Category: Max Heuer
New Congress, New Results on Prescription Drugs?
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Dec. 04, 2002–After a record-breaking campaign season in which the Republican party took back control of the Senate and widened its majority in the House, a new class of Republican lawmakers are preparing to join the ranks of the 108th Congress in January with a bundle of issues to address.
Few will be as important as passing a prescription drug benefit for Medicare for the millions of seniors in America who enroll in the government sponsored health care.
But as some inside the Beltway have trumpeted a new GOP mandate after establishing a majority on both sides of Capitol Hill, the issue will still be a hotbed of controversy.
Last summer, four bills in the Senate failed because none could garner the 60 votes necessary to end filibustering.
In June, the Republican-controlled House passed a prescription drug package for Medicare – estimated by the Congressional Budget Office at a cost of $337 billion over 10 years. That bill was sharply criticized by some Democrats and liberal organizations as inadequate.
Republicans maintain their version of the bill will help seniors and is more affordable than the Democratic version.
At the heart of the conflict last session is the classic dividing line of private versus public: The Republican plan uses HMOs and insurance companies to provide prescription drug programs for Medicare recipients, while many Democrats favor a government run benefit – although a few on both sides of the aisle have voted against the majority of their party on the issue.
While there is tri-partisan support in the Senate for increased aid to low income recipients and seniors whose prescription drug prices are “catastrophic,” Democrats have criticized the GOP plan for a perceived “doughnut hole” in coverage.
Sen-elect John Sununu, R-NH, said he expected the Senate GOP to push for legislation similar to that already passed by the House.
With a narrow Republican Senate majority, the GOP leadership will try to include any new legislation into a budget resolution, which does not face the same 60 vote parliamentary hurdle. If the GOP fails to pass a budget, like the Democratic Senate last session, experts say the likelihood of passing a benefit would be reduced significantly.
The issue is rife with complexity, but it is of the utmost importance for New Hampshire’s 148,000 residents 65 or older, none of who receive prescription drug coverage through Medicare, according to the New Hampshire Medication Bridge Program.
A study in 2000 revealed that 56% of seniors in New Hampshire do not have prescription drug coverage, higher than the national average of 38% at the time, according to the New Hampshire chapter of the American Association of Retired Persons.
To The Victors, Goes The Accountability
Campaign promises and post-election statements make providing relief for seniors on Medicare – who are faced with daunting prescription drug bills – a priority for the GOP in the 108th Congress.
“It seems to me there is an awful lot of activity aimed at getting something done in the first six months,” said Ed Howard, executive vice president of the Alliance for Health Reform, a non-partisan, non-profit informational group. “The first thing out of (House Speaker) Dennis Hastert’s mouth, when asked what his agenda was, was health care.”
“We’re going to see significant legislative action in the next Congress, and I even think it’s likely to occur in the first year,” said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a liberal health lobby.
“This is something that so many people campaigned on that I can’t image its not going to have a lot of momentum going forward,” Howard said.
Whether that will get a bill passed is still up for debate.
Bill Hamilton, director of advocacy AARP New Hampshire, said that the chances the Senate could pass a bill may be improved “with a new a environment in January.” But Hamilton added, “I don’t know if anybody is exactly sure why it didn’t go through the last time.”
The fact that Republicans in the House got legislation may have helped the GOP in the midterm elections. Some wonder whether the flurry of proposals in the Senate was designed to fail by both parties.
“I think with the elections coming up as it was going through the Senate, I don’t think either one wanted the other one to get credit for what happened,” said Hamilton.
Howard said the failure of the Senate to act in July only served to illustrate what happens in politics “when an issue is so big politically that both parties have a stake in making sure that the issue survives as opposed to the policy proposal.”
Ku said there were “political risks” at the time for Republicans, because there would be disappointment in what the “middle class senior will be getting” if the legislation’s benefits were limited.
But now, some say the onus now falls on the Republicans’ shoulders to deliver a bill.
“The Republicans are in a position where they have really got to deliver, there is no ability to hide behind a Democratic Senate,” Pollack said.
The Budget
With a slumping economy and the federal government back in deficit, the Republican majority could try to restrict fiscal spending and maybe even push for a less expensive prescription drug benefit for Medicare.
“Inherently this is going to be something expensive,” said Leighton Ku, senior fellow at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan policy center emphasizing the issues that affect middle and low income people. “Three-hundred (billion) was the low end… the question is, gee, well can we afford this given the fact that the federal budget is in deficit for the next several years, and there’s continuing interest in further tax cuts and a war with Iraq.”
“I would hope that, you know, we’re able to pass a prescription drug benefit plan,” First congressional district Rep-elect Jeb Bradley, R-NH, said in a phone interview last week. “It certainly was something I talked a lot about during the campaign, I said it should be targeted to low and middle income senior citizens and it needs to be affordable.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-MA, co-sponsored a bill with Sens. Bob Graham, D-FL, and Zell Miller, D-GA, estimated to cost about $594 billion over eight years, by far the most expensive proposed last session.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated the House passed version at $337 billion; the tri-partisan Senate legislation – whose sponsors included Sen. James Jeffords, I-VT – was similar to the House version in cost.
