Political Insider

By True Dat

July 3, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this

He has money, raises money, and gets more money, because that’s who and what he represents. Working people of Georgia: Chambliss does not care your issues, but he sure does appreciate your vote.

By lc

July 3, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

you talk about special interest. He is the king of special interest.

By MasterCard

July 3, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

Georgia GOP Fundraising Dinner, per plate: $3,500 Thirty-second TV spot morphing the face of a disabled war hero into America’s worst enemy: $350,000 Duping Georgia’s sinking middle class into maintaining their own economic decline for six more years: Priceless!

By Tom Ga Hunter

July 3, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this

The sugar industry gave Saxby $80,000 he gave then a $3,300,000,000 subsidity. Wonder who paid for the $3,300,000,000.00.. Answere the Arabs because we had to borrow the money..

By Ga Values

July 3, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this

When will the AJC do its job & write a feature about this shake down artist & his lobbist son?

By RJ

July 3, 2008 9:03 PM | Link to this

True Dat, You are right on target. The political landscape is in a state of transformation. Chambliss will not be able to BUY this election.

By Why?

July 3, 2008 10:56 PM | Link to this

What do suburban Republicans see in Saxby?

I’m curious.

By Tom Ga Hunter

July 4, 2008 5:49 AM | Link to this

Why? ………Slime

By Saxby sell Georgia out

July 5, 2008 7:03 AM | Link to this

Before leaving town for the Fourth of July recess, Senate Republicans thwarted a vote on a sensible Medicare bill that would benefit doctors and patients at the expense of overpaid private health plans.

Skip to next paragraph The Board Blog Additional commentary, background information and other items by Times editorial writers.

Go to The Board » The House approved the legislation with a vote of 355 to 59. The bill is supported by most doctors, hospitals and pharmacists. But it is vehemently opposed by the insurance industry and its Republican coddlers.

The bill would protect doctors from a 10 percent cut in their reimbursement rates, and it would give them a tiny increase next year. It would also spend more money to enhance preventive services, improve low-income assistance programs and make other modest but worthwhile changes. The bill would largely and sensibly offset the additional costs by reducing payments to the private plans that participate in Medicare.

That has inflamed opposition from the White House and Senate Republicans who seem determined to protect inefficient private plans from the rigors of competing fairly against traditional Medicare coverage. Medicare pays these private plans, known as Medicare Advantage, an average of 13 percent more to provide the same services as the traditional Medicare program.

The new bill would start reducing the payment disparity through some modest adjustments. It would also require the fastest-growing category of private plans — private fee-for-service plans — to organize networks of doctors and hospitals and report measures of quality, just as other private plans do, so that beneficiaries would have guaranteed access to capable medical providers.

The likely result would be slower growth for the private fee-for-service plans, which are the most heavily subsidized and least efficient Medicare plans. That is an outcome to be welcomed, not deplored.

We would prefer eliminating a provision that would postpone a promising new competitive bidding program for durable medical equipment. But even with that weakness, this bill needs to pass so that Congress can start the politically difficult task of wringing unjustified subsidies from the most inefficient private Medicare plans.

In the Senate, every Democrat (except the ailing Edward Kennedy, who was not there) voted to take a final vote on the bill. Nine Republicans went along, leaving the bill only one vote short of forcing a vote and up to eight votes short of a veto-proof majority.

Every American represented by one of the recalcitrant Republican senators should press them to change their votes. Medicare is in deep financial trouble. Voters should demand that their leaders help control spending by reducing clearly unjustified subsidies to private Medicare plans. Let them compete on a level playing field with the government-run Medicare program.

By Ga Values

July 6, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this

During an election year when access to health care is the second-most important domestic issue cited by Americans, incredibly U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, and both U.S. Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, voted against legislation that would ensure stability in the Medicare program for Georgia’s elderly and disabled patients.

That vote means that, as of July 1, physicians who care for Medicare patients saw their payment slashed by 10.6 percent. Without congressional action to rectify the situation, Medicare will cut an additional 5 percent from physician pay in 2009, according to a June 30 announcement by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the federal agency that oversees Medicare.

THE IMPACT of these cuts threatens elderly and disabled patients’ access to health care because it further drives primary care physicians toward financial insolvency at a time when we’re already struggling with a shortage of primary care doctors.

In December, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission reported that three out of 10 Medicare patients had trouble finding a new primary care physician. In March, the Medical Group Management Association reported that nearly 24 percent of all physicians had begun limiting or not accepting new Medicare patients; 46 percent would limit or stop accepting new Medicare patients with implementation of the 10.6 percent pay cut that just took effect.

SINCE 2001, internal medicine and family medicine physicians have worked tirelessly on behalf of Medicare patients, even as Medicare compensation for their services stagnated, and they struggled with 20 percent inflation in costs to keep their offices open. No small business — as most primary care physician practices are — can sustain that kind of loss and remain open to care for people.

Our lawmakers must return to Washington and support Medicare payment levels that enable primary care physicians to keep their doors open. Lawmakers must vote “yes” on limiting debate and “yes” on passage of the Medicare bill, House Resolution 6331. Without such a vote, we’re all at risk of losing our health care. An insurance card has no value unless there’s a doctor in the house.

(The writer runs McDuffie Medical Associates in Thomson, and is vice president of the Georgia Chapter of the American College of Physicians.)

By flip wilson

July 6, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this

Ga Values, don’t hold your breath waiting for these lazy “pundits” to do any digging into Chambli$$ and his lobbyist cronies.

By Tomhere

July 6, 2008 9:11 PM | Link to this

I truly hate what this guy and his buddies have done to America. This guy is Neocon through and through. I’m looking forward to voting against him.

By James

July 7, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

Can’t wait ‘til Saxby wins big in November and pi$$es you all off!

By Tom Ga Hunter

July 7, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

James

Why are you pulling for a crook?? Are you his lobbist son?? Money’s go to be good after selling his vote to the out of state Insurance companies & screwing Georgia Doctors.

By Tom Ga Hunter

July 7, 2008 1:47 PM | Link to this

James..How about this??????????? The House approved the legislation with a vote of 355 to 59. The bill is supported by most doctors, hospitals and pharmacists. But it is vehemently opposed by the insurance industry and its Republican coddlers.

The bill would protect doctors from a 10 percent cut in their reimbursement rates, and it would give them a tiny increase next year. It would also spend more money to enhance preventive services, improve low-income assistance programs and make other modest but worthwhile changes. The bill would largely and sensibly offset the additional costs by reducing payments to the private plans that participate in Medicare.

That has inflamed opposition from the White House and Senate Republicans who seem determined to protect inefficient private plans from the rigors of competing fairly against traditional Medicare coverage. Medicare pays these private plans, known as Medicare Advantage, an average of 13 percent more to provide the same services as the traditional Medicare program.

The new bill would start reducing the payment disparity through some modest adjustments. It would also require the fastest-growing category of private plans — private fee-for-service plans — to organize networks of doctors and hospitals and report measures of quality, just as other private plans do, so that beneficiaries would have guaranteed access to capable medical providers.