Bush to Veto Medicare Bill

C

Cypress

Well-known member
Dems postion: Allow government to negotiate bulk discounts for medicare drugs.

GOP postion: Our medicare legislation is working so well, why mess with success?



Bush renews vow to veto Medicare bill

By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - President Bush renewed his veto threat Friday as Democrats pushed legislation that would require the government to negotiate drug prices for Medicare patients.

The House began debating the bill that would require the secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct those negotiations. It's one of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's six priorities for the new Democratic-controlled House.

Democrats touted the negotiations as a way to save money for seniors and taxpayers. They said that the government would be able to drive down prices by buying in bulk.

"Medicare overpays drug companies in purchasing medicine," said the bill's author, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich.

Republicans countered that the drug benefit, which kicked in on Jan. 1, 2006, has cost less than anticipated, and the large majority of seniors and disabled who use the program are satisfied.

"With all that's right with the program, it seems unwise and unkind to jeopardize its success," said Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas).



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070112/ap_on_go_pr_wh/medicare_drugs
 
thats why nancy johnson R-CT lost her seat to chris murphy, b/c she voted w/ bush's big giveaway to the drug companies over seniors and his atrocious medicare bill
 
Why should the government not negotiate just like private providers do? Let the market decide how much medicine will cost!
 
Apparently the Republicans think everyone but the government it supposed to practice capitalistic methods.
 
Topspin said:
it's not capitalists its socialist.
Price controls people, Bush should and will veto.
Click to expand...



But Topspin, how is that socialistic? They just want the ability to negotiate bulk orders, bulk discounts.

I did this every day of the week with manufacturers that I bought from...many orders did not qualify for a discount because I just was not buying enough of them but if I had a hot item and was willng to commit to it, I placed a huge order on it and in this process, I NEGOTIATED a discount for my major or bulk, purchase.

All other european countries and Canada buy their drugs from our Pharma industry at a bulk discount also....buying power should count, and cutting out the middle man by eliminating the "bulk order guy" on our purchases for medicare prescriptions would save us billions in future taxes?

The Va buys in bulk from PHARMA as they should, why should the free market be allowed to work?

Care
 
thats exactly what I'm saying, the government is not a market group.
I would be price controls and I'm not for that.
 
Topspin said:
thats exactly what I'm saying, the government is not a market group.
I would be price controls and I'm not for that.
Click to expand...
Negotiating the lowest price is much like accepting bids for a contract and taking the most qualified that offers at the lowest price.

If it were direct price fixing, like Nixon attempted, I too would hate the idea. However negotiating with the company, and its competitor, to get a good price is not exactly the same thing.
 
WOW, how can anyone who condtantly talks about Gov waste be FOR something that would allow the gov to have the same right as any insurance Co to negociate prices with the drug cos?

I just dont get it?
 
uscitizen said:
The government represents a market group, US! They are merly our purchasing agents.
Click to expand...
Only if they are a supplier. If they are, they would be competing with US companies providing the same. Is it right to have the government competing with a company?
 
the government is not producing or selling the drugs, how are they competing. Oh the same was as they award any contracts. Lowest qualified bidder huh ?
 
The government is a provider, like any pharmacist. To say that they are not producing it is ridiculous, neither is the pharmacist. They are providing it and thus are competing directly with companies providing the same service. Should the government, especially one that doesn't care about whether they overspend and make no profit, be competing directly with US companies?

If the government is in a position to negotiate pricing, it is because they are a provider. That they are not "selling" it is an illusion based on the fact that you cannot seem to understand that we are paying for it.
 
Damocles said:
Only if they are a supplier. If they are, they would be competing with US companies providing the same. Is it right to have the government competing with a company?
Click to expand...

As fair as it is for a company to compete with the government, I suppose?

care
 
uscitizen said:
the government is not producing or selling the drugs, how are they competing. Oh the same was as they award any contracts. Lowest qualified bidder huh ?
Click to expand...
Lowest qualified bidder is usually reserved for things such as NASA or the Military where there is no direct competitor. When they directly compete with companies is where they begin to step in the wrong direction. Allow the companies to negotiate pricing and contract with them to provide the drugs at a lower cost. Placing companies at a disadvantage by competing directly with them in a no-profit necessary situation is not the same as "lowest qualified bidder".
 
Care4all said:
As fair as it is for a company to compete with the government, I suppose?

care
Click to expand...
Not exactly. It's more like people who are upset with Microsoft because they can underprice and kill competitors. The government has no need for profit, they are not seeking it. Therefore competing directly with companies as a direct supplier should not be their place. It would be better to negotiate contracts with those companies, lowest qualified bidder, and allow them to negotiate pricing with the drug companies.
 
So the government stockpiles and dispenses the drugs, billing the supplemential medicare/medicaid insurance companies ? Yeah right :D

Hmm last I rercall hearing a liscenced DR was required to write prescriptions for drugs which seem to be filled at the local drug stores from what I have seen. and I help a couple of folks that are older than I deal with their medicare stuff.
Well the VA does provide drugs from their pharmacy, but I think that is the extent of the govt dispensing drugs.
 
The "bulk" price affects the price charged by the local pharmacies who should not be confused with the drug MAKERS....the bulk price negotiated with the MAKER, transends to the final price charged and reinbursed by the various insurance companies for the medicines, I thought? Thus taking much longer to reach the "donut hole".... helping the individual that is sick, taking many medications, and helping the us govt by the lower prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top