The final Senate bill, a bi-partisan measure sponsored by Sens. Bob Graham, D-FL, and Gordon Smith, R-OR, aimed to compromise between the two competing versions, was estimated at $395 million.
“I think the message has been sent by the American people loud and clear to Congress: Work out your differences, keep things affordable, and at the same time provide meaningful drug relief to senior citizens,” Bradley said. “As long as we’re reasonable, I’m pretty optimistic.”
But just how reasonable that is could shift depending on the circumstances.
“The numbers are going to be subject to maneuvering,” Howard said.
Some say those numbers could even fall from last year’s estimates.
“Sen. Lott talks about going for the low income (benefit),” Ku said. “This could be a signal a new bill would go below last year’s proposals.”
The Doughnut Hole, Among Other Things
One of the biggest conflicts this past year over the various plans was a perceived “hole” in drug coverage. Under the plan passed by the House, drug coverage under Medicare would end at total drug expenditures of $2,000 and only start up again once the amount of money spent out of the recipient’s own pocket reached $3,700, or $4,800 in total spending, according to a Congressional Research Service report.
In 2001, Medicare beneficiaries spent an average of $1,756 on prescription drugs, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
“It’s the so called doughnut hole,” said Howard. “But here’s the political dilemma, it’s very expensive to insure that because that’s where most of the expenses are.”
Under the House plan, a senior with $2,500 in annual drug costs would have to pay $1,400 themselves plus a $396 premium, totaling 72 percent of the senior’s total prescription drug expenses, according to a Families USA release in September.
Beyond the hole, the debate starts to get more ideological.
The House relies on Medicare+Choice plans and prescription drug plans (PDPs) to provide the drug benefit. The bill promotes competition by also relying on private plans to compete and provide coverage, with federal subsidies to encourage participation.
The M+C plan, which can provide prescription drug coverage, has dwindled in the Medicare system as an option because HMOs contend they cannot afford it
“Medicare+Choice is currently the only part of Medicare where you can get a prescription drug benefit,” Sununu said. “One of the reasons we need to further modernize Medicare is to make sure we further fund that option.”
“The problems with a one size fits all prescription drug benefit that’s managed by government bureaucrats is that it’s an expensive, inefficient way to do business,” he said.
Experts say that while there is tri-partisan agreement that the legislation will include broad coverage for the very poor, just how much the drug plan reduces costs for the average senior citizen is still something of a debate.
The disagreement highlights major divides in how big a role the Medicare program should have in providing the benefit.
While Bradley said the House bill passed last session would have cut drug costs between 40-45 percent for the average senior, others say the benefit would have been more like 25 percent.
“It may be that 300 or 350 (billion dollar appropriation) can really only pay for a decent low income benefit,” Howard said.
Pollack said prescription drugs will cost consumers over $2 trillion over the next ten years, and therefore even a plan allotting $500 billion would only cover 25 percent of that cost, and the GOP benefit would amount to about 15 percent off.
Sununu called this reasoning “ridiculous” and said the GOP’s estimate factored in a decline in drug costs because of the bulk purchasing and competition spurred by the legislation. Sununu said these factors would shrink prescription drug costs an estimated 15 percent, adding to the total savings of the recipient.
Ku also added this was an issue “that distinguishes Republicans versus Democrats” because a Medicare benefit coupled through private plans could increase the efficiency, which helps “shave off some of the cost.”
“One of the features that seemed to be malleable… was the extent to which you guarantee that this benefit was going to exist even if private insurance companies didn’t see fit to offer it,” Howard said.
While there is concern among Democrats that giving private insurance companies control would hurt consumers, insurance companies say having the necessary flexibility to give people a variety of choices is crucial to doing business.
“Some in the Senate wanted to see a purely government run program, just to add drugs to the existing benefit,” said Larry Akey, a spokesperson Health Insurance Association of America. “We think that the lessons to be learned from the last 40 years is that benefits designed by the Congress take away the innovation that a private market can bring.”
Others say if Medicare has more control, prescription drug prices will be driven lower.
“The Medicare program would use its very substantial bargaining clout to get prices down,” Pollack, of Families USA, said. “When the pharmaceutical (industry) endorses the House plan, they obviously do not want prices coming down.”
But Sununu said competition was the best way to bring down pharmaceutical prices.
“We should give seniors a choice and some options, and in the long run that competition is going to continue keep costs and prices under control,” he said. “The Kennedy bill would effectively undermine all of the benefits that some senior might already have and enjoy.”
Agreements, Not Many
Democrats and Republicans have agreed, on principle at least, that the largest benefit in any bill go those seniors with a very low income and those who have gigantic prescription drug bills from medical disasters.
