Opinion Pieces Examine Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Debate
Several opinion pieces published recently address the congressional debate over a Medicare prescription drug benefit. Summaries of the opinion pieces appear below.
-
Bangor Daily News: The Medicare prescription drug benefit bill approved by the Senate Finance Committee last week "is the result of too many years of fighting, a scarcity of money post-tax cuts and an acute sense that failure to have a senior drug benefit ready for the 2004 election would look bad on presidential and congressional resumes," a Daily News editorial states (Bangor Daily News, 6/12).
- Thomas Oliphant, Boston Globe: Approval of Medicare prescription drug benefit legislation by the Senate Finance Committee last week is "impressive" and "foreshadows a similar margin" in the House, but the "real test will be how the Senate reacts when the reliably partisan and ideological" House "completes its own version and a final measure is negotiated," Oliphant, a Globe columnist, writes in an opinion piece (Oliphant, Boston Globe, 6/15).
-
Chicago Tribune: The Medicare prescription drug benefit bills in the House and Senate would "cost a lot of money" and would "ultimately disappoint many seniors," according to a Tribune editorial. Although Congress will likely pass a bill that President Bush will sign, the "hard work to fix Medicare will remain undone," the editorial states (Chicago Tribune, 6/15).
-
Dayton Daily News: The passage of a Medicare prescription drug benefit bill this year would represent "the most important policy decision affecting seniors in decades," according to a Daily News editorial. Although the "time has come to adopt the benefit," as Medicare beneficiaries have "waited too long" for prescription drug coverage, a "bigger, tougher decision -- how to keep Medicare affordable for the long haul -- still remains," the editorial states (Dayton Daily News, 6/12).
-
Detroit News: The "wildly expensive new drug plan" passed by the Senate Finance Committee last week offers "very little in the way of reform" and is "motivated by presidential election politics rather than the long-term good of the country," a News editorial states. According to the editorial, the legislation "will certainly lead to a bankrupting of Medicare and place an oppressive burden on the backs of future taxpayers" (Detroit News, 6/16).
- Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Foster's Daily Democrat: The Senate Medicare prescription drug benefit bill represents a "great opportunity to both provide prescription drugs for seniors and improve the quality of care seniors receive," and it is "a challenge we must meet right now," Gregg writes in a Daily Democrat opinion piece. According to Gregg, a "Band-Aid will not work; we need a real, comprehensive remedy right now" (Foster's Daily Democrat, 6/12).
- Ronald Brownstein, Los Angeles Times: The Medicare prescription drug benefit bill in the House and Senate -- which would enact the "largest expansion of Medicare since its inception" -- "may be the most blatant example of generational irresponsibility in U.S. history," Brownstein writes in his Times "Washington Outlook" column. The "most important move" President Bush and Congress can make "to meet seniors' drug needs responsibly is to raise today's taxes to the level where they are sufficient to fund the services society expects and demands," Brownstein writes (Brownstein, Los Angeles Times, 6/16).
-
Macon Telegraph: "Ideological differences and partisan ploys" last year prevented congressional agreement on a Medicare prescription drug benefit bill, but this year "has to be the breakthrough year" for the legislation as Medicare beneficiaries, some of the nation's "most active voters," are "watching to see whether the promises of 2000 and 2002 will be fulfilled," according to a Telegraph editorial (Macon Telegraph, 6/12).
-
New York Times: The Senate Medicare prescription drug benefit bill has a "patchwork quality about it" as lawmakers worked to address a number of "conflicting interests," but the legislation "looks like a reasonable start" to help beneficiaries pay for prescription drugs "without damaging the traditional Medicare program," a Times editorial states. According to the editorial, the bills "moving toward votes in both houses of Congress offer the best hope in years of providing a Medicare drug benefit," and lawmakers will have "opportunities later to repair any deficiencies" (New York Times, 6/16).
-
Peoria Journal Star: A congressional agreement on a Medicare prescription drug benefit bill "threatens to be clumsy, inefficient and costly," according to a Journal Star editorial. Although a Medicare prescription drug benefit will reduce the "enormous burden" of medication costs for beneficiaries, for "how long is a good question," the editorial states (Peoria Journal Star, 6/12).
-
San Jose Mercury News: A congressional agreement on Medicare prescription drug benefit legislation could help millions of beneficiaries obtain affordable prescription drugs by 2006 and -- with a "little tweaking" -- could provide "an excellent framework for a long-overdue benefit," according to a Mercury News editorial (San Jose Mercury News, 6/12).
-
Wall Street Journal: The Senate Medicare prescription drug benefit bill "is nothing more than a wealth transfer" from younger workers to seniors, a Journal editorial states, adding that the "problem of genuinely poor seniors can be handled with a drug discount card or a means-tested subsidy" (Wall Street Journal, 6/16).
- Robert Moffit, Washington Times: The current Medicare program "does not work," and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program "provides a blueprint for a more affordable way to add a prescription drug benefit for seniors, fully integrated into a health insurance package," Moffit, director of the Center for Health Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation, writes in a Times opinion piece (Moffit, Washington Times, 6/16).