35 million members -- sold them out... The law, pushed by President Bush, is the biggest change in Medicare since its creation in 1965, and includes a new prescription drug benefit for 40 million older and disabled Americans... In West Palm Beach, Fla., Sam Oser, a 77-year-old retiree, organized a protest in his retirement community and burned his AARP card. 'The more we thought about the Republican plan -- the more we thought about it, the angrier we got and we felt the AARP was really selling us out,' he said."

GOP MediFraud "would steer at least $125 billion over the next decade in extra assistance to the health care industry and U.S. businesses... The largest chunk of that assistance, according to congressional budget estimates, would be $86 billion worth of payments and tax benefits for employers, giving them a new subsidy for the health benefits that many already provide to retirees. HMO's, hospitals and physicians also would be paid more by the government for treating the 40 million elderly and disabled people in Medicare, the estimates show. Whether this extra money, part of a $400 billion plan to redesign the program, is warranted remains a matter of intense debate. Regardless of whether the payments are needed, the bill's generosity to employers and major sectors of the medical industry helps explain the aggressive lobbying campaigns for the legislation by groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Medical Association."

"It was in doubt to the end. As time expired for the roll call, there were only 58 votes to override the budget objections. But Republicans prevailed on Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Trent Lott (R-Miss.) to change their votes, and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) followed suit. On the cloture vote, 22 of the Senate's 48 Democrats joined most Republicans in opposing continuation of the filibuster, which was led by Kennedy and supported by Democratic presidential candidates John Edwards (N.C.), John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.). But only 11 Democrats voted to brush aside the budget objections. Nearly all the Republicans opposed both Democratic moves. Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) said some Democrats did not want to delay a final vote but sought to express their concern over financing of the legislation, especially subsidies to HMOs and other private interests."

Cheryl Seal writes, "This odious, unconscionable bill reforms Medicare allright! It reforms it right out of the business of caring for the nation's neediest older seniors - the very ones it was designed to protect. It is nothing more than a thinly disguised barrel of greasy, choice pork to be gobbled down by the pharmaceutical and health insurance industries while that little old lady with diabetes down the street, or that elderly man with cataracts and crippling arthritis in that apartment upstairs, have to go without dinner or a winter coat to be able to afford a visit to the doctor's or the drugs they need to survive. Some elderly will suffer unspeakably from non-life-threatening but painful, life-degrading diseases because they will simply go without the treatment that could ease their suffering. What kind of monsters now preside on Capitol Hill? The worst kind: Corporate monsters."

AP reports: "The Senate cleared the way Monday for final congressional passage of legislation to add a prescription drug benefit and a free-enterprise flavor to the government-run Medicare program, repelling twin attacks by die-hard Democratic opponents... Defiant in defeat, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., said the legislation 'starts the unraveling of the Medicare system,' and he accused the Republicans of planning a follow-up attack on Social Security after the next election... Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle called the bill a 'bailout for the HMOs and insurance companies,' and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., said the well-being of seniors had been 'trumped by the interests of those who have money to make and are taking advantage.'"

Tom DeLay engineered the most outrageous vote in the history of the House of Representatives. Votes always take 20 minutes, but DeLay was LOSING 218-216 so he kept the vote open for 3 HOURS until he could kneecap enough members to win. Here is the final roll call. How did YOUR Representative vote? If (s)he voted to destroy Medicare, call his/her office at 202-224-3121 and say you will guarantee his/her defeat in November 2004.

"While campaigning in New Hampshire on Saturday, John Kerry announced that he'd be returning to Washington to help his Senate colleagues filibuster the Medicare bill. The measure narrowly passed the House in the early hours Saturday. Kerry called the legislation 'a boondoggle for the pharmaceutical industry and a raw deal' for the nation's elderly. 'That is why I am going to join Senator Ted Kennedy to lead the filibuster of this legislation,' said Kerry. 'Unfortunately that means I will miss the debate in Iowa. But I think the people of Iowa will understand that potential harm of this bill is worth the effort.' Former Vermont governor Howard Dean and Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., are locked in a tight battle for the top spot in the Jan. 19 caucuses in Iowa, but Kerry is close behind in most polls. A spokeswoman for Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., said he would be leaving Iowa tomorrow to return to Washington to fight the bill." Call 202-224-3121 to urge your Senators to join the filibuster!

"'This is a good bill that will help every Medicare beneficiary,' wrote Tom Scully, the Medicare administrator, in a letter... defending the prescription drug bill. That's flatly untrue. (Are you surprised?) As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, the bill will force millions of beneficiaries to pay more for drugs, thanks to a provision that cuts off supplemental aid from Medicaid. Poorer recipients may find previously affordable drugs moving out of reach. That's only one of a number of anti-retiree measures tucked away in the bill. It contains several Trojan horse provisions that are clearly intended to undermine Medicare over time -- it will allow private insurers to cherry-pick healthy clients in selected cities, and it will heavily subsidize private plans competing with traditional Medicare. Meanwhile, the bill prohibits Medicare from using its bargaining power to cut drug prices; drug company stocks have soared since the bill's details became public."

