A Times Editorial

Aiding to retirees

Sen. Bob Graham has a good proposal that would give Medicare beneficiaries coverage for drug costs.

© St. Petersburg Times, published June 26, 2000

Congress has agreed in principle to cover prescription drugs under Medicare. The only debate now is over who gets credit, the extent of coverage and what role the private sector should play. Senate Democrats erred by forcing a showdown last week over a reasonable approach crafted by Sen. Bob Graham of Florida. Graham should work with William V. Roth of Delaware and other Senate Republicans to gain bipartisan support.

Thursday's vote was a political gambit that trivialized the strength of Graham's proposal. Rather than set the stage for an honest debate, Democrats forced a vote they knew they'd lose only to embarrass Republicans and make drug coverage a political issue in this year's elections.

Graham's bill deserved an honest debate on its merits. His measure would improve upon the Clinton administration's plan by giving Medicare beneficiaries immediate coverage for catastrophic drug costs, while embracing a role for private insurers that Republicans want as the bedrock of any new entitlement.

Graham would make coverage voluntary for all 39-million Medicare beneficiaries. Most would pay a premium of $35 to $40 per month. In return, the government would pay half the beneficiaries' drug costs. It also would subsidize premiums for the poor and pay most or all of drug expenses that exceed $3,500 a year.

Graham's proposal is straightforward and reasonably targeted to help those who need assistance the most. It strikes a balance between more aggressive coverage sought by liberal Democrats and the minimal role conservative Republicans want the government to play.

Graham insists he will keep pushing the plan in the Finance Committee. He should, because the alternatives fall short. The Republican plan relies heavily on the goodwill of private insurers. It also creates a gap in coverage for patients who spend between $2,100 and $6,000 a year on drugs. The president's plan is better. It establishes drug coverage as a fixed benefit, and puts the onus of providing coverage on the government, not private industry. But federal co-payments would be phased in over several years, and catastrophic coverage would not be available until at least 2006. That approach ignores the meteoric rise in drug costs, and the enormous burden faced by the very few who account for one-third of all drug spending among Medicare recipients.

Still, the debate is circulating on the fringe, in part because Senate Democrats, like their Republican counterparts, have turned drug coverage into a partisan issue. It may be a game in Washington, but coverage is not a partisan issue in the heartland. Graham's idea represents a good starting point for providing drug coverage, and for garnering a bipartisan approach to resolving structural problems within Medicare. Let's hope last week's distraction won't set either effort back too far.

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.