Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

John Kerry For President "Promises, Scranton"
Republican National Comitee ^ | Sunday, September 05, 2004 | RNC

Posted on 09/06/2004 10:38:00 PM PDT by crushelits

Rhetoric

NARRATOR: “Four years ago, George Bush came to Scranton promising quality health insurance for every senior.” 

CHYRON: George Bush; Scranton, PA; 9/5/2000; “quality health insurance for every senior”  

NARRATOR: “Four years later, 5 million more people without health insurance. Prescription drug prices skyrocketing. Now, Bush is back. But around here, we remember Bush’s broken promises.”

CHYRON: 5 million more people without insurance; Source: Census Bureau Statistics; Drug Prices Skyrocketing; Source: Families USA

NARRATOR:  “America can do better. John Kerry – a  real plan to lower the cost of health care. Because a stronger America begins at home.”

KERRY: “I’m John Kerry and I approve this message.”

CHYRON: See Kerry plan at: www.johnkerry.com; Kerry-Edwards; Approved By John Kerry & Paid For By Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.

The Facts

Kerry Has Done Nothing To Fix Pennsylvania’s Medical Liability Crisis

Kerry Opposed Or Voted To Block Medical Liability Reform At Least Ten Times.  (H.R. 956, CQ Vote #137: Motion Rejected 39-61: R 10-44; D 29-17; I 0-0, 5/2/95, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #140: Motion Agreed To 65-35: R 24-30; D 41-5, 5/2/95, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #141: Motion Agreed To 56-44: R 13-41; D 43-3, 5/2/95, Kerry Voted Yea; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #144: Passed 53-47: R 48-6; D 5-41, 5/2/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #151: Motion Rejected 46-53: R 44-10; D 2-43; I 0-0, 5/4/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #152: Motion Rejected 47-52: R 45-9; D 2-43; I 0-0, 5/4/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #160: Motion Agreed To 54-44:: R 46-7; D 8-37, 5/10/95, Kerry Voted Nay; H.R. 956, CQ Vote #161: Passed 61-37: R 46-7; D 15-30, 5/10/95, Kerry Voted Nay; S. 1052, CQ Vote #212: Motion Agreed To 52-46: R 2-45; D 49-1; I 1-0, 6/29/01, Kerry Voted Yea; S. 812, CQ Vote #197: Motion Agreed To 57-42: R 6-42; D 50-0; I 1-0, 7/30/02, Kerry Voted Yea) 

ü      Medical Liability Reform Could Save Between $60 Billion And $108 Billion In Health Care Costs Annually, Making Health Insurance More Affordable For Millions.  “The [medical malpractice] litigation system also imposes large indirect costs on the health care system. Defensive medicine that is caused by unlimited and unpredictable liability awards not only increases patients’ risk but it also adds costs. The leading study estimates that limiting unreasonable awards for non-economic damages could reduce health care costs by 5-9% without adversely affecting quality of care. This would save $60-108 billion in health care costs each year. These savings would lower the cost of health insurance and permit an additional 2.4-4.3 million Americans to obtain insurance.”  (“Confronting The New Health Care Crisis: Improving Health Care Quality And Lowering Costs By Fixing Our Medical Liability System,” U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services, 7/25/02)

Pennsylvania Is Experiencing A Medical Liability Crisis, According To The American Medical Association.  (“Medical Liability Reform - NOW!” American Medical Association, 3/26/04, p. 7)

 

ü      Pennsylvania Lawmakers Said Kerry Is “Holding Pennsylvania Physicians Hostage” And “Depriving All Americans Of Affordable And Accessible Health Care.”  “Although more needs to be done to restore fairness, common sense, and personal responsibility to Pennsylvania’s lawsuit abuse system, the [PA] Senate has taken an important step forward toward achieving meaningful reform. Unfortunately, Kerry continues to blatantly accuse President Bush and Pennsylvania lawmakers as being responsible for the reason that malpractice reform has not been achieved. Yet Kerry has done nothing to fix our country’s broken lawsuit abuse system, therefore, holding Pennsylvania physicians hostage. He continues to serve as an outspoken opponent of caps on damages and liability reform, thus depriving all Americans of affordable and accessible health care.”  (Sen. Jake Corman, Sen. Jeff Piccola and Rep. Mike Turzai, “Restoring Fairness, Common Sense, & Personal Responsibility To Pennsylvania’s Lawsuit Abuse System,” Centre Daily Times, 7/1/04)