"AARP, the nation's leading lobbying force for retirees, has a major conflict of interest in its backing for a new Medicare prescription drug plan, opponents charge. The organization receives millions of dollars a year in royalties for insurance marketed under its name. It stands to reap a windfall from the plan, which would pump $400 billion into a new drug benefit and open Medicare to private insurance competition... AARP's annual reports show it has received about $608 million in insurance-related income over the four most recent years for which data are available. That's 30% of its total income, roughly equal to what it collects in membership dues... Much of AARP's insurance business is in policies that pay costs not covered by Medicare - so-called Medigap insurance. UnitedHealth Group signed a 10-year contract with AARP in 1998 to provide health coverage to its 35 million members. The business was worth $3.7 billion last year to the insurance company."

"Seniors and Democrats were stunned when the AARP announced its support of the Trojan Horse Republican Medicare bill. The AARP message board is burning up with rage against the AARP and William Novelli, former ad executive whiz kid, and current head of the AARP. Seniors appear to be canceling their memberships and calling for heads to roll at the AARP headquarters. But Novelli, CEO of the AARP, defiantly dismissed membership outrage at his alliance with the Republicans, who see the proposed Medicare bill as the first step in the privatization and dismantling of the senior health insurance program... Novelli claims he has his AARP seniors in the bag for the GOP. But is being an enthusiastic supporter of Newt Gingrich's wing nut healthcare plan for America doing the best for seniors? Novelli is such a fan of Gingrich that he wrote a preface to Newt's babbling right wing treatise on how to destroy the health safety net for seniors and other Americans: 'Saving Lives & Saving Money.'"

NY Times: "Mr. Bush's popularity has declined over all since early summer, but some recent polls suggest that he lost significantly more ground among voters 65 and older than he did among younger Americans... Many Republicans consider it a top priority to deliver a Medicare drug benefit before next year's election. This could be, many Republican strategists have argued, a transformational event in American politics - a Republican president and a Republican Congress producing the biggest expansion of Medicare, a signature Democratic program, since the program's creation. But the...bills that emerged from the House and Senate fall far short of what many working people typically receive, with large co-payments and gaps in coverage. Many older Americans have also voiced concerns to their lawmakers that they could end up losing coverage they already get from their former employers, which is sometimes better than what the government would provide."

NY Times reports: "As Congress works on legislation to cover prescription drugs under Medicare, lawmakers have been deluged with complaints from retirees who fear losing drug benefits they already have from former employers. Some lawmakers say this issue is emerging as the most immediate threat to the legislation. Congress is frantically seeking ways to address the concern, by offering tax credits, subsidies or other incentives for employers to continue providing drug benefits to retirees. The tax credits would be available to employers who maintain drug coverage or supplement what Medicare provides. Medicare generally does not cover outpatient prescription drugs. Some employers voluntarily provide such coverage though they are not required to do so... Lobbyists for the elderly say that millions of older retirees could be at greater risk of losing employer-sponsored health benefits because of a provision in the Senate bill."

The Hill reports: "Cancer doctors see a coordinated effort by the White House and Congress to siphon federal money from cancer treatment and use it for prescription drugs currently not covered by Medicare. The Bush administration's unexpected move to cut Medicare payments for cancer drugs has left some oncologists feeling they are being targeted unfairly. In an act that caught many healthcare experts off guard, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services indicated last week that it will soon issue a new regulation that will propose cutting Medicare payments for cancer drugs.... As part of their respective Medicare reform bills, the House and Senate have passed legislation that would lower payments for cancer drugs. Oncologists, however, claim that the legislation would hamper patient access to care because it would lower their Medicare reimbursements as well." Is it possible for this administration to do a single purely decent deed? Seriously, is it?

NY Times reports: "House Democrats today began broadcasting television commercials attacking Republican lawmakers around the country for their support of the House-passed plan to create a new prescription drug benefit... The advertisements criticize Republican lawmakers for backing an approach to Medicare that Democrats say would steer those covered by the federal health program into private plans and leave holes in protection from high drug costs. 'The Republican plan has no limits on premiums,' the woman says, 'and a massive gap in coverage that will still cost many seniors thousands.'"