The House plan included low-income subsidies for recipients with earning less than 175% of the federal poverty level, which is set at $8,860 for a single person home.
This provision should help a significant number of Granite State residents. About 41,000 seniors in New Hampshire live below 200% of the federal poverty level, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation State Health Facts Online.
Still, the importance of providing at least some assistance to the neediest could be enough to lure some Democrats.
“It seems to me very difficult for Democrats to walk away from $40 billion to low income seniors,” Howard said, roughly referring to the annual cost of the GOP version.
Getting Local
In place of federal assistance, local Granite State residents and lawmakers have devised an array of stopgaps and alternatives to ease the escalating costs of prescription drugs.
Seniors have turned to bus trips and online purchasing to obtain cheaper drugs from Canada.
While the Bush administration has voiced opposition to the growing popularity of obtaining cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, it has not tried to stop such access. In fact, a bi-partisan bill passed in 2000 barred the Food and Drug Administration from blocking seniors’ access to cheaper drugs up north.
Assistance programs have popped up all over the Granite State providing community access to pharmaceutical manufacturers offering assistance. According to the New Hampshire Medication Bridge Program, pharmaceutical companies provided $500 million for prescription drug aid for 1.5 million patients in 1999 alone.
President Bush neutralized, at least somewhat, the polarizing election issue of allowing cheaper generic drug versions into the market by using an executive order to close a loophole in the 1984 Hatch-Waxman Act that allowed drug companies to continually extend patents by filing frivolous lawsuits.
Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, who recently lost to John Sununu in the Senate race, testified before a Senate committee on behalf of the Businesses for Affordable Medicine Coalition, a group of business, labor leaders and Governors concentrated on the generic drug issue.
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, will take the reins of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee from Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-MA – which has jurisdiction over generic drug issues. The Finance Committee deals with Medicare prescription drug legislation, according to Gregg’s Press Secretary Jeff Turcotte.
Bush’s new regulations are set to go into effect 60 days after his announcement October 21st. BAM spokesman Brad Cameron said the move was a “good first step” but that “what will happen after that nobody knows for sure.”
Cameron said the new regulations would save consumers about $3 billion annually, if implemented effectively.
New Hampshire’s HHS currently pays $93 million a year for prescription drugs for Medicaid recipients. Generic drugs are 30 to 60 percent cheaper than their brand name counterparts and are therapeutically equivalent, said Lisa Swenson assistant director of Health Planning and Medicaid at the New Hampshire HHS.
But most involved with the prescription drug issue acknowledge that aid from Washington, especially for seniors under Medicare, is a must.
New Hampshire prescription drug expenditures increased 17 percent in fiscal year 2001, costing the state’s residents $88 million.
The New Hampshire American Association of Retired Persons had every congressional candidate this past election cycle sign a pledge in commitment to getting a prescription drug bill passed, said Bill Hamilton, New Hampshire AARP director of advocacy.
New Hampshire was one of only two states in the country – the other being Iowa – that was able to garner signatures from every candidate, Hamilton said, which shows that the Granite State’s elected officials in Washington are committed to finding a solution.
“I think that we will see a prescription drug benefit bill on the president’s desk,” Bradley said. “The elections showed that the American people want results and that its up to the Republican party and the Democrats to produce those results and we’ll be held accountable for our successes or our lack of success.”
The desire to produce those results has left New Hampshire Democrats ready to support just about anything that would help.
“If (the Republicans) can pull it off great,” New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair Kathy Sullivan said. “I wish them luck and I hope it works, and if they do ill be the first one standing there and applauding.”
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
N.H. Delegation Cautious About Iraq Acceptance
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Nov. 13, 2002--New Hampshire's congressional delegation reacted Wednesday with guarded optimism to Iraq's statement that it had accepted the United Nations resolution to allow unrestricted weapons inspections and was ready to admit inspectors.
"While it is encouraging that Saddam Hussein has accepted the proposal to
allow unrestricted inspections, the real test will come when Iraq is required to declare the status of all of its weapons programs and then to give inspectors unlimited access," Rep. John Sununu, R-01, said in a press release. "The real proof will be shown in their willingness to comply with all aspects of this resolution."
All four Granite State delegates echoed this statement. Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, emphasized strong distrust for the Iraqi leader.
Saddam Hussein, he said in a pres release, "has played games with inspectors before, and it is critical that we are vigilant and insist on unfettered access for the inspectors to all sites in Iraq. Saddam Hussein clearly threatens us with his weapons of mass destruction that could kill tens of thousands of Americans."
"I am cautiously optimistic that Iraq has taken this step to allow inspectors into the country and remain hopeful that military action can be avoided; however, we must not let this news deter our preparation and responsibility to ensure that his regime is disarmed," said Rep. Charlie Bass, R-02, in a press release.
Sen. Bob Smith, R-NH, said in a statement, "I remained concerned that Saddam Hussein will fully cooperate with weapons inspectors."
