Government Executive - Authors - Spencer Rich

FDA lags on inspections of foreign drug plants

Spencer Rich — Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:00:00 -0500

"We are supposed to inspect each foreign drug manufacturer at least every other year, but do not achieve that goal, due to limited resources," the agency said in a statement issued in response to questions from CongressDaily. "We have only about $50 [million] to do all drug inspections each year, both domestic and foreign, so we do not get to every firm every other year, although we do inspect every firm before a new drug is allowed on the market."

The disclosure that the FDA cannot keep up with inspections is sure to factor into the debate on both sides of the contentious reimportation issue, which lawmakers vow to continue when the 109th Congress convenes. The FDA statement -- which comes as the department prepares to release a congressionally mandated report on prescription drug imports -- also noted that it would "be very costly for the agency to inspect foreign pharmacies in the way contemplated" by legislation that would allow prescription drugs to be purchased in Canada.

The debate over reimportation masks that about four in 10 prescription drugs now sold in this country are manufactured elsewhere. That includes one of the most widely prescribed drugs, Pfizer's Lipitor -- in fact, much of the cholesterol-lowering medication sold in the United States is manufactured in Ireland. The FDA inspects only the part of the Irish plant that makes the pills sold here, not the part of the facility that makes Lipitor bound for Canada or elsewhere, said William Hubbard, associate FDA commissioner.

"We can't be sure any drug we don't examine and check is safe and good," Hubbard said in an interview. "The problem with the Canadian stuff is that it hasn't gone through FDA reviews and supervision." The existing law requires that any drug sold in this country be approved in advance, regardless of where it was made.

While safety is often mentioned as a reason for opposing reimportation, some supporters of the effort say raising those concerns is merely a smokescreen from drugmakers who fear their profits will be undercut by lower prices from Canada. Other critics of the current system, including a Pfizer official whose statements have been disavowed by the company, say the FDA is already failing to ensure safety.

"The FDA has failed to keep our drug supply safe from criminals and corporate profiteers," said the Pfizer official, Peter Rost. "The FDA has failed to protect the American consumer."

]]>

Panel OKs OMB review of federal programs every five years

Spencer Rich — Fri, 04 Jun 2004 00:00:00 -0400

Action was by voice vote. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., vociferously shouted "no" when the vote was called because he opposed several provisions, though not all.

The final bill, proposed by Rep. Todd Platts, R-Pa., contained a substitute text offered by Platts and accepted by voice vote.

The aim of the bill was to "evaluate the purpose, design, strategic plan, management and results" of each program, according to a committee description.

Waxman said that there is already "quite a bit of planning and reviewing" of programs, and the bill would codify the process, but it had some "significant flaