posted on January 19, 2004 09:45:14 AM new
WASHINGTON - January 16 - While President Bush is likely to pat himself on the back and proclaim victory in the Medicare prescription drug debate in his State of the Union address next Tuesday, a new TV ad by MoveOn.org Voter Fund – to be broadcast before, during and after the speech – will tell the truth about the Bush Medicare package.
View ad at www.labridge.com/zimark/Medicare/movfstate1.mpg
The truth: the Bill Benefits Drug Companies, not Older Americans who depend upon Medicare. “It’s enough to make you sick,” is the tagline.
The 30-second spot will run 40 times each on CNN, CNBC, MSNBC and Fox News Jan. 17-20 in the Metro Washington, D.C., market and will air all day nationally on CNN next Tuesday, the day of the State of the Union. The ad buy also may be extended to several battleground states after the speech.
Meanwhile, a coalition will issue a primer for evaluating the new Medicare law and claims on its behalf by the Bush Administration. Myths and Facts About the Bush Drug Bill (printed at the end of this release), produced by the Campaign for America’s Future, demolishes Administration claims that the new law benefits older Americans.
Another spot in which Bush is portrayed as pulling the rug out from under Medicare enrollees has been running since Jan. 6, a $1.2 million buy in 25 cities in West Virginia, Ohio, Nevada and Florida.
The new ad features actual footage of the President speaking to the Congress, with an imitating voice.
The script follows:
VIDEO: WE SEE A SERIES OF STILL PHOTOS FROM PREVIOUS STATE OF THE UNION SPEECHES BY GEORGE BUSH. THE CAMERA MOVES OVER THE STILLS AND MAKES QUICK CUTS TO CREATE A DYNAMIC VIEW THAT MIMICS MOTION PICTURES. WE SEE BUSH WALKING DOWN THE AISLE, TAKING THE PODIUM, AND BEGINNING HIS TALK. WE SEE CUTAWAY SHOTS OF THE REPUBLICAN DELEGATION ON THEIR FEET AND CHEERING, ALL WITH APPROPRIATE SOUND EFFECTS TO CREATE THE IMPRESSION WE ARE THERE WATCHING.
ON THE SCREEN, WE WILL HAVE TO SEE A DISCLAIMER THAT STATIONS WILL REQUIRE. IT MAY SAY SOMETHING LIKE “PRESIDENT BUSH’S VOICE IS BEING IMITATED” OR “THIS IS A DRAMATIZATION AND IS NOT REALING PRESIDENT BUSH SPEAKING”.
AUDIO: Announcer (voiceover): In his State-Of-The-Union speech, here’s what George Bush should say about his new Medicare bill:
Bush imitator (voiceover): My fellow Americans. My Medicare bill has real drug benefits…but not for you. For my contributors at the big drug companies. My bill actually forbids Medicare from negotiating lower drug prices...so you’ll probably have to pay more for your prescriptions than you do now; and you won’t be able to get cheaper prescriptions from Canada.
VIDEO:THEN CUT TO A PICTURE OF GEORGE BUSH. THE WORDS “MIS” AND “LEADER” COME TOGETHER OVER HIS IMAGE. AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN, SUPER “PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG VOTER FUND”.
AUDIO: Announcer (voiceover): The Bush Medicare sellout. It’s enough to make you sick.
END OF PRESS RELEASE; MEDICARE REPORT FOLLOWS
CAMPAIGN FOR AMERICA'S FUTURE
1025 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, NW, SUITE 205, WASHINGTON, DC 20036, TEL (202) 955-5665
FAX (202) 955-5606 www.ourfuture.org
What Bush says vs. the Facts about his Medicare drug plan
by Roger Hickey Co-Director, Campaign for America's Future
Bush says: We want to help seniors with drug costs.
The Facts: The Bush drug plan puts special interests over seniors
On December 8, 2003 President Bush signed a law he claims will provide prescription drugs to seniors. But the Campaign for America’s Future and a large coalition of senior, labor and civic groups have joined to make the case that the new drug deal gives windfall profits to the drug and insurance industry and provides tax breaks for the rich – without giving a reliable prescription drug benefit or drug price relief to seniors and people with disabilities.
President Bush will no doubt talk about his prescription drug bill in his State of the Union speech on January 20. [AP reports Bush will also revive his Social Security privatization proposal.] CAF co-director, Roger Hickey – organizer of major citizen coalitions on Medicare and Social Security – has written this primer about what Bush likely to say, followed by the facts of the matter.
Bush says: This Administration came into office promising a prescription drug benefit for seniors, and we kept that promise.
The Facts: For years Republicans opposed a prescription drug benefit.
But activist senior citizen organizations, like the Alliance for Retired Americans, organized and pressured politicians, conducting highly-publicized bus trips to Canada and Mexico to buy American-made drugs at lower prices than they could buy here. Democratic politicians took up the cause. And one highly visible political upset – U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow’s defeat of Spencer Abraham in Michigan -- sent a message to Republicans that they couldn’t stand in the way of progress forever.
The pharmaceutical industry also opposed a government program to buy drugs for seniors, but when George W. Bush decided to neutralize the issue by promising a prescription drug plan, the drug companies quickly got into the business of designing a drug bill for seniors that they could live with. Their enormous political contributions to Bush and his party gave them easy access to the White House and Congressional drafting sessions. [See Public Campaign’s new report, BUYING A LAW: Big Pharma’s Big Money and the Bush Medicare Plan [1] http://www.pcactionfund.org/buyingalaw/.]
HMO companies, having failed miserably in their efforts to take over senior health care in the Medicare Plus experiment, decided a Bush drug was also an opportunity to get government subsidies to play again in Medicare and the new drug program.
Bush says: "Some older Americans spend much of their Social Security checks just on their medications. This new law will ease the burden on seniors and will give them the extra help they need." [George W. Bush at bill signing ceremony 12/08/08.] [2]
The facts: Most Medicare beneficiaries will end up paying MORE for their prescriptions.
Everyone knows that the prices of prescription drugs have been skyrocketing. The new law, which will spend a good part of $400 billion over 10 years to buy drugs for seniors, should have empowered Medicare to do what any private firm would do when it buys a lot of anything, widgets or health care services: go to the drug companies and
negotiate the lowest possible price. (This is what the Veterans Administration does, saving billions on drug prices.) Instead, the bill President Bush is so proud of actually explicitly prohibits the federal government from negotiating low prices on behalf of beneficiaries.[3] This is a provision that only a drug company lobbyist could have written.
Gail Shearer, Health Policy Director at Consumers Union, looked at the impact of Bush’s new drug plan on the pharmaceutical expenditures of consumers, making the assumption that the law will do nothing to curb the outrageously high prices charged by the big drug companies. [4]
She found that “the benefit design, and the assumption of continued growth in expenditures combine so that people at most expenditure levels actually face out-of-pocket expenditures in 2007 (when they would have coverage) greater than their out-of-pocket expenditures in 2003 (when they have no drug coverage).”
To repeat, she finds that “Most beneficiaries will face higher out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs after full implementation, despite the benefit.” Specifically, she found:
The average Medicare beneficiary (without prescription drug coverage) spending
$2,318 in 2003 would find that his or her out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs
(including: premium, deductible, co-payments, and “doughnut”) are higher in 2007,
despite the new prescription drug benefit, and would total $2,911 in 2007 (real 2003 dollars).
Bush says: "[T]his legislation is a victory for all of America's seniors."
George W. Bush at bill signing ceremony, 12/08/03.[5]
The Facts: The real winners are drug companies and insurance plans.
Drug makers will be the big winners – pocketing a whopping $139 billion in new revenues from the taxpayers, according to the Health Reform Program analysis of the bill.