Inspectors are scheduled to leave for Iraq Monday.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
N.H. Delegation Backs Homeland Passage
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Nov. 13, 2002--New Hampshire's congressional delegation Wednesday lauded the passage of a new version of the Homeland Security Act, based on a compromise between the White House and key senators earlier this week.
"The formation of a Department of Homeland Security will bring together agencies and programs to better assess, prevent, and respond to new threats posed by weapons of mass destruction and global terrorism," Rep. John Sununu, R-01, who was recently elected to the Senate, said in a press release.
"I am pleased that Congress and the White House were able to reach a
bipartisan agreement that will allow for the passage of legislation to create the Department of Homeland Security," recently re-elected Rep. Charlie Bass, R-02, said in a press release.
Both congressmen voted for the legislation, which passed ### to ###, Wednesday night.
The bill would create a cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security with a $37 billion budget. Twenty-two federal agencies would be consolidated within the agency, including Border Patrol, Customs Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Immigration and Naturalization Services and the Coast Guard, according to a release from Sununu's office.
The agency will comprise four divisions: Border and Transportation Security, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Science and Technology, and Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection.
Both congressmen said the agency was crucial in protecting American lives in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
"As Congress reviewed the events leading up to September 11, there was a clear need for better communication and coordination of activities," Sununu said.
"By consolidating the confusing patchwork of government activities, this bill will help reduce duplication, end confusion about responsibilities, and provide focus, direction, and flexibility to help protect Americans from today's threats and the unknown threats of the future," Bass said.
The House had passed a version of the bill on July 26, but similar legislation was blocked in the Senate because of a labor dispute. Reports this week said three moderate senators - John Breaux, D-LA, Ben Nelson, D-NE, and Lincoln Chafee, R-RI - had worked out a compromise with GOP leadership and the White House on the bill.
The new provision makes the department inform union representatives of when it proposes any change in workplace rules . It provides a 30-day period for the union to respond, and if both sides cannot agree, the issue would be sent to Congress for review and a 30-day mediation process would be held. But if this process does not produce an agreement, the agency would still be allowed to continue with the change.
The Senate is expected to vote on the bill sometime next week.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
EIA Predicts Slightly Cheaper Oil Heating Costs
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Nov. 13, 2002--The cost of heating a home this winter won't be quite as expensive as originally expected, but there will still be a much heavier financial burden than last winter on New Hampshire residents and others throughout the Northeast, the Energy Information Administration said in its November Short-Term Energy Outlook.
The EIA-part of the U.S. Department of Energy-last week lowered its estimated average household winter expenditure for oil heat by about $30, crediting the adjustment to a surprising jump in oil production from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).
EIA energy information specialist Jonathan Cogan said the production increase has made crude oil cheaper. This should in turn bring some moderate relief to oil heat customers in the Northeast, the EIA estimated.
"There has been talk of concerns in the market about possible military actions in the Middle East," Cogan said in a phone interview Wednesday. "The more fundamental factors of supply and demand seem to be more significant."
Oil heat customers make up 58 percent of New Hampshire's home heating market, according to the EIA, and natural gas users represent another 18 percent.
The EIA projection this month foresees expenditure increases over last winter of 40 percent in heating oil and 25 percent in natural gas. of
Last winter, the average Northeast customer paid $643 in oil heating during an unusually warm winter. This year, the EIA now estimates, it will cost the average homeowner $901. But that number is down from a $934 estimate in the Short-Term Outlook published last month. This year's estimates, despite being vastly higher than last winter, are not record breaking: two winters ago the average Northeast customer paid $999.
While the estimated decrease is "a step in the right direction" the cost is still going to be a "huge bite" out of homeowners' wallets, said Joe Broyles, energy program manager in the New Hampshire Governor's Office of Energy and Community Services.
New Hampshire has the lowest heating oil prices in New England, with an average of approximately $1.20 per gallon of oil, according to the most recent EIA weekly report.
But the price of oil heat in the Granite State has been increasing faster than the New England average, which is currently at about $1.25. The average price of a gallon of oil has climbed 2.1 cents since the first week in October in New Hampshire, one cent more than the New England average has risen.
The price of oil by the gallon in neighboring Vermont climbed just seven-tenths of a cent in the same period. Only Maine saw a larger increase, with its average increasing 3.9 cents.
Both Cogan and Broyles stressed that the accuracy of the estimates depends on the severity of this winter's weather.
"We have observed in October it was colder than we expected, but the rest of the forecast assumes we'll see so-called normal weather," Cogan said.
There is speculation that OPEC, in increasing its production, was motivated by the struggling world economy, which had driven down the number of consumers able to buy oil at exceedingly high prices, Broyles said. Other reports have hinted that some OPEC member countries could be cheating on their production quotas to produce more immediate cash.
"Nobody's really sure, but worldwide there is a lot of crude oil out there," Broyles said.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Dems. Flooding New Hampshire With Cash
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Nov. 01, 2002--National money is pouring into the Granite State for this midterm election at a record pace.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has given an historic amount of money to New Hampshire's state and local Democratic committees for a non-Presidential election.
The DNC money has flowed into the state at more than twice the rate of money from its Republican counterpart, according to the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
The DNC funneled nearly $3.7 million to the Granite State's party committee from Jan. 1, 2001 through Oct. 16, 2002, according to the FEC. That figure dramatically outpaces Republican National Committee spending in New Hampshire. The RNC transferred a record of more than $1.4 million to the state and local party committees in the same time period.
The spending is important for candidates in the New Hampshire Senate and House races because under current election law, state party committees operate as political action committees (PACs).
There is no cap on donations to PACs, and state committees often pay for "issue ads" during elections. Although issue ads cannot directly encourage viewers to vote for or against a specific candidate, they often do so indirectly.
In the last midterm election, in 1998, the DNC transferred just $189,907 to the Granite State's Democratic committees and the RNC just $79,500 to GOP state committees, according to the FEC. In the only Senate race that year, GOP Sen. Judd Gregg was re-elected with an overwhelming 68 percent of the vote.
There are two reasons for the contributions increase, UNH assistant professor of political science Mark Wrighton said: First, there is heightened national interest because the New Hampshire Senate race is one of only a few that will determine control of the Senate, and second, this is the last year for unregulated "soft-money" donations thanks to the campaign finance bill that Congress passed in March and that becomes law next Wednesday, the day after the elections.
The new law will ban soft-money donations to political parties and limit some advertising before an election. So the 2002 elections represent the last chance for donors to slide huge checks directly to the parties, Wrighton said.
Nationally, the RNC has outspent the DNC 2 to 1. The RNC has transferred more than $46 million to state committees around the country, while the DNC has transferred about $21.6 million, according to the FEC.
Almost all the money the DNC transferred to Granite State Democratic committees was in the form of soft money- a whopping $3.53 million. The RNC's soft-money transfers totaled $974,728 this year, roughly two-thirds of its total contribution. Wrighton said that the money the RNC had transferred was probably a "rational decision" that factored in other important races.
He said the large disparity between the two national party committees' New Hampshire contributions was not an indication that the GOP wasn't paying enough attention to close New Hampshire races, specifically the Senate contest between Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen and Rep. John E. Sununu.
Instead, he said, Democrats have to spend more on ads if they are to win in the historically conservative Granite State, where even the number of registered Independents is significantly larger than registered Democrats.
"(Shaheen) has gained, but I think the best way to describe her task is as an uphill battle," Wrighton said. "(Democrats) have to appeal to the Independents, and that's going to require some bucks."
"It's a race we think we can win," DNC communications director Maria Cardona said. "It would be a big coup if we could pick up that seat. The resources reflect a priority that the Democrats have."
RNC spokesman Dan Ronayne said the committee was supporting Sununu and explained the high level of Democratic national support as a philosophical difference between the parties. "Democrats tend to think that all power, knowledge and wisdom come from Washington, D.C.," Ronayne said.
The largest soft-money contributions to any state have come from the RNC, which has transferred more than $5.3 million to Florida state and local committees. Ronayne would not comment on what that figure represented, but one GOP state official attributed it to the relatively low cost of commercials in New Hampshire compared to other media markets.
"We're supportive of all of our candidates in New Hampshire and feel that at the end of the day it will be leadership that will be appreciated by the voters of New Hampshire and not negative attack ads," Ronayne said. Shaheen has raised $4,701,976 to Sununu's $2,847,690, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
The Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee has transferred about $2.5 million to state GOP committees in New Hampshire. Its Democratic counterpart has transferred about $2.3 million to its state party committees.
Phone calls to the New Hampshire Democratic Party were not returned.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
New HUD Grant for Seniors
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Oct. 31, 2002--The Bush administration announced a new grant Wednesday designed to help seniors in Dover stay in their homes longer and live independently.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development allotted the Dover Housing Authority a $200,000 Resident Opportunities and Self Sufficiency (ROSS) program grant.
The Dover Housing Authority, which provides elderly housing units to 297 seniors, collaborates with Wentworth Homecare and Hospice to provide home medical and homemaking services under the Dover program, which has existed for five years.
Dover Housing Authority supportive services coordinator Kathryn Conway-Dorr said the program provides seniors with help doing basic house cleaning and errands.
"If the resident has trouble or is putting themselves at risk, the homemaker coming in can be there," Conway-Dorr said in a telephone interview.
The grant marks the third straight year HUD has funded the program with a $200,000 ROSS grant.
Conway-Dorr said the grant "has allowed us to reach all of our residents on some level; it's not just for the most frail elderly."
The Dover program also provides information for seniors who do not need assistance to keep themselves safe and healthy.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
How Much Will The New I-93 Plan Really Help?
