July 8, 2008 – 4:24 pm | One Comment

In a move sure to stir controversy, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended on Monday that a more aggressive approach to treating high cholesterol in children should be implemented, even if it means prescribing …

Read the full story »
Diet

Drugs

Lifestyle

Medical Research

Prevention

Home » Events, Health Insurance, Medicare

Playing Politics Stalls Bill to Save Medicare Doctors’ Pay

Submitted by MedHeadlines on June 30, 2008 – 5:04 pmNo Comment
 

As American senators angrily bickered across party lines last week, the bill that met with overwhelming approval in the US House of Representatives that would eliminate a 10% pay cut for doctors treating Medicare patients has been shelved so senate members can enjoy a week-long Independence Day holiday.

Medicare cutsThe bill fell one vote short of approval in the Senate.  The only two senators not present for voting were Senator Edward M. Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, who is recovering from recent brain surgery and is undergoing cancer treatment, and Senator John McCain, R-Arizona, who was campaigning for the presidency in Ohio and attending a fund-raiser for his election bid.  The McCain campaign has released no comment on the matter.

Current law requires a reduction in the fees paid to doctors treating the nation’s elderly and disabled, beginning July 1, in spite of the dramatic rise in the cost of delivering health care.  A second 10% pay cut is scheduled for January 1, with additional cuts of 5% scheduled for 2010, 2011, and 2012.

President George W. Bush has vowed to veto the bill if it passes approval in both the House and Senate although the extreme number of votes the measure received in the House is enough to override any presidential vetoes.

In the House vote, all Democrats and most Republicans voted their approval to replace current law, calling for pay cuts, with the bill in question that would give doctors a 1.1% pay increase instead.

In the Senate vote, Democratic majority leader, Harry Reid, Nevada, changed his affirmative vote to no at the last minute when it became obvious there would not be enough affirmative Republican votes for the bill to pass.  By doing so, he protects the chance to re-introduce the bill at a later date.
Source: NYT

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.