· The drug industry has spent about $650 million on politicians since 1997 – fully 80% to Republicans. Many millions more have been spent on sham “senior” groups who take drug company money to run television and print ads supporting the drug and insurance industry positions.[6]
In addition to the money that goes to drug companies, $12 billion will go directly to insurance companies and HMOs to keep them from leaving Medicare.
· Since 1997, more than 2.5 million seniors and people with disabilities have been dropped by many of these same insurance companies that will be handed billions under this deal.
President Bush isn’t even trying to hide the big money behind this bad deal! Together with the Members of Congress who joined him on the stage during the signing ceremony – they have taken $14 million in political contributions from the health care industry!
From the Wall Street Journal: "Corporate lobbying groups are emerging as winners, having pushed hard for a bill in order to shift some of their costs to the government...companies can opt in, taking the proposed tax-free federal subsidy and shifting some costs to the government, or opt out and possibly cut or eliminate their own coverage altogether, a trend that is already under way.". . . "For the drug industry, the legislation is good news...Drug makers believe individual private buyers are less able to push down prices than a centralized government purchaser with a pool of 40 million patients." [7]
Bush says: My drug plan helps those who need it most. The new benefit provides for comprehensive drug coverage for people with low incomes.
The Facts: Millions of low-income seniors will be hurt by the Bush bill.
From the New York Times: "Millions of Medicare beneficiaries have bought private insurance to fill gaps in Medicare. But a little-noticed provision of the legislation prohibits the sale of any Medigap policy that would help pay drug costs after Jan. 1, 2006, when the new Medicare drug benefit becomes available." [8]
From a USA Today report: "The Congressional Budget Office estimates about 2.7 million seniors could lose benefits that may be more generous than those that will be offered under Medicare." [9]
The bill establishes a $6,000 ($9,000 for a couple) “assets test” for those under 135% of established poverty level which will disqualify 2.8 million very low-income seniors for assistance.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports "Several million of the nation’s poorest elderly and disabled beneficiaries will be made worse off by the new legislation, because they will have to pay more for drugs than they currently pay under Medicaid, will be denied coverage for some drugs they currently receive through Medicaid, or both.." [10]
The Center’s report continues: “Medicaid beneficiaries currently receive prescription drugs free of charge or pay charges that are generally limited to no more than $1 or $2 per prescription per month. Under the new legislation, elderly and disabled Medicare beneficiaries who qualify for Medicaid and have gross incomes modestly above the poverty line will begin paying charges of $5 per month per brand-name prescription and $2 per month per generic prescription. (The charges are lower for those below the poverty line.) For those with few prescriptions, these differences may not matter much. For those with many prescriptions, however, the differences can be significant.
Of particular concern, these $5 and $2 charges will be increased each year by the percentage that drug costs rise per Medicare beneficiary, which the Congressional Budget Office projects will be about 10 percent per year. These near-poor elderly and disabled beneficiaries live primarily on fixed incomes that do not rise over time or on small Social Security checks that rise with the general inflation rate, which CBO projects will be about 2.5 percent per year. In other words, the drug co-payment charges these beneficiaries will have to pay will rise about four times faster than their incomes.
Still more troubling, Medicaid generally covers all drugs that a beneficiary needs. By contrast, the new legislation allows the private insurance plans that will deliver the Medicare drug benefit to beneficiaries in Medicare fee-for-service (as well as HMOs and PPOs that provide all Medicare benefits to their enrollees, including the drug benefit) to limit coverage to two drugs per therapeutic class. This means that many poor elderly and disabled beneficiaries who currently receive drug coverage through Medicaid may lose coverage for the drugs they have been prescribed.[11]
Bush says: The new law protects existing retiree coverage.
The Facts: It doesn’t do much to prevent companies from dumping their drug plans for their retired employees.