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Oct. 31, 2002--Whether traffic on Interstate 93 is going to get better any time in the next decade is still anybody's guess.
The U.S. Department of Transportation formally announced Thursday that the $420 million project to widen I-93 was one of several construction projects put on an expedited list to speed up environmental review. But exactly how much faster the process will be still isn't clear.
"(In terms of) how does (the program) actually get implemented and what difference ultimately will it effect I don't know," Jeff Brillhart, director of project development for New Hampshire's Transportation Department and the former manager of the I-93 project, said in a phone interview Thursday.
The list is part of a program that -- under an executive order from President Bush about six weeks ago- - will create a Cabinet-level, interagency task force designed to simplify the environmental review process without upsetting federal law on the issue.
Brillhart said he hadn't seen any specific information on the task force other than a press release. He said he was expecting that eventually "something will come down from the Federal Highway Administration."
The goal behind the new task force is to avoid "duplication" and "red tape" that have delayed projects, a U.S. Transportation Department spokesman said Thursday on condition of anonymity. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta echoed this statement in a press release, saying that "President Bush asked his Cabinet to help states cut through federal bureaucratic inertia to help them complete sound transportation projects more quickly and at less cost."
The department spokesman said that a "second wave" of announcements is coming soon that will place other projects around the country on the new list. The spokesman said that the function of the new system was simply to avoid multiple reviews of the same site by different groups with similar interests.
The Environmental Protection Agency has been involved for years with the I-93 project, which would widen the highway lanes in an 18-mile stretch between the Massachusetts border and Manchester.
"(The I-93 project) has been on a fast track basis… since day one," said Elizabeth Higgins, Northeast director of the EPA's Office of Environmental Review. Higgins said the widening of I-93 was a "pilot project" for streamlining the review process. Unlike with most construction projects, she said, the I-93 project's environmental impact statement that her agency made public Sept. 13 was preceded by months of detailed interagency discussion.
But the EPA and the New Hampshire Transportation Department have been unable to come to a consensus on mitigating damage to wetlands along the road - or on how much land in other areas of the Granite State should be preserved in the place of wetlands lost to the widening of I-93. This issue remains the single biggest stumbling block between the two agencies.
Brillhart said the EPA is pushing for secondary impact mitigation, which would provide an additional 3,000 acres of land with high ecological value. This land would be included because of the potential for further loss of wetlands as a consequence of an increase in business and housing development in New Hampshire towns not directly adjacent to the highway, Brillhart said.
The New Hampshire agency has agreed to 650 acres of wetland mitigation for towns that are immediately adjacent to the highway, Brillhart said. Higgins said the EPA had not specified an exact amount of land, but that its position is that more land should be included.
Brillhart said that the New Hampshire Transportation Department does not need EPA approval but added that there will be "some negotiation" on the issue. The. Army Corps of Engineers, the state Wetlands Bureau and the Federal Highway Administration are the agencies that grant the the state highway agency permission to widen the interstate, Brillhart said.
Brillhart said that after environmental concerns are addressed, the final design must be approved by these agencies. He estimated that "some construction" would begin by 2004 but that the project would probably not be completed until 2012. Brillhart added that obtaining proper funding would be another "critical item."
The original estimate for the $ project was $150 million, state transportation commissioner Carol Murray told The Union Leader Wednesday. The department's budget is about $150 million a year, and additional federal funding is "the other unknown" in addition to the eventual cost of the project, Murray said.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Bush Announces Generic Drug Plan
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Oct 23, 2002--As New Hampshire's Senate race drew closer to Election Day, President Bush added to the campaign fodder this week by announcing a plan to speed generic drugs to the market.
"I think (Bush has) done the right thing," Rep. John Sununu, R-NH, his party's Senate candidate, said Wednesday. "I've always been very committed to protecting the integrity of the patent system." Sununu was referring to the fact that the proposal would close patent loopholes that effectively allow drug companies to renew their drug patents.
Colin Van Ostern, the press secretary to Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, Sununu's Democratic opponent, said the Bush proposal was "a good first step" and accused Sununu of trying to block legislation in the House that would have solved the problem.
"The pharmaceutical industry has stalled (a generic drug bill) in the House, with John Sununu's help," Van Ostern said in a press release Wednesday, arguing that Sununu "should sign the discharge petition that would bring the issue up for a vote… but refuses to do so. "
Van Ostern also said that in 1999 Sununu co-sponsored legislation (H.R. 1598, the Claritin Patent Renewal Act) that "helped drug companies extend their patents on Claritin and seven other popular drugs, at a cost of consumers in the billions."
Sununu's press secretary, Julie Teer, responded that the Shaheen campaign was "deliberately distorting" Sununu's record. Under the bill, she said, only a court could award a drug manufacturer a patent extension. "The judge decides, not John Sununu," she said.
On whether Sununu would sign the discharge petition, Teer said the Shaheen campaign should "stop the partisan bickering" and blamed the Democratic Senate for wanting "an election-year issue" instead of "delivering results."
