These young Republicans who are calling up have no clue

what is happening to Elders. This is on CSpan. There was this 25 year old who said that she wanted the bill passed simply because it was a health bill. She also said that she is going to need health care in future, but she support Republicans. If she wanted health care, she should be supporting Democrats.

Then, this 20 year old from California calls up and says he wants the bill passed because he feels that a 25 % reduction in the cost of prescription drugs is a huge savings. Well, you could save even MORE if you import drugs from Canada instead of giving handouts to the drug companies and HMO's.

and I do not either. It is a running point for Bush.

and said it is the international intelligence agencies that are doing the bombings. I am sure they do shady stuff, but not the bombing in Turkey.

They listen to Limbaugh...

By police investigators, BWAHAHAHAHAHA

I need to find the Wednesday paper...the bill was broken down point by point on a dollar basis.

There is no 25% savings. It is 15%

But the limits and deductions make the bill nearly a wash for most seniors. You'd pay the same for your drugs either way, after the deductibles and limitation. Plus, there is a provision for catastrophic drug coverage; the bill will pay a significant amount of the cost of drugs for extreme circumstances. Oddly, there is a gap between $2200 in meds and $3800 in meds where seniors get NO drug benefit should their "catastrophe" fall within that window.

It really, really is a disaster of a bill. My wife, a Nurse Practioner, added it all up and it just makes no sense. Why can't "real people?"

I'll find the article...my figures above might be off a bit, I am going from memory.

REPUBLICANS ARE PUSHING THIS BILL: THAT IS CLUE NUMBER ONE that this does NOT, WILL NOT, benefit the average person (senior). IT WILL LINE SOMEONE'S POCKETS.

If the Republicans strongly support it,

A. It benefits big business
B. It screws everyone else

You know exactly who it will benefit; drug company stocks shot up when it was introduced.

A couple of Highlights...

------------<snip>---------

Dozens of complex provisions in the new legislation will be critical to the congressional votes and to seniors' understanding of the new math. Here are some of the most important numbers:

15 percent - The savings the Bush administration estimates would be available to Medicare beneficiaries who purchase a drug discount card. The card is envisioned as a temporary measure to help seniors until the full drug benefit takes effect in 2006. The card would cost about $25 a year.

22 percent - The portion of Medicare beneficiaries' total prescription drug costs the new drug plan would cover over the next decade. The relatively low number is why groups such as Consumers Union say the new plan does not go far enough. Seniors are projected to spend $1.8 billion on prescription drugs over the decade.

$35 - The estimated average monthly premium that beneficiaries would pay to enroll in the new drug plan. The premium is not fixed in law and could increase if drug costs increase in the future.

$275 - The annual deductible for the new drug coverage. When combined with the monthly premiums, most middle-income beneficiaries would pay $695 annually before they receive any benefit. The premium and deductible would be waived for low-income beneficiaries - those with incomes of $12,100 a year or less - which is one reason AARP supports the legislation.

$1,000 - The amount a person of any age could set aside each year in new tax-free accounts to pay for medical expenses. Critics say the provision could fragment the insurance market; supporters say it opens a new option to cover medical expenses.

-------<snip>--------------

$3,600 - The point at which catastrophic coverage would kick in. The government would pay 95 percent of beneficiaries' drug costs above this level, but nothing between $2,200 and $3,600. The catastrophic coverage is another reason why AARP supports the legislation.

$80,000 - The annual income level at which people would start to pay higher premiums for doctors' services and other outpatient Medicare services. The premium would roughly triple for seniors with annual incomes exceeding $200,000. This is a cost-saving measure that, for the first time, would introduce differential Medicare premiums depending on a beneficiary's annual income.

---------<snip>-----------


http://www.ctnow.com/news/health/hc-medicare1119.artnov19,0,7615003.story?coll=hc-headlines-health

Went to our Democratic meeting last night and learned more about the horrific Medicare bill. The gap the Republicans now have on the table is no coverage from $2000 to $4900 and the higher level will be pushed to $5044 before they are done. This along with $420 raise in premiums plus $275 deductable and 25% of the first $2200 ($550) leads to a pretty hefty bill for seniors. My mom will probably lose her good coverage she gets (she is a retired State employee) for this poor coverage. As her drug bill tops $5000/year she stands to pay over $4000 out of pocket for her medications. She now pays $280.

Went to our Democratic meeting last night and learned more about the horrific Medicare bill. The gap the Republicans now have on the table is no coverage from $2000 to $4900 and the higher level will be pushed to $5044 before they are done. This along with $420 raise in premiums plus $275 deductable and 25% of the first $2200 ($550) leads to a pretty hefty bill for seniors. My mom will probably lose her good coverage she gets (she is a retired State employee) for this poor coverage. As her drug bill tops $5000/year she stands to pay over $4000 out of pocket for her medications. She now pays $280.