"The Congressional Budget Office estimates about 2.7 million seniors could lose benefits that may be more generous than those that will be offered under Medicare." From USA Today, 11/25/03. [12]
The Alliance for Retired Americans reports: The law provides a subsidy to sponsors of qualifying private employer retiree health plans, but that amount is 28% of “allowable retiree costs” in excess of “cost threshold” up to amount of “cost limit.” For 2006, the individual cost threshold is $250 and cost limit is $5,000. Allowable retiree costs exclude administrative costs, net of rebates, charge backs, discounts, etc. The law only requires the plan to provide drug coverage that is “at least actuarially equivalent to the standard prescription plan” which means many companies could, and probably will, reduce current coverage. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 2.7 million retirees who currently receive drug coverage through a former employer will lose those benefits. [13]
Bush says: The benefit will be simple. “Seniors happy with the current Medicare system should be able to keep their coverage just the way it is.” [14] From Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address, Tuesday, January 28, 2003
The Facts: This bill creates a VERY complicated, confusing system.
Let’s take a look at what faces those who choose to participate in the new prescription “benefit”:
· Recipients will be charged at least $420 per year in new premiums, have to pay a $250 deductible, a part of your drug costs up to $2,250, all of your drug costs from $2,251 to $5,100, and then a smaller portion of drug costs after that.
· Once all of this is added up – the average person on Medicare will end up paying more out-of-pocket for their prescriptions after the new law goes into effect than they pay today, according to Consumer’s Union.
· What does all of that look like in real time for real people? Here’s what a year of coverage under the drug deal (including premiums) looks like for a Medicare beneficiary with $6,200 in annual drug costs – an average of $515 per month:
January: she pays around $350
February – April: she pays around $165
May – October: she pays around $530 (COVERAGE GAP LASTS 6 MONTHS!)
November – December: she pays around $60 (catastrophic)
AND THEN IT STARTS ALL OVER AGAIN!
· Because of the skyrocketing cost of drugs – many seniors may find themselves navigating a new and confusing roller coaster to get help with their prescriptions. [15]
Bush says: “We must work toward a system in which all Americans choose their own doctors, and seniors and low-income Americans receive the help they need. . . We must put doctors and nurses and patients back in charge of American medicine.” Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003 [16]
The Facts: This bill Subsidizes HMOs to take over Medicare.
Most people who have dealt with HMOs know that patients lose choice of their doctors, and find bureaucrats and insurance clerks in charge of treatment decisions. But President Bush and his backers used this drug bill to inject HMOs into Medicare – even after the failure of the Medicare Plus experiment with HMOs.
· The drug deal starts Medicare privatization, subsidizes HMOs, means tests beneficiaries, and is designed to starve Medicare of necessary funds – making Newt Gingrich’s goal that Medicare “wither on the vine,” a reality.
· HMOs get billions of taxpayer dollars in “incentives” to sell the health care coverage that Medicare provides now. This false “competition” will wind up luring the healthy and wealthy out of Medicare and will threaten the program’s stability.
· About a fifth of people on Medicare will find themselves in areas with higher Medicare costs as a result.
From the Alliance for Retired Americans: This law really undermines the traditional Medicare program by forcing it to compete, beginning in 2010, with private HMO insurance plans. Supporters tout this as “only a demonstration project,” but it is the beginning of the privatization of Medicare. Private insurance companies will have the option to “cherry-pick” enrollees, that is they will accept healthier seniors, leaving sicker seniors in the traditional program . Unlike the traditional program, private insurers do not guarantee premiums, can drop patients and change coverage. The law also establishes a “means test” for the Medicare program under which higher income seniors will pay higher premiums for Part B, ranging from 40-220%.
In order to get such drug coverage you must either leave the traditional Medicare program and join a Medicare Advantage plan (this replaces the failing Medicare+Choice program that replaced the failed Medicare HMO program) or buy a stand alone policy from a private “Plan Sponsor.” The private “Plan Sponsor” is either an insurance company licensed in the state or a company that meets the solvency standards established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). [17]
The Bush program also includes bogus “cost saving” measures that will starve Medicare of
necessary funds. Despite the fact that the deal would force Medicare to pay skyrocketing drug costs and stops Medicare from lowering those costs it also includes caps on Medicare spending – squeezing Medicare from both ends.