"An emerging prescription drug benefit for retirees represents a victory for drug companies and their lobbyists, who have spent heavily to keep Republicans in control of Congress. Final work on the new Medicare drug benefit -- the biggest change since the health care program was created 38 years ago -- faces Congress as it returns this week from its Fourth of July break... But pharmaceutical-makers already have averted what they feared most: a single new bloc of 40 million consumers with the market power to dramatically drive down prescription prices -- and industry profits... In 2002, drugmakers spent $20 million on congressional races, four-fifths of it to help Republicans. That doesn't count a $17 million television ad campaign that the industry funded to boost Republican members of Congress in close races. Those ads featured Art Linkletter defending Republicans who favored a private model for providing drug benefits. They helped the GOP solidify its grip on Congress."

AP reports: "The Bush administration's top Medicare accountant has calculated how millions of senior citizens would be affected by bringing private managed care into the program, but the administration won't release the information. An earlier analysis suggested that a Republican plan to inject market forces into Medicare could increase premiums for those who stay in traditional programs by as much as 25 percent. If that's still the case, it could help Democrats who argue that the GOP plan is risky for those who want to stay in traditional Medicare, where they can pick any doctor, rather than move to a managed care plan. The administration's Medicare chief threatened to fire his top actuary, Rick Foster, if Foster released his calculations to Capitol Hill Democrats who requested the analysis, officials said... Democrats point[ed] to legislative language approved in 1997 that specifically requires the top Medicare actuary to answer questions from Congress."

"The Senate rejected a Democratic amendment Wednesday to a $400 billion prescription drug benefit plan that would have allowed senior citizens to choose drug coverage through Medicare even if they have private insurance. The Senate voted 58-37 to reject arguments by Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., that seniors should be given a choice of receiving drug benefits through the government health care program or private insurers. Medicare should not just offer 'fallback' coverage under the new prescription drug plan, she said... The bill the Senate is considering would give seniors a chance to have drug coverage whether they stayed in government-run Medicare or chose a private health plan. Seniors who stayed in traditional Medicare would buy a drugs-only policy from private insurers. If two plans were not available in a region, Medicare would offer fallback coverage... Meanwhile, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., planned an amendment that would eliminate a disruption in benefits."

Reuters Health reports: "Senate Finance Committee Democrats on Friday questioned whether a bipartisan agreement to provide prescription drug coverage under Medicare -- the details of which remain sketchy -- would serve seniors' best interests. 'We're here with one hearing (and) with a two-page summary and the most basic kinds of questions, to me, not being able to be answered,' said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. 'I've never quite been through a process as bad as this,' said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va."

NYTimes reports: "In a fundamental change, the Bush administration has begun to weigh cost as a factor in deciding whether Medicare should pay for new drugs and medical procedures. Most notably, in recent weeks, federal officials have adopted policies to limit what Medicare pays for prescription drugs. These actions, they said, set a significant precedent, illustrating how Medicare will try to control spending if Resident Bush and Congress agree on a plan to provide more extensive drug benefits to the elderly and the disabled. The officials said they were not imposing explicit price controls, but stretching federal dollars to ensure that the government would be a prudent purchaser, a goal endorsed by health policy experts. But drug industry executives have strenuously protested the administration's actions. The government, they say, lacks the legal authority, the expertise and the clinical data to make such decisions."

"The Bush administration is proposing drastic cuts in Medicare payments for a wide range of drugs and medical services beginning next year... The new reductions will undoubtedly result in denial of access to care for hundreds of thousands of American seniors, as government payments are slashed for vitally needed drugs and services, forcing hospitals to stop offering many medical treatments. The new rates are scheduled to take effect January 1, 2003. The Medicare payment reductions are mainly aimed at outpatient services, which account for nearly half of all revenue at many US hospitals. Medicare received more than 110 million claims for outpatient services in 2001."

Public Citizen reports: "Some senators want to partially privatize Medicare in September. We defeated similar proposals in July. We must do it again. It's a smart investment in your family's health. Some senators are feeling so much voter pressure to pass a bill providing seniors with drug coverage, they may support a scheme that starts a whole new entitlement program – for the insurance industry. Our job: oppose the scheme. Setting up private drug coverage for seniors and disabled people will give lots of relief to drug and insurance companies – at taxpayers' expense. And it will give the patients one giant headache. Medicare has worked well as a public program for over 35 years. Seniors and people with disabilities, who are most familiar with how Medicare works, hold it in high regard...Every day, there's a new corporate scandal exposing financial mismanagement. Not only is the privatization idea inadequate, it's just plain stupid." Send a free fax today!

Congressional Democrats promised to fight the administration's Medicare reform and prescription drug plan, accusing Bush of abandoning his campaign pledge to seniors. Bush's budget spends $153 billion over the next 10 years on Medicare, but Democrats say $350 billion to $400 billion is needed, and urged Republican lawmakers to free up the additional funding by reducing Bush's $1.6 trillion tax cut.