AN ANALYSIS OF THE BUSH PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLAN

In the first four years of the ten year plan, "Bush would hand off responsibility to the states in a way none of the other proposals envisions – giving them billions of dollars as early as next year to manage prescription benefits for elderly residents who are poor or have especially big drug bills. For the long run, his plan would tie any expansion of drug benefits to a controversial plan for restructuring Medicare, proposed by a small Senate bipartisan group that has acknowledged it is politically unsellable this year.

"Bush yesterday filled in many blanks in his thinking about one of the prime issues of this year's election, but his speech in Pennsylvania and documents released by his campaign leave certain crucial details vague. While saying the government would pay 25 percent of their monthly insurance premium, the plan does not spell out whether most Medicare patients would have to pay a yearly deductible before their government benefits began or how much of the price of each prescription they would have to pick up on their own. Instead, touting market competition and flexibility, Bush would let individual insurance companies make those decisions.

"Similarly, his plan would dedicate $110 billion between 2004 and 2010 for Medicare 'modernization,' but it does not specify how much of that money would subsidize prescription drugs and how much would be used for other changes to the program. The governor's proposal means that both major presidential candidates now have set forth substantive plans to address widely acknowledged shortcomings in Medicare, the 1960s-era federal program that provides health insurance to nearly 40 million elderly Americans. The program is considered antiquated in its coverage of prescription drugs, the most rapidly escalating form of health care costs in the nation, paying for drugs while patients are in the hospital, but not for those they use at home. About one-third of Medicare patients have no drug coverage, while others buy private insurance supplements that are expensive and relatively ungenerous.

"Bush would spend less money than Gore to fill those gaps in coverage and, as a result, would offer less help. According to Kenneth E. Thorpe, a professor of health policy at Emory University who has studied candidates' health plans, the "catastrophic" coverage Bush proposed for people with more than $6,000 in drug costs would help perhaps 1 percent of all Medicare patients, or about 300,000 people. Gore's plan would help people with more than $4,000 in drug costs, helping perhaps 7 percent of those patients, or about 2.7 million people, according to Thorpe's analysis. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the premiums and subsidies in Gore's plan would motivate virtually all Medicare patients without drug coverage to sign up, while far fewer would be drawn to [Bush's plan].

"The question of how to make medicine more affordable for older Americans has assumed particular urgency because the main approach the government has tried over the last few years – encouraging elderly people to join private health maintenance organizations, which traditionally have offered better drug benefits than "fee for service" Medicare – has hit serious snags. During the last two years, some HMOs have dropped out of Medicare, complaining that the government is not paying them enough. Other plans have remained in the program, but have stopped covering medication or have started compelling patients to chip in more....

"Health and Human Services Secretary Donna E. Shalala told reporters yesterday, "Under the Bush plan, there will will be wide variations [in drug coverage] across the country. Geography and what kind of health plans you have in your area will determine what you get." Bush's approach was received enthusiastically, however, by the Health Insurance Association of America, an industry trade group that recommended several features of his plan a year ago." --Amy Goldstein, WP, 9/6/00

We assume that Bush's long-delayed prescription drug plan was given input by Deborah Steelman, his major healthcare adviser who is a Washington lobbyist for the health care industry. (See the last story here) Apart from the desire by Bush to privatize the federal healthcare system as a way of rewarding his campaign contributers (read about his connections to Prudential, Cigna, and Aetna here) as well as his financial mentors (read about HMO owner Marvin Rainwater here), we're concerned that millions of seniors in need are not covered by his plan and, even if they were, Bush has no money allocated to pay for it. (Read here.) Further, if Texas is any example, the idea of handing over more federal money to the states to be given to the poor is questionable, at best. In Texas, under the direction of Bush appointee and abortion advocate Dr. William Archer, the Department of Health has been accused of not providing federally funded health clinics for the poor because such clinics would need to provide reproductive services under federal guidelines. Dr. Archer recently was willing to assert that, in spite of Texas' terrible health statistics, providing insurance to the uninsured would not change their lives. Archer, the son of retiring U.S. Rep. Bill Archer, R-Houston, has been a longtime proponent of abstinence-based sex education, having been responsible for Poppy's gag rule on abortion education as an official in that administration, and runs his massive state department with an obsessive, socially conservative view for guidance. (Rep. Archer, his father, has been mentioned as a candidate for Sec. of the Treasury if Bush were to be elected president.) (Read here) Finally, it's no secret that insurance companies and HMO's, having profits as their primary interest, are pulling out of Medicare in droves. If they were to be given charge of the prescription drug program, they would have no need to pull out, they would simply raise prices, cut benefits, and cut participants. Keep in mind that while talking about such issues as Governor of Texas, Bush said he wanted people to have the best health care they could pay for. --Politex, 9/6/00

"The Bush proposal is closer to the position favored by the pharmaceutical industry, though it is not exactly what drug makers want. Mr. Gore is running on a proposal that was developed in the White House and submitted to Congress by President Clinton earlier this year; it is closer to the position favored by many consumer groups." NYT