The new law requires the President to cut Medicare spending (including benefit cuts) whenever the government projects that, seven years into the future, costs might go above an arbitrary threshold.
Bush says: The money in this bill goes to prescription drugs for seniors.
The Facts: Hidden in this bill are More Tax Breaks for the Rich.
As one might expect from a bill written by conservatives, the Bush Medicare bill contains--another tax cut for rich people! This new $6.8 billion tax break has nothing to do with prescriptions – it allows wealthy Americans to shelter income in high-deductible health savings accounts that most Americans can’t afford. Plus this tax break is only for Americans under 65 years old – eliminating the overwhelming majority of Medicare beneficiaries.
In HSAs Won't Cure Medicare's Ills Urban Institute health economists Leonard E. Burman and Linda J. Blumberg write: “This proposed set-up would primarily benefit those with high incomes for at least two reasons. First, the tax deduction is worth most to them. A $4,500 HSA contribution, the maximum permitted in the House legislation, would generate a tax deduction worth $1,575 per year to a household in the top income tax bracket. The value of the tax benefit would be less than half as much for a moderate-income family—much less if it could not afford to contribute much to the account.
Second, high-income people can afford the risk of a high deductible. $2,000 in unreimbursed medical costs is a huge burden for someone earning $30,000 per year, but chump change for someone earning $300,000. Employers may kick in part of the deductible out of their premium savings, but those savings are expected to be dwarfed by the deductible. Thus, modest-income families in these high- deductible plans may be tempted to skip preventive care or delay medical tests and services when illness strikes.
Tax cuts for rich people were never a cure-all, but this particular proposal is pure snake oil. Health savings accounts have nothing to do with Medicare and they are the wrong prescription for the uninsured. [18]
· So what could $6.8 billion get for seniors and people with disabilities on Medicare? 165.3 million prescriptions of Lipitor or 72 million prescriptions of Plavix at the price the Veteran’s Administration pays for prescriptions.
[1] BUYING A LAW: Big Pharma’s Big Money and the Bush Medicare Plan by David Donnally January 2004 The study can be found online at http://www.pcactionfund.org/buyingalaw/.
[2] George W. Bush at bill signing ceremony 12/08/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45709-2003Dec8?language=printer
[3] From the new drug bill language: “NONINTERFERENCE- In order to promote competition under parts C and D, the Administrator, in carrying out the duties required under this section, may not, to the extent possible, interfere in any way with negotiations between eligible entities, MedicareAdvantage organizations, hospitals, physicians, other entities or individuals furnishing items and services under this title (including contractors for such items and services), and drug manufacturers, wholesalers, or other suppliers of covered drugs. S. 1, Sec. 301.”
[4] Medicare Prescription Drugs: Too High a Price For Modest Benefit by Gail Shearer Director, Health Policy Analysis Washington Office Consumers Union November 17, 2003 http://www.consumersunion.org/1117%20medicare%20report%20final.pdf
[5] George W. Bush at bill signing ceremony 12/08/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A45709-2003Dec8?language=printer
[6] BUYING A LAW: Big Pharma’s Big Money and the Bush Medicare Plan by David Donnally January 2004 The study can be found online at http://www.pcactionfund.org/buyingalaw/.