Kerry’s Plan Will Not Lower Cost Of Health Care Or Prescription Drugs

Kerry’s Plan Would Shift More Health Care Costs To Taxpayers Without Reducing Spending.  “Mr. Kerry would partly take the burden off employers by making government responsible for 75% of the cost of catastrophic cases, those running up more than $50,000 in bills. He says these cases account for nearly 20% of private insurers’ costs. But then what? The cost is just transferred to taxpayers but there’s no injection of efficiency into incentives, no reason to imagine total costs won’t continue to grow wildly.” (Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., Op-Ed, “Faint, Desperate Hope For Health Care Leadership,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/17/04)

ü      President Of National Business Group On Health Said “Giving The Government Responsibility For Highest-Cost Medical Cases Shows A ‘Blank-Check Mentality.’”  “The notion is to have taxpayers take the risk of very costly illnesses in exchange for companies’ agreeing to cover all workers, funnel savings to them and take steps to slow the growth of health spending. Mr. Thorpe estimates that companies would have to spend $68 billion over 10 years to provide the required coverage, resulting in a net savings of $222 billion for the companies. … Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health, a coalition of employers, said that the idea is appealing to business ‘if you were voting only on that particular provision.’ But, she adds, giving the government responsibility for highest-cost medical cases shows a ‘blank-check mentality.’ Once a worker’s bill hits the ceiling, she says, ‘there’s no reason for anyone to pay attention to costs.’” (Sarah Lueck, “Businesses Are Wary Of Kerry Health Plan,” The Wall Street Journal, 7/26/04)

ü      Because Kerry Puts Mandates On Businesses In Order To Qualify For Reinsurance Pool, Large Employers With Many Part-Time Workers Probably Would Not Participate. “To qualify, companies would have to institute disease-management programs, which are designed to help reduce the long-term expense of such chronic illnesses as diabetes and heart disease. In addition, employers would have to offer health coverage to all workers, including part-timers. Employers, therefore, would have to weigh the cost of covering all workers against the benefit of the subsidy. Large employers with many part-time workers - such as Wal-Mart, for example - probably would pass, [health policy expert Ken] Thorpe said.”  (Marilyn Werber Serafini, “Targeting The ‘Worried Insured,’” National Journal Magazine, 2/7/04)

Kerry Would Make Government Negotiate Prescription Drug Prices And Allow Importation Of Drugs From Other Countries.  “John Kerry will fight to allow Medicare to negotiate better prescription prices for seniors and will fight to pass reimportation so seniors can get safe quality affordable prescriptions. Kerry will strengthen drug coverage for those who have it - not make it worse.”  (John Kerry For President, “Bush’s Broken Promises: Social Security And Medicare,” Press Release, 3/7/04)

ü   According To Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Government Negotiation Would Not Reduce Costs; Under New Medicare Law, Private Plans Will Negotiate “Substantial Savings.”  “CBO has examined the effect of striking the ‘noninterference’ provision (section 1860D-11(i) of the Social Security Act) as added by P. L. 108-173, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003. That section bars the Secretary of Health and Human Services from interfering with the negotiations between drug manufacturers and pharmacies and sponsors of prescription drug plans, or from requiring a particular formulary or price structure for covered Part D drugs. We estimate that striking that provision would have a negligible effect on federal spending because CBO estimates that substantial savings will be obtained by the private plans and that the Secretary would not be able to negotiate prices that further reduce federal spending to a significant degree. Because they will be at substantial financial risk, private plans will have strong incentives to negotiate price discounts, both to control their own costs in providing the drug benefit and to attract enrollees with low premiums and cost-sharing requirements.”  (Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director, Congressional Budget Office, Letter To Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, 1/23/04)

ü   Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office Concluded That Importation Would Produce Only A Small Reduction In Prescription Drug Spending.  “On the basis of its evaluation of proposals to date, CBO has concluded that permitting the importation of foreign-distributed prescription drugs would produce at most a modest reduction in prescription drug spending in the United States. H.R. 2427, for example, which would have permitted importation from a broad set of industrialized countries, was estimated to reduce total drug spending by $40 billion over 10 years, or by about 1 percent. Permitting importation only from Canada would produce a negligible reduction in drug spending.”  (Colin Baker, Anna Cook, and Margaret Nowak, “Would Prescription Drug Importation Reduce U.S. Drug Spending?” Issue Brief, Congressional Budget Office, 4/29/04)