Sununu also counter-attaccked, charging Shaheen with failing to come up with a long-term plan to ease rising drug costs.
"Jeanne Shaheen has no plan to add a prescription drug plan to Medicare," Sununu said, adding that he thought his Democratic opponent's support for getting cheaper prescription drugs from Canada was not a long-term solution. "Putting seniors on a bus isn't the answer."
Van Ostern responded that the accusation that Shaheen had no prescription drug plan was "simply not true." Her plan, he said, includes reimportation of FDA-approved drugs from Canada, improvements in generic drug access and limits on drug companies' ability to deduct advertising costs from their taxes.
Sununu stressed that a Medicare prescription drug benefit is needed as a long-term solution.
Bush's proposal, announced just two weeks before the Nov. 5 elections, would limit name-brand pharmaceutical companies to a single 30-day window of protection when lawsuits on the drug are pending.
Some drug companies have filed litigation over and over, critics say, solely to delay the release of drugs to the generic market under the 30-day rule. Bush's proposal angered some in the Senate, which passed a bill in July that supporters said was a more comprehensive measure.
The removal of the loophole could introduce generic versions of popular brand-name drugs like Prilosec, Claritin, Zantac and Xanax, according to Lisa Swenson, the assistant director of health planning and Medicaid at the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
New Hampshire's HHS currently pays $93 million a year for prescription drugs for Medicaid recipients. Generic drugs are 30 to 60 percent cheaper than their brand-name counterparts and are therapeutically equivalent, Swenson said in a phone interview Wednesday.
"We're very supportive of any initiative… (that) speeds generics (to the market)," Swenson said.
The state agency contracted with Virginia-based First Health Services Corp. last year to consult on the state's management of pharmacy programs, Swenson said.
This year, the agency also started a pharmaceutical and therapeutics advisory committee of in-state practicing physicians and pharmacists to look at potential initiatives, Swenson said.
The Associated Press reported Wednesday that a coalition of Northeastern legislators was pushing to set up a non-profit mail-order drug purchasing company that would allow consumers to pay Canadian prices for their drugs.
United Seniors Association (USA), a conservative activist group that has received funding from the drug industry's main lobbying group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), launched a TV ad campaign aimed at New Hampshire this week supporting Sununu's plan on prescription drugs.
USA chairman and chief executive Charles Jarvis lauded Sununu's votes in the House on pharmaceutical issues. In an interview, Jarvis also said that as head of USA, he takes donations from "anyone who agrees with me" on "unabashedly pro-market-based solutions." Jarvis added he thought the president was "trying to find the balance" between stunting research and lowering costs.
Sununu said that support from a group linked to the pharmaceutical industry did not affect his position on the generic drug issue and added that he has supported capping the patent loopholes for a long time. Sununu also said he supports allowing people to purchase prescription drugs from Canada provided the drugs are FDA-approved.
"I voiced my support for the patent legislation that came out of the Senate months ago," Sununu said. "As I said, I'm an engineer and believe very strongly that no one should misuse the patent system."
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
North Korea Nuclear Admission Tough Issue With Iraq Looming
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17, 2002--Revelations this week that North Korea is in direct violation of a 1994 agreement with the United States that directed the South Asian country to halt its nuclear weapons program left New Hampshire's congressional delegates and candidates with a thin political tightrope on which to balance, considering the looming confrontation with Iraq.
Every Granite State politician agreed that North Korea poses a serious threat to the United States and that the Bush administration should use diplomacy first to defuse the situation. But some disagreed sharply on the potential for unilateral U.S. military action and how similar the situation was to a pending showdown with Iraq.
1st district Democratic congressional candidate Martha Fuller Clark said she thought Iraq and North Korea were "equally dangerous" but said that in this situation the United States "mustn't be hasty."
"We must get as much evidence of the situation (as possible), and only then (act accordingly)," Fuller Clark said. "We certainly don't have the adequate information now."
Her Republican opponent, Jeb Bradley, also saw strong similarities between the two situations. "I don't see that (the situation in North Korea is) any different from Iraq," he said. "I think we have to see how the situation unfolds…. Certainly (unilateral military action) would be one possible response."
"I support President Bush as he works to remove the threat posed by North Korea," Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat who is running for Senate, said in a press release. "It is in our national interest to limit the world's nuclear arsenals, particularly the ability of rogue states to obtain nuclear weapons."
North Korea's announcement complicated an already delicate political situation, particularly for the most hawkish supporters of the Bush administration's push to confront Iraqi noncompliance with U.N. resolutions.
Some officials said the context in North Korea is completely different from that in Iraq and should be approached accordingly in the international community.
"You can't say because we have a policy in Iraq, the circumstances, conditions and objectives (are the same in North Korea)," Rep. Charlie Bass, R-NH, said. "There is no nexus between the two, other than we are involved in (both)."
