![]() |
Ben Ray Lujan on Health Care |
[Sen. DeMint, R-SC]: The Democrats have Medicare on a course of bankruptcy. Republicans are trying to save Medicare & make sure there are options for seniors in the future. Medicare will not be there 5 or 10 years from now. Doctors will not see Medicare patients at the rate [Congress will] pay.
[Sen. Ayotte, R-NH]: We have 3 choices when it comes to addressing rising health care costs in Medicare. We can do nothing & watch the program go bankrupt in 2024. We can go forward with the President's proposal to ration care through an unelected board of 15 bureaucrats. Or we can show real leadership & strengthen the program to make it solvent for current beneficiaries, and allow future beneficiaries to make choices.
Opponent's Arguments for voting No:
[Sen. Conrad, D-ND]: In the House Republican budget plan, the first thing they do is cut $4 trillion in revenue over the next 10 years. For the wealthiest among us, they give them an additional $1 trillion in tax reductions. To offset these massive new tax cuts, they have decided to shred the social safety net. They have decided to shred Medicare. They have decided to shred program after program so they can give more tax cuts to those who are the wealthiest among us.
[Sen. Merkley, D-OR]: The Republicans chose to end Medicare as we know it. The Republican plan reopens the doughnut hole. That is the hole into which seniors fall when, after they have some assistance with the first drugs they need, they get no assistance until they reach a catastrophic level. It is in that hole that seniors have had their finances devastated. We fixed it. Republicans want to unfix it and throw seniors back into the abyss. Then, instead of guaranteeing Medicare coverage for a fixed set of benefits for every senior--as Medicare does now--the Republican plan gives seniors a coupon and says: Good luck. Go buy your insurance. If the insurance goes up, too bad.
Proponent's Argument for voting Yes:
[Rep. Pitts, R-PA]: Section 4002 of PPACA establishes a Prevention and Public Health Fund, which my bill, H.R. 1217, would repeal. The PPACA section authorizes the appropriation of and appropriates to the fund from the Treasury the following amounts:
Opponent's Argument for voting No:
[Rep. Waxman, D-CA]: This bill represents the Republicans' newest line of attack to disrupt, dismantle, and to ultimately destroy the Affordable Care Act. For many years, Republicans have joined with Democrats in supporting programs to prevent disease, to promote health and, in turn, to cut health care costs. But today, the House will vote to end funding for the first and only Federal program with dedicated, ongoing resources designed to make us a healthier Nation.
Rep. FRANK PALLONE (D, NJ-6): In the last Congress, we passed legislation that enjoyed bipartisan support as well as the support of the American people. Unfortunately, it did not enjoy the support of the President, who vetoed our bill twice, and went on to proclaim that uninsured children can simply go to the emergency room to have their medical needs met. As the Nation moves deeper into a recession and unemployment rates continue to rise, millions of Americans are joining the ranks of the uninsured, many of whom are children. We can't delay. We must enact this legislation now.
Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. ROY BLUNT (R, MI-7): This bill doesn't require the States to meet any kind of threshold standard that would ensure that States were doing everything they could to find kids who needed insurance before they begin to spend money to find kids who may not have the same need. Under the bill several thousands of American families would be poor enough to qualify for SCHIP and have the government pay for their health care, but they'd be rich enough to still be required to pay the alternative minimum tax. The bill changes welfare participation laws by eliminating the 5-year waiting period for legal immigrants to lawfully reside in the country before they can participate in this program. In the final bill, we assume that 65% of the children receiving the benefit wouldn't get the benefit anymore. It seems to me this bill needs more work, would have benefited from a committee hearing. It doesn't prioritize poor kids to ensure that they get health care first.
Medicare Access to Rehabilitation Services Act of 2011 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to repeal the cap on outpatient physical therapy, speech-language pathology, and occupational therapy services of the type furnished by a physician or as an incident to physicians' services.
SEC. 2. OUTPATIENT THERAPY CAP REPEAL.
Section 1833 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395(l)) is amended by striking subsection (g).
[Explanatory note from Wikipedia.com "Therapy Cap"]:
In 1997 Congress established per-person Medicare spending limits, or "therapy cap" for nonhospital outpatient therapy, but responding to concerns that some people with Medicare need extensive services, it has since placed temporary moratoriums on the caps. The therapy cap is a combined $1,810 Medicare cap for physical therapy and speech language pathology, and a separate $1,810 cap for occupational therapy ($1870 for 2011). Medicare patients requiring rehabilitation from disabilities, car accidents, hip injuries, stroke, and other ailments would be limited to roughly two months worth of treatments at an outpatient therapy clinic. Any patients that exceed the cap, whether they are healed or not, would have to stop therapy, or pay for the therapy services out of their own pocket.Several medical associations have lobbied against therapy caps because the bill inadvertently restricted disabled seniors, stroke patients, and other severe cases from receiving therapy treatments.
Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [PPACA, known as ObamaCare] to require Exchanges to offer a public health insurance option that ensures choice, competition, and stability of affordable, high-quality coverage throughout the United States. Declares that the primary responsibility is to create a low-cost plan without compromising quality or access to care. Sets forth provisions related to the establishment and governance of the public health insurance option, including that such plan:
Congressional Summary:The purpose of this Act is to increase diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias, leading to better care and outcomes for Americans living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. Congress makes the following findings:
Proponent's argument for bill: (The Alzheimer's Association, alz.org). The "Health Outcomes, Planning, and Education (HOPE) for Alzheimer's Act" (S.709/H.R. 1507) is one of the Alzheimer's Association's top federal priorities for the 113th Congress. The HOPE for Alzheimer's Act would improve diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and increase access to information on care and support for newly diagnosed individuals and their families. It would also ensure that an Alzheimer's or dementia diagnosis is documented in the individual's medical record.
| |||
Other candidates on Health Care: | Ben Ray Lujan on other issues: | ||
NM Gubernatorial: Gary Johnson Gary King Jeff Apodaca Joe Cervantes John Sanchez Michelle Lujan-Grisham Steve Pearce Susana Martinez NM Senatorial: Gary Johnson Gavin Clarkson Maggie Toulouse Oliver Martin Heinrich Mick Rich NM politicians NM Archives |
Senate races 2019-20:
AK: Sullivan(R,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) AL: Jones(D,incumbent) vs.Moore(R) vs.Mooney(R) vs.Rogers(D) vs.Tuberville(R) vs.Byrne(R) AR: Cotton(R,incumbent) vs.Mahony(D) AZ: McSally(R,incumbent) vs.Kelly(D) CO: Gardner(R,incumbent) vs.Madden(D) vs.Baer(D) vs.Walsh(D) vs.Johnston(D) vs.Romanoff(D) DE: Coons(D,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) GA: Perdue(R,incumbent) vs.Tomlinson(D) IA: Ernst(R,incumbent) vs.Graham(D) vs.Mauro(D) ID: Risch(R,incumbent) vs.Harris(D) IL: Durbin(D,incumbent) vs.Stava-Murray(D) KS: Roberts(R,retiring) vs.LaTurner(R) vs.Wagle(R) KY: McConnell(R,incumbent) vs.Morgan(R) vs.Cox(D) LA: Cassidy(R,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) |
MA: Markey(D,incumbent) vs.Liss-Riordan(D) vs.Ayyadurai(R) ME: Collins(R,incumbent) vs.Sweet(D) vs.Gideon(D) MI: Peters(D,incumbent) vs.James(R) MN: Smith(D,incumbent) vs.Carlson(D) MS: Hyde-Smith(R,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) MT: Daines(R,incumbent) vs.Collins(D) NC: Tillis(R,incumbent) vs.Smith(D) vs.Mansfield(D) vs.mith(R) NE: Sasse(R,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) NH: Shaheen(D,incumbent) vs.Martin(D) NJ: Booker(D,incumbent) vs.Singh(R) NM: Udall(D,retiring) vs.Clarkson(R) vs.Oliver(D) vs.Lujan(D) OK: Inhofe(R,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) OR: Merkley(D,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) RI: Reed(D,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) SC: Graham(R,incumbent) vs.Tinubu(D) vs.Harrison(D) SD: Rounds(R,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) TN: Alexander(R,incumbent) vs.Sethi(R) vs.Mackler(D) TX: Cornyn(R,incumbent) vs.Hegar(D) vs.Hernandez(D) VA: Warner(D,incumbent) vs. (no opponent yet) WV: Capito(R,incumbent) vs.Swearengin(D) WY: Enzi(R,incumbent) vs.Ludwig(D) |
Abortion
Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators Senate Votes (analysis) Bill Sponsorships Affiliations Policy Reports Group Ratings |
Contact info: Email Contact Form Fax Number: 202-226-1528 Mailing Address: Cannon HOB 502, Washington, DC 20515 Official Website |