By Scott Wright

In January, conservative columnist Robert Novak admitted to readers that the Bush administration and the House Republican leadership “pushed it down the throats of unhappy conservatives.” Last week, in an editorial in the New York Times, conservative author Richard A. Viguerie described it as “budget busting … the greatest increase in spending since Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society.”

“It” is the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit and “it” is, by and large, a disaster.

Why? Because Republicans decided private sector competition would help reduce premiums and produce more options for patients than a government-run plan.

President Bush has repeatedly touted the plan's multiple choices as a benefit, but many seniors confused by the plan's complexities don't feel that way. Opponents of the drug plan will tell you the Republican-led Congress caved in to the enormous influence of the pharmaceutical industry, or simply tried to “bribe” seniors with some form of prescription drug coverage in advance of the 2004 mid-term elections.

Regardless of why the drug plan is so convoluted and confusing, it is. In his mea culpa, Novak cited “the hideous complexity of the scheme, which has the effect of discouraging seniors from signing up.” Sure enough, just over half the seniors who weren't automatically enrolled in the program signed up willingly during the six-month no penalty signup period that ended on May 15.

Turns out the administration and the Republican leadership in Congress knowingly lied about the program's cost, too. Several members of Congress, including some in the GOP, stated they would not support a drug plan that cost more than $400 billion over 10 years. Miraculously, a few weeks later the estimated total came in at $395 billion(wink). A couple of months after the bill passed, the White House suddenly “realized” the cost would be more along the lines of $534 billion.

Turns out that number was a little low, too, and the administration knew so months before the bill passed because Medicare official Robert Foster blew a hole through the administration's ledger when he figured the real cost of the plan was going to be more along the line of $720 billion over 10 years. Foster passed those numbers to his boss, Tom Scully, who got them to the president. The next thing Mr. Foster knew he was being told by Mr. Scully to keep his numbers to himself.

Indeed, this drug plan is full of holes, though none of them the size of the one millions of seniors are about to step into.

It's the infamous “doughnut hole,” and plenty of seniors who do take part in the drug plan are going to be ready to call someone in Washington a “hole” of some sort or other pretty soon. After participants reach $2,250 in drug costs, Medicare totally stops paying for medications until after members absorb the next $3,600 out of their own pockets. Last week, a man from Patchagoe, N.Y. told Knight-Ridder News Service his monthly drug bill jumped from a $50 co-pay to $990 the first time he visited the local pharmacy after he entered the doughnut hole-phase of his plan.

How many seniors stand to get reamed nationwide by the so-called doughnut hole? Estimates range from 5.3 million to 6.9 million. That's a lot of pretty reliable voters that Novak claimed political guru Karl Rove was keen to convert to conservatism, all those “low-to-middle income voters seniors who vote heavily Democratic and complain about the cost of prescription drugs.” Novak said Rove thought the genius of his plan came from making it so complex that anyone who already had any amount of prescription coverage would fear a switch and decline to sign up.

Alas, Novak -- master of understatement -- wrote this about Rove's apparently impending electoral backfire: “The drug plan will further swell the budget deficit without commensurate political benefits.” Viguerie was much more brutal, writing that the GOP slit its own throat by trying to “buy off seniors with a prescription drug benefit.”

Whatever the reason behind its myriad flaws, this drug plan seems a colossal mistake. Sure, the plan will help a few of our sickest senior citizens save a few dollars on their medications, but if political posturing and lobbying dollars had been left out of the process, who knows how many more seniors the plan could have really helped?

And if we can argue that point convincingly with the legislators. who passed “it” to begin with, maybe we can get something done about fixing their convoluted, shortsighted, underachieving Medicare Prescription Drug Plan.

Scott Wright is a member of the National Society of Newspaper Columnists and an award-winning member of the Society of Professional Journalists. He is a native of Cherokee County.

Medicare Drug Plan is helping seniors

By Rep. Mike Rogers

The new Medicare prescription drug benefit is a good first step for helping many Cherokee County seniors save money on the skyrocketing cost of prescription drugs.

Is this a perfect new benefit? Certainly not. Its initial shortcomings have been widely publicized and I, for one, have shared many of those concerns as the program has been implemented.

Despite its startup issues, however, it seems over the last several months the plan -- whose passage was supported by both Democratic and Republican legislators in Alabama -- has weathered these bumps in the road. As of May 19, for example, over 38 million of 45 million Medicare-eligible seniors now have some sort of drug coverage.

In Alabama alone, over 589,000 seniors -- 77 percent of eligible retirees -- now have assistance. Right here in Cherokee County, more than 2,800 seniors are covered.

When enrollment began in late November critics were quick to cite the benefit's “complexity,” citing the over 40 plans with monthly premiums ranging from zero to $69 per month.

I understand the frustration of those who may have been confused by the number of plans, and agree fewer may have been better. My staff and I have worked hard to assist folks through this process, as has Gov. Bob Riley, who spearheaded statewide enrollment seminars at community colleges like Gadsden State.

Over the past few months, state and federal health officials have worked to assist folks with the drug benefit and help make improvements. They eliminated the May 15 enrollment deadline for our low income seniors, for example, and worked to address the reimbursement challenges faced by our pharmacists.

Partially as a result, enrollment grew. By April, AARP reported that nearly 8-in-10 seniors (around 78 percent) enrolled in a Medicare prescription drug plan were satisfied with their coverage.

As for the private insurers that administer the plans, it seems competition has indeed helped drive down some costs. According to USA Today the average monthly premium is now $25, down from an expected $37. Furthermore, the government reports a senior who previously lacked coverage will save an average of $1,100 each year. For many Alabama seniors on fixed incomes, these are real savings indeed.

It's true many plans have a gap in coverage. But it's important to note here in Alabama that six plans have “doughnut hole coverage,” meaning the plan continues to pay drug costs in that gap.

It's also important to point out the new benefit includes over $109 million for rural hospitals in the Third District. Over the next ten years, this could mean more money for Cherokee County's doctors and clinics, and ultimately better healthcare for us all, not just our seniors.

At the end of the day, if the choice was between imperfect coverage and none at all, I would still support providing our seniors at least some coverage. There's no doubt the implementation of Medicare Part D has seen its challenges, and I certainly support efforts to improve the program in the future for our seniors.

It is my hope that these initial challenges are being resolved, and East Alabama's seniors are finally getting some of the prescription drug relief they so desperately need.