Q: Should Medicare use its
bargaining power to negotiate lower prescription prices?
A: Medicare should be able to use its bulk purchasing power to negotiate lower prices for seniors. This practice is currently used by the Veterans' Administration, but is actually prohibited in
the new Medicare program.
Q: What about imposing an annual limit on federal Medicare spending?
A: Oppose. I believe that more effective ways of curbing federal spending on Medicare exist. Going after provider fraud is one key component.
Expand Medicare for people, not for drug companies
With healthcare costs soaring, and the number of uninsured Americans growing by the day, America is approaching a national healthcare crisis. Washington has failed to address the healthcare crisis. The Bush Administration cut billions from Medicaid and
proposes further cuts to Medicare. The new Medicare part D prescription drug helps drug company profits more than it does seniors. Claire will fight for the health care needs of everyday Missourians, not the bottom lines for HMOs and drug companies.
Source: Campaign website, www.ClaireOnline.com, "Issues"
May 2, 2006
Negotiate for lower Rx prices and reimportation
It's unAmerican to make it criminal for the government to negotiate lower prices for our seniors. I intend to make Washington more accountable to our seniors. [My plan includes]:
Extend the enrollment period and create flexibility.
Allow Medicare to use its bulk purchasing power to negotiate with drug companies for lower drug prices.
Allow all Americans to re-import lower-priced prescription drugs from other countries.
Source: Campaign website, www.ClaireOnline.com, "Issues"
May 2, 2006
Uncovering Medicaid waste reduces cost of medicine
As State Auditor, Claire made state government more accountable to the people it serves, uncovering millions of dollars in wasteful spending and exposing inefficient government practices.
She advocated ways to save millions in the Medicaid program designed to reduce the cost of medicine for everyday Missourians.
Source: Campaign website, www.ClaireOnline.com, "About Claire"
Dec 25, 2005
Voted YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility.
Allows State Children's Health Insurance Programs (SCHIP), that require state legislation to meet additional requirements imposed by this Act, additional time to make required plan changes. Pres. Bush vetoed this bill on Dec. 12, 2007, as well as a version (HR976) from Feb. 2007.
Proponents support voting YES because:
Rep. DINGELL: This is not a perfect bill, but it is an excellent bipartisan compromise. The bill provides health coverage for 3.9 million children who are eligible, yet remain uninsured. It meets the concerns expressed in the President's veto message [from HR976]:
It terminates the coverage of childless adults.
It targets bonus payments only to States that increase enrollments of the poorest uninsured children, and it prohibits States from covering families with incomes above $51,000.
It contains adequate enforcement to ensure that only US citizens are covered.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
Rep. DEAL: This bill
[fails to] fix the previous legislation that has been vetoed:
On illegal immigration: Would the verification system prevent an illegal alien from fraudulently using another person's name to obtain SCHIP benefits? No.
On adults in SCHIP: Up to 10% of the enrollees in SCHIP will be adults, not children, in the next 5 years, and money for poor children shouldn't go to cover adults.
On crowd-out: The CBO still estimates there will be some 2 million people who will lose their private health insurance coverage and become enrolled in a government-run program.
Veto message from President Bush:
Like its predecessor, HR976, this bill does not put poor children first and it moves our country's health care system in the wrong direction. Ultimately, our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage--not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage. As a result, I cannot sign this legislation.
Reference: Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act;
Bill H.R. 3963
; vote number 2007-403
on Nov 1, 2007
Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D.
Would require negotiating with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices that may be charged to prescription drug plan sponsors for covered Medicare part D drugs.
Proponents support voting YES because:
This legislation is an overdue step to improve part D drug benefits. The bipartisan bill is simple and straightforward. It removes the prohibition from negotiating discounts with pharmaceutical manufacturers, and requires the Secretary of Health & Human Services to negotiate. This legislation will deliver lower premiums to the seniors, lower prices at the pharmacy and savings for all taxpayers.
It is equally important to understand that this legislation does not do certain things. HR4 does not preclude private plans from getting additional discounts on medicines they offer seniors and people with disabilities. HR4 does not establish a national formulary. HR4 does not require price controls. HR4 does not hamstring research and development by pharmaceutical houses.
HR4 does not require using the Department of Veterans Affairs' price schedule.
Opponents support voting NO because:
Does ideological purity trump sound public policy? It shouldn't, but, unfortunately, it appears that ideology would profoundly change the Medicare part D prescription drug program, a program that is working well, a program that has arrived on time and under budget. The changes are not being proposed because of any weakness or defect in the program, but because of ideological opposition to market-based prices. Since the inception of the part D program, America's seniors have had access to greater coverage at a lower cost than at any time under Medicare.
Under the guise of negotiation, this bill proposes to enact draconian price controls on pharmaceutical products. Competition has brought significant cost savings to the program. The current system trusts the marketplace, with some guidance, to be the most efficient arbiter of distribution.
Status: Cloture rejected Cloture vote rejected, 55-42 (3/5ths required)
Reference: Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act;
Bill S.3 & H.R.4
; vote number 2007-132
on Apr 18, 2007