"Different approaches will be taken to respond to different kinds of security threats," said Rep. John Sununu, R-NH, who is running for the Senate. "Iraq has shown it will use its weapons of mass destruction."
Bass said that the political atmosphere in the region made "everything different" and that Iraq and North Korea were "not going to be comparable."
"Maybe the Chinese will take care of it," Bass said. "It's a whole different debate…. I'm just not in the position to make all kinds of hypothetical (statements)."
"Korea is quite different from Iraq because we have 37,000 standing troops in South Korea," Bass added. "At this point I want to find out what the administration has in mind first."
Bass said he thought China was a crucial part of the equation.
"North Korea is pretty much powerless…. The real issue is China standing behind North Korea," Bass said. "The Chinese don't want North Korea allied with the West."
Sununu said he didn't think the news was particularly surprising to U. S. officials.
"There have been many in Congress that have raised this as a concern for years," Sununu said. "The president will work with a coalition of partners to address this security threat and address these concerns…. This isn't new."
Sen. Bob Smith chimed in with ringing support for the Bush administration on the issue.
"I support President Bush's bold determination to address regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction capabilities," Smith said in a statement. "The United States must demand that North Korea comply fully with its commitments relating to the development of nuclear weapons and end immediately its nuclear weapons program."
Sen. Judd Gregg expressed guarded optimism about a multilateral solution.
"I hope North Korea's neighbors and the United States can work together to discourage any continued nuclear research and ensure the security of our nation," Gregg said in a statement.
Bush administration officials disclosed late Wednesday that the North Korean government admitted, when pressed by U.S. officials with new intelligence information two weeks ago, that it was funding a clandestine nuclear development program.
The Clinton administration and former President Jimmy Carter negotiated an agreement with the country's leader, Kim Jong Il, in 1994 that hinged on the dismantling of North Korea's nuclear program in exchange for economic benefits.
Bush included North Korea in his "axis of evil" during his State of the Union address last January, but the administration has been steadfast in focusing its diplomatic policy on confronting Iraq.
"The Administration is consulting with key Members of Congress… (and U.S. officials) are traveling to the region to confer with friends and allies about this important issue," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in a press release Wednesday, adding that the United States will "seek a peaceful resolution of this situation."
"I think one thing that is different is that weapons inspectors left Iraq and have been unable to return to Iraq, and Iraq used chemical weapons against their own people,"
Bradley said. Fuller Clark also pointed to Iraq's previous use of weapons of mass destruction as a key difference.
Sununu said the new information about North Korea only "underscores" the importance of Bush's decision last December to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
The 1972 agreement between the United States and the former Soviet Union allowed limited missile defense systems that some at the time felt could have offset what was a delicate balance of power between two nuclear-equipped countries. Bush, last year, cited the growing threat of terrorism as the reason for withdrawal.
"This is why Jeanne Shaheen was wrong to insist that the United States remain part of the ABM treaty," Sununu said. He said that a missile defense system is crucial to protecting the United States from countries like North Korea and Iraq.
"Governor Shaheen supports developing the technology for a missile defense system, and John Sununu knows that," Shaheen's press secretary, Colin Van Ostern, responded Thursday. Sununu, he said, "is trying to mischaracterize her position to score political points, and it's disappointing he would politicize national security issues like this."
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Smith Eligible for Federal Pension, Other Benefits
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16, 2002--Just because Sen. Bob Smith probably won't be working for the federal government after he leaves the Senate in early January, it doesn't mean the government won't still be paying him.
Smith hasn't made his retirement plans public yet. But one thing is sure: after 18 years in Congress and two years of active duty in Vietnam, Smith will be eligible for a federal pension for the rest of his life.
Smith, who was elected to the House in 1984, can choose to be covered under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), and also is eligible to receive Social Security retirement benefits when he turns 62 on March 30.
Smith's press secretary Eryn Witcher said that because Smith was still working he had not asked for his pension to be calculated.
But according to a formula from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), members who have served 20 years and are 60 years old are eligible to begin receiving their pension immediately.
Although Smith served only 18 years in Congress, he can add his two years of service in the Navy to his total and thus qualify for immediate benefits.
Should he do so, Smith would be eligible for 1.7 percent of the average of his three highest earning years in the federal government, multiplied by the number of years he served in Congress.
Under this formula, Smith, who has earned $150,000 a year for the past three years, according to OPM, would get an annual pension of $51,000 a year if his military service is included in his years of service total.
Members of Congress are also eligible to receive the same health and life insurance benefits as other federal employees.
The federal government offers about 250 different plans, and the most popular fee-for-service family plans available in New Hampshire for Smith-Blue Cross-Blue Shield's basic family plan or its standard family plan,--would put his premium, paid every other week, at either $75.74 or $94.83, according to OPM.
Smith also is eligible to purchase federal life insurance for himself and his family for up to five times his final salary.
Officials at OPM said the federal health and life insurance plans are attractive to many people because they are inexpensive and numerous.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