[7] A Guide to Who Wins and Loses in Medicare Bill, Wall Street Journal Updated November 18, 2003 1:09 a.m. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB106910858582739700,00.html?mod=sp-rmkmedicare_1
[8] New Medicare Plan For Drug Benefits Prohibits Insurance By ROBERT PEAR, New York Times, December 7, 2003, Sunday Late Edition - Final , Section 1 , Page 1 , Column 6
[9] “Benefits start in '06, but help available sooner” by Andrea Stone, USA TODAY, 11-25-03
[10] THE AARP ADS AND THE NEW MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG LAW by Edwin Park and Robert Greenstein December 11, 2003 Center of Budget and Policy Priorities Report
[11] THE AARP ADS AND THE NEW MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG LAW by Edwin Park and Robert Greenstein December 11, 2003 Center of Budget and Policy Priorities Report
[12] “Benefits start in '06, but help available sooner” by Andrea Stone, USA TODAY, 11-25-03
[18] HSAs Won't Cure Medicare's Ills by Leonard E. Burman, Linda J. Blumberg Published: November 21, 2003 Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=1000578
posted on January 19, 2004 10:10:25 AM new
Doesn't surprise me at all. Bush has been taking careof his special interest buddies since he took office.
The sad thing is that few will protest this. Bush has become sacrosanct to many, hailed as America's "deliverer." Excuses will be made, or it will be outright ignored. Those that do protest will be labeled "Bush bashers," "hysterical," or just plain "un-American" or "unpatriotic." It's sickening.
Edited toput spaces here & there. Darn keyboard...
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
[ edited by bunnicula on Jan 19, 2004 10:11 AM ]
posted on January 19, 2004 10:19:04 AM new
Once again, a deceptive move by Bush, a self serving photo op for his election campaign and a subsidy for the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.
posted on January 19, 2004 12:02:07 PM new
It may be a close race but any one of the democratic candidates can whip him easily. With Clark, Kerry, Dean or Edwards it will be a breeze.
posted on January 19, 2004 12:24:46 PM new
So Sky what freaking difference does it make to you. Isn't the medical practice in Canada socialized & don't you pay 30% in taxes to support it?
"I keep wondering who will be / The Democratic nominee / For president. Will it be Clark / Who somehow lights a latent spark? / Or Dean who holds on to his lead? / Or Gephardt who the voters heed / At last? Or maybe Lieberman, / Who now appears an
also ran? / Or Kerry who thinks Vietnam / Makes him the Demos' great 'I Am?' / Who
knows which one of these will win / While others take it on the chin? / One thing we
know, when all is done / Kucinich, Moseley Braun, Sharpton / Ere this month ends
will fade from view / Leaving just the doughty few / To woo us with their campaign
jive, / Striving to keep their hopes alive. / One wonders why. At final blush / There's none today can beat George Bush." --Lyn Nofziger
"If you believe you can tell me what to think, I believe I can tell you where to go. Not all of us are sheep....."
posted on January 19, 2004 01:11:05 PM newBush Sr. and the RNC thought the same thing a dozen or so years ago
Dont forget Bush SR was much more popular as well. Anyone who thinks bush is unbeatable may be in for a surprise
Concerning health insurance, we are heading for universal coverage. The costs keep going up, and more keep going off. Sooner than later there will be a breaking point.
posted on January 19, 2004 01:20:12 PM newSooner than later there will be a breaking point.
The breaking point has arrived -- and as a result, over 40 million people in this country are uninsured.
If you consider Federal, State, County, sales and Property taxes we pay more than 30% and then can't afford health insurance. Many people in the U.S have to travel to Canada or Mexico to afford medicine
posted on January 19, 2004 04:54:24 PM new
The govt doesn't hand feed anyone I am aware of, but the Constitution does say that the govt is responsible for the general welfare of the people of the United States.
posted on January 19, 2004 05:10:55 PM new "I am curious, since when is it the reposnsibility of the governement to hand feed people?"
Providing health care for all people becomes the responsibility of government when such care becomes unaffordable. That's not "hand feeding" by any stretch of the imagination. Remember that the function and power of our government is derived from the people. You seem to think that governments should not be responsive to people's needs.
As Reamond suggested, from the constitution...
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Health care is a very basic need and so vital that we are providing it to the people in Iraq. We should recognize that need here and do the same for the people of our country. It's not acceptable to have over 43 million people without health insurance.
posted on January 19, 2004 06:03:56 PM new
I agree, Helen. Health care should be at the top of the list in every government. Healthy people can continue paying taxes. Unhealthy people are a tax burden to others. It makes no sense at all.
posted on January 19, 2004 07:18:35 PM newpromote the general Welfare
General Welfare... very undefined and open to interpretation...
My idea of general welfare is making sure I live in some form of safety... not standing there with begging like a bum...
If people can't afford healthcare... tough sh*t... get a job or die... one or the other...
Yes I do believe that.
People are so damn lazy now it is not funny and always want a handout from the government... never taking responsibility for their own actions.
On the one hand you #*!@ about government being too much and on the other you want handout after handout... how about we cut out welfare all together... then we can talk about healthcare, or move to that socialist sh*thole to the north....
posted on January 19, 2004 07:26:47 PM new
Yes, it's better to have a non-caring government that gives you very little back for the thousands you pay them each year.
posted on January 19, 2004 07:58:47 PM newYeah, but he will be reelected because there is not any competition...
A while back it was stuff like "he's protected us from terrorists....he's gone after Al Qaeda...he's a bronco-bustin' take no prisoners cowboy buckaroo macho man protector of our wimmin and chillerns.."
now it's just...there's no competition....looks to me like there's plenty of competition. You couldn't call a race this close beforehand...
___________________________________
Mi abuelita me dijo "en boca cerrada no entran moscas".
posted on January 19, 2004 08:09:10 PM new
This administration could provide plenty of employment to alleviate some of the homelessness and decrease the unemployment rate. If they are going to drive the deficit up with such reckless abandon. Why not allocate a percentage of those monies to go in a direction that would benefit the economy. Roosevelt's New Deal brought about programs such as the W.P.A., C.C.C and a host of others, which by and large, proved beneficial to the economy and the country.
posted on January 20, 2004 01:10:50 PM new
THE REAL TRUTH
George W Bush and the real state of the Union: Today the President gives his annual address. As the election battle begins, how does his first term add up?, The Independent (UK), January 20, 2004
By
Jan 20, 2004, 13:40
232: Number of American combat deaths in Iraq between May 2003 and January 2004
501: Number of American servicemen to die in Iraq from the beginning of the war - so far
0: Number of American combat deaths in Germany after the Nazi surrender to the Allies in May 1945
0: Number of coffins of dead soldiers returning home from Iraq that the Bush administration has allowed to be photographed
0: Number of funerals or memorials that President Bush has attended for soldiers killed in Iraq
100: Number of fund-raisers attended by Bush or Vice-President Dick Cheney in 2003
13: Number of meetings between Bush and Tony Blair since he became President
10 million: Estimated number of people worldwide who took to the streets in opposition to the invasion of Iraq, setting an all-time record for simultaneous protest
2: Number of nations that Bush has attacked and taken over since coming into the White House
9.2: Average number of American soldiers wounded in Iraq each day since the invasion in March last year
1.6: Average number of American soldiers killed in Iraq per day since hostilities began
16,000: Approximate number of Iraqis killed since the start of war
10,000: Approximate number of Iraqi cililians killed since the beginning of the conflict
$100 billion: Estimated cost of the war in Iraq to American citizens by the end of 2003
$13 billion: Amount other countries have committed towards rebuilding Iraq (much of it in loans) as of 24 October
36%: Increase in the number of desertions from the US army since 1999
92%: Percentage of Iraq's urban areas that had access to drinkable water a year ago
60%: Percentage of Iraq's urban areas that have access to drinkable water today
32%: Percentage of the bombs dropped on Iraq this year that were not precision-guided
1983: The year in which Donald Rumsfeld gave Saddam Hussein a pair of golden spurs
45%: Percentage of Americans who believed in early March 2003 that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 11 September attacks on the US
$127 billion: Amount of US budget surplus in the year that Bush became President in 2001
$374 billion: Amount of US budget deficit in the fiscal year for 2003
1st: This year's deficit is on course to be the biggest in United States history
$1.58 billion: Average amount by which the US national debt increases each day
$23,920: Amount of each US citizen's share of the national debt as of 19 January 2004
1st: The record for the most bankruptcies filed in a single year (1.57 million) was set in 2002
10: Number of solo press conferences that Bush has held since beginning his term. His father had managed 61 at this point in his administration, and Bill Clinton 33
1st: Rank of the US worldwide in terms of greenhouse gas emissions per capita
$113 million: Total sum raised by the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign, setting a record in American electoral history
$130 million: Amount raised for Bush's re-election campaign so far
$200m: Amount that the Bush-Cheney campaign is expected to raise in 2004
$40m: Amount that Howard Dean, the top fund-raiser among the nine Democratic presidential hopefuls, amassed in 2003
28: Number of days holiday that Bush took last August, the second longest holiday of any president in US history (Recordholder: Richard Nixon)
13: Number of vacation days the average American worker receives each year
3: Number of children convicted of capital offences executed in the US in 2002. America is only country openly to acknowledge executing children
1st: As Governor of Texas, George Bush executed more prisoners (152) than any governor in modern US history
2.4 million: Number of Americans who have lost their jobs during the three years of the Bush administration
221,000: Number of jobs per month created since Bush's tax cuts took effect. He promised the measure would add 306,000
1,000: Number of new jobs created in the entire country in December. Analysts had expected a gain of 130,000
1st: This administration is on its way to becoming the first since 1929 (Herbert Hoover) to preside over an overall loss of jobs during its complete term in office
9 million: Number of US workers unemployed in September 2003
80%: Percentage of the Iraqi workforce now unemployed
55%: Percentage of the Iraqi workforce unemployed before the war
43.6 million: Number of Americans without health insurance in 2002
130: Number of countries (out of total of 191 recognised by the United Nations) with an American military presence
40%: Percentage of the world's military spending for which the US is responsible
$10.9 million: Average wealth of the members of Bush's original 16-person cabinet
88%: Percentage of American citizens who will save less than $100 on their 2006 federal taxes as a result of 2003 cut in capital gains and dividends taxes
$42,000: Average savings members of Bush's cabinet are expected to enjoy this year as a result in the cuts in capital gains and dividends taxes
$42,228: Median household income in the US in 2001
$116,000: Amount Vice-President Cheney is expected to save each year in taxes
44%: Percentage of Americans who believe the President's economic growth plan will mostly benefit the wealthy
700: Number of people from around the world the US has incarcerated in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
1st: George W Bush became the first American president to ignore the Geneva Conventions by refusing to allow inspectors access to US-held prisoners of war
+6%: Percentage change since 2001 in the number of US families in poverty
1951: Last year in which a quarterly rise in US military spending was greater than the one the previous spring
54%: Percentage of US citizens who believe Bush was legitimately elected to his post
1st: First president to execute a federal prisoner in the past 40 years. Executions are typically ordered by separate states and not at federal level
9: Number of members of Bush's defence policy board who also sit on the corporate board of, or advise, at least one defence contractor
35: Number of countries to which US has suspended military assistance after they failed to sign agreements giving Americans immunity from prosecution before the International Criminal Court
$300 million: Amount cut from the federal programme that provides subsidies to poor families so they can heat their homes
$1 billion: Amount of new US military aid promised Israel in April 2003 to offset the "burdens" of the US war on Iraq
58 million: Number of acres of public lands Bush has opened to road building, logging and drilling
200: Number of public-health and environmental laws Bush has attempted to downgrade or weaken
29,000: Number of American troops - which is close to the total of a whole army division - to have either been killed, wounded, injured or become so ill as to require evacuation from Iraq, according to the Pentagon
90%: Percentage of American citizens who said they approved of the way George Bush was handling his job as president when asked on 26 September, 2001
53%: Percentage of American citizens who approved of the way Bush was handling his job as president when asked on 16 January, 2004