"Gore's plan would cost more and cover more people, generally offering them higher benefits. Bush's plan would cover fewer people and cost less." SLATE

"The Bush plan would fundamentally restructure Medicare, forcing the government plan to compete with private plans for the first time....Gore, in turn, contended Bush's proposal would leave 'millions of seniors without any prescription drug coverage.' He said Bush won't have the money for a major drug plan if he spends as much of the expected federal surplus as he has promised on a tax cut." AP

"In contrast with the vice president's $250 billion proposal, the Bush plan offers $158 billion, largely in state grants, to cover the cost of prescriptions for the poorest seniors." SALON

"Mr. Bush wants to use private industry, including insurance companies and health maintenance organizations, to deliver drug benefits and other medical services to the elderly. But the government would still pay most of the costs, and it would supervise insurers serving the elderly, approving or disapproving all plans." NYT

"Bush wants to give money to poorer seniors to buy private medical insurance to cover prescription drugs. His plan would cover the full cost of the premiums for individuals who make $11,300 or less, and for couples who make $15,200 or less." SLATE

"The $158 billion would include $48 billion that Mr. Bush wants to see go to state assistance programs over the next four years to immediately provide prescription drugs to seniors with low incomes. The remaining $110 billion would be used to modernize Medicare over the next 10 years." NYT

"The Gore campaign said Bush's plan leaves millions of seniors without coverage, and called it "a plan of, by and for the big drug companies." Gore wants to allow all Medicare beneficiaries to pay an optional premium to receive prescription drug coverage. Gore would cover the cost of the premium for low-income seniors. His plan, when fully implemented, would "cover half the cost of prescription drugs up to $5,000 a year." SLATE

Side-by-Side Comparison of Drug Policies..... Transcript of Bush Speech

Bush/Cheney Weasel Words About Their Non-Existent Perscription Drug Program

Step Right Up, Step Right Up, Ladies and Gentlemen, to...The Bush Wedding Video!!! (click here)......

Bush Tangles Tongue on Tax Tally of Trillions. 8/23/00

Troubling News About the Bush Charter School Program. 8/10/00

Troubling News About George P. Bush. 8/10/00

Can a Jew Go to Heaven? George W. Bush Answered "No." 8/8/00

Bush's KISS Playbook. 8/1/00

Bush Smoking Gun? Kids' Money and Tax Cuts. 7/27/00

How Mary Cheney Outed Her Father. 7/26/00

Stories About Midland, Texas and Bush

--Midland is the Rape Capitol of Texas. 8/12/00
--Sign in a West Texas Restaurant Window--"No Mexicans or Dogs Allowed." 8/9/00
--Questions Still Surround Laura Bush's Midland Tragedy 8/7/00
--Midland Is a World of Millionaire Oil Bosses with Eastern Family Connections 8/6/00
--"The words 'nigger' and 'mescan' fly wildly to this day in Bush's Midland, Texas." 8/5/00
--In Midland Opportunity for All Isn't True for Everyone 8/4/00
--Bush Claims He Wants to Model America After Midland, Texas 8/3/00
--(letters invited)

THE TRUTH BEHIND BUSH'S SPEECH

At the start of the GOP Convention, the New York Times editorialized that it was time for Bush to provide some specifics to make sense of his vague stump-speech generalizations, and that his address to the GOP Convention offered the proper opportunity to do so. Unfortunately, it was not to be. Vague generalizations were still the order of the day. What follows is a summary of the issues and policies that Bush presented in his speech last night and our analysis of the specifics that need to be discussed. Naturally, without specifics, Bush is asking the American people to give him a blank check. Perhaps that's why he asked us to trust him several times during his speech. Trust a politician with a blank check? Sure, right. In particular, Bush's Texas record of broken trust indicates he has not earned it. For example, click on "Health Care" below. --Politex, 8/4/00

From S&L to S. S. hasn't junior learned anything from poppy's savings and loan scandal? Bush's Mushroom Management bush robs peter (budget) to pay paul (tax cuts), then he stonewalls the poor to balance budget. BUSH DOES THE "RIGHT THING" (FOR SELF) BUSH FEEDS NAACP "BABY FOOD" HEALTH CARE AND THE LADY LOBBYIST IS BUSH A DIFFERENT KIND OF RACIST? Bush Stiffs Kids and Lies Bush Threatens Church-State Divvying Up the Prez Spoils garlic on cheney Bush Watch is a daily political internet magazine, a non-advocacy site paid for and edited by Politex, a non-affiliated U.S. citizen. Based in Austin, Tx., publication began on February 1, 1998, prior to any other official or unofficial G. W. Bush site. (c) 1998-2000 Politex. Permission of author required for reprinting. The duration of the working links is not under our control. Bush Watch has not reviewed all of the sites linked to our site and is not responsible for the content of any off-site pages or any other sites linked to our site. Your linking to any other off-site pages or other sites from our site is at your own risk. Send all e-mail to Politex.