For U.S. Representative Cal Dooley, co-founder of the New Democrat Coalition, April has been a particularly busy month.
On April 2, Dooley and a group of 23 centrist Democrats introduced a Medicare prescription drug bill (HR 1568), known as the Medicare Rx Now Act of 2003. As the principal author, Dooley followed an approach developed by the Progressive Policy Institute that has the potential to deliver on a promise both parties have thus far failed to keep.
"Many of my colleagues have become frustrated by Congress' failure to consider a fiscally responsible prescription drug proposal that provides legitimate relief to seniors within the Medicare system," Dooley said. "That is why we have developed this alternative to gain support from both sides of the aisle and enact a benefit this year."
The bill's principles are simple yet compelling: reassure the sickest seniors that drug costs won't bankrupt them, help the poorest seniors with comprehensive benefits, provide all seniors with group-purchasing discounts, and don't ruin the coverage that seniors already have.
The benefits are similarly clear-cut: all Medicare beneficiaries would receive catastrophic insurance for drug costs over $4,000 a year. The deductible would be waived for low-income beneficiaries. There would be no premium, and the additional benefits would work with existing coverage, including employer-based retiree policies, privately purchased Medigap supplemental plans, Medicare HMO plans, the Medicaid program for low-income seniors, and other state-based pharmaceutical assistance programs. There are no gaps in the benefits, no extra premiums to pay, and no incentives for employers to drop their retiree coverage.
The drug benefit is also universal: all seniors would get a drug card that would provide discounts for all drug purchases. The card would track all of their drug purchases, helping to prevent harmful drug interactions, and helping Medicare administrators target regions of the country where seniors aren't getting the proper preventive medications, and where disease management programs for seniors with chronic illnesses would be most effective.
"This proposal is just a starting point -- something that can be built upon to expand benefits when additional resources are available," Dooley said. By sticking to the fundamentals, Dooley's bill can be added to in the future with a potentially more lavish drug benefit, and can be integrated into a modernized Medicare program in which preventive medicine through prescription drugs is integral to better health outcomes for seniors.
On another front, Dooley and other centrist Democrats on April 10 introduced the Asbestos Victims' Compensation Act of 2003 (HR 1737). The bill seeks to address the problem of a rising tide of lawsuits being brought by people who may have been exposed to asbestos but have no actual illness. This in turn is limiting the resources available for victims who have actually suffered asbestos-caused injuries. "The bill," Dooley said, "has broad-based support amongst traditional adversaries -- manufacturers and trial lawyers, insurance companies and doctors."
To date, companies have paid more than $20 billion in asbestos-related claims, with a much as $200 billion in liability remaining. Already, thousands of workers have lost their jobs; pensions and savings have been wiped out.
Yet ironically, claimants receive as little as 37 cents out of every dollar paid by defendants because of transaction costs and attorneys fees, and they often must wait for years to get to trial or settlement, according to a recent study by the RAND Institute for Civil Justice.
Dooley called the asbestos litigation system "broken." "What we have now," he added, "is a first-come, first-serve approach that does nothing to protect those who are sick. This bill develops fair medical standards and provides the best chance for real reform this year."