Kerry Takes Wrong Approach To Expanding Insurance Coverage

Kerry’s FEHB-Style Purchasing Pool Would Probably Attract Older, Sicker Individuals But Not Provide Enough Benefit For The Average Uninsured, Low-Income Person To Buy In.  “The basic problem with KerryCare is its impracticality. Take his commitment to provide federal employee-style health care to every interested individual or business. Since joining would be voluntary, the odds are that the older and less healthy would be overrepresented in the rolls. Further complicating matters is Kerry’s plan to make the insurance community-rated. This attempt at equity would further attract older, sicker patients (they would get a relatively good price on the insurance), while those typically without insurance - healthy, young men and women with low incomes - would balk at the cost.”  (David Gratzer, “From HillaryCare To KerryCare,” The Weekly Standard, 5/24/04)

Kerry’s Plan For Children’s Health Insurance “Is A Compact That Many States May Not Want Or Be Able To Afford.”  “Kerry would pay for his more costly plan by eliminating future tax cuts for the top 2 percent of taxpayers and would shift part of the cost of his health-insurance plan from Washington to state capitals, said Sarah Bianchi, national policy director for the Kerry campaign. Bianchi said Kerry would ‘strike a new compact with the states.’ But it is a compact that many states may not want or be able to afford. Kerry would have the federal government pay the full cost of health insurance for the 20 million children enrolled in Medicaid. In return, states would have to agree to expand the coverage of children in families with income up to three times the poverty level, cover their family members if the family’s income is less than twice the poverty level, and assure that very poor adults without children receive health insurance.” (Lawrence M. O’Rourke, “Wide Gulf Between Bush, Kerry Health-Care Plans,” Scripps Howard News Service, 6/28/04)

Kerry’s Plan Not Focused On Improving Consumer Choice Or Health Insurance Portability.  “There is little talk in the Kerry plan about individuals having control over their own choices. The words consumer choice and Health Savings Accounts don’t show up in any of his health proposals … Further, there is little acknowledgement that the world is changing and that insurance needs to be more portable, with costs and choices determined by consumers, not politicians.”  (Grace-Marie Turner, “The Kerry Plan,” Galen Institute, 3/5/04) 

Millions Of Pennsylvania Seniors Save Money On Prescription Drugs
Under President Bush’s Medicare Law

Medicare Law Signed By President Bush Provides Significant Prescription Drug Savings For All 2.1 Million Of Pennsylvania’s Medicare Beneficiaries. “Beginning in 2006, all of the approximately 2.1 million Medicare beneficiaries living in Pennsylvania will be eligible to get prescription drug coverage through a Medicare-approved plan. In exchange for a monthly premium of about $35, seniors who are now paying the full retail price for prescription drugs will be able to cut their drug costs roughly in half. In many cases, they’ll save more than 50 percent on what they pay for their prescription medicines.”  (“What MMA Means For Pennsylvania,” Fact Sheet, U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services, 2/17/04)

Under New Medicare Law, Seniors Are Now Using Drug Discount Cards To Save Up To 60 Percent On Generic Drugs And Up To 18 Percent On Name Brand Name Prescriptions.  “Seniors and people with disabilities can begin using their Medicare-approved drug discount cards to garner savings on prescription medicines. … Analysis by CMS shows that Medicare beneficiaries can expect discounts of up to 18 percent off the average retail prices for name brand drugs and discounts of between 30 and 60 percent on generic drugs. Mail order and Internet discounts through the cards offer savings of up to 24 percent from comparable services.” (U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services, “HHS Secretary Urges Seniors To Sign Up For Discount Cards,” Press Release, 6/1/04)  

ü Low-Income Seniors Can Receive $1,200 Credit Over The Next 18 Months That Will Offer Savings Of Up To 70 Percent On Their Prescription Expenses.  “On top of the discounts, low-income beneficiaries can qualify for a $600 credit this year to help pay for their prescription medicines and another $600 in 2005. Any money from the credit not spent this year will carry over into 2005. For millions of low-income beneficiaries, these savings translate to 30 to 70 percent or more reductions in their drug costs.”  (U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services, “HHS Secretary Urges Seniors To Sign Up For Discount Cards,” Press Release, 6/1/04)

“Over 4 Million Seniors Already Are Saving On Their Prescription Medicines Through Medicare-Approved Prescription Drug Discount Card.”  (U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services, “HHS Proposes New Rules To Deliver Better Benefits And Savings On Drugs For Medicare Beneficiaries,” Press Release, 7/26/04)

President Bush Is Acting To Reduce Cost Of Health Care And Expand Insurance Coverage

Led Effort To Save Americans As Much As $3.5 Billion Each Year By Moving Low-Priced Generic Drugs To The Market Faster.  President Bush today announced new regulations to hasten the pace at which generic drugs are brought to market, a measure the administration says will save $3.5 billion annually after it takes effect Aug. 18. … Specifically, the regulations will limit original drugmakers to one 30-month ‘stay’ blocking the entry of generic drugs by filing patent lawsuits. … The FDA also said it will make internal changes, speeding its review procedures to reduce the time it takes for generic drugs to be declared safe. With a $13 million increase in its budget for generic drugs requested by Bush, the FDA aims to reduce its generic drug application process to 17 months from 20 months.”  (Dana Milbank, “New Drug Rules Aim To Speed Generics,” The Washington Post, 6/13/03)

Enacted Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) To Help Millions Of Americans With Out-Of-Pocket Medical Expenses, And Offered New Proposal To Make HSAs Even More Affordable.  “The Medicare bill that President Bush signed into law establishes new tax-free savings accounts for individuals and groups who purchase affordable high-deductible health plans. Businesses and individuals who take advantage of these accounts will save substantial sums on health insurance premiums and gain more control over health care expenditures. The tax-free, portable accounts will help families pay their routine medical expenses and provide a tax-preferred means of saving for future health care needs. … The President’s proposal will allow individuals who establish HSAs to deduct the premiums they pay for their low-premium, high-deductible health insurance policies. This new deduction will be available to taxpayers whether or not they itemize. It will reduce the net cost of these policies and encourage the use of HSAs for saving for health care needs and making wise, cost-effective health care choices.”  (The White House, “Expanding Access And Increasing The Affordability Of Health Insurance Through Health Savings Accounts,” Fact Sheet, 8/9/04)

Urged Congress To Address Rising Health Costs Through Medical Liability Reform.  “President Bush is trying to resuscitate a measure to place nationwide caps on medical malpractice awards, a move he has made a centerpiece of his election-year focus on health care. Bush argues that a nationwide ceiling would drive down soaring health care costs and save taxpayers money. … In response, the president was issuing a new appeal for the legislation …” (Scott Lindlaw, “President Pushes Effort To Limit Malpractice Awards,” The Associated Press, 1/26/04)

Would Allow Small Businesses To Form Purchasing Pools To Negotiate Lower Health Insurance Costs For Their Workers.  (“President Bush’s FY 2005 Budget,” Fact Sheet, The White House, 2/2/04)

Proposed Lowering Health Care Costs By Expanding Electronic Medical Records To Nearly All Americans Within The Next Ten Years.  (“Innovation Economy Policy Book,” Executive Summary, The White House, 4/26/04)

<![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]>


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: ads; adwatch; campaignads; forpresident; gop; johnkerry; kerry; kerryads; promisesscranton; rnc; tvads

1 posted on 09/06/2004 10:38:01 PM PDT by crushelits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: crushelits

They've got a plan for everything ... Where the hell ARE all these plans?


2 posted on 09/06/2004 10:47:07 PM PDT by JennysCool (Funny how militant environmentalists always ruin the lawn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crushelits
But then what? The cost is just transferred to taxpayers but there’s no injection of efficiency into incentives, no reason to imagine total costs won’t continue to grow wildly.

This is one of my favorite Kerry proposals. He provides incentives for higher medical bills so employers can dump the costs on the Federal Government...or right back in our pockets. Kerry is a complete idiot.

3 posted on 09/06/2004 10:59:05 PM PDT by Dolphy (Support swiftvets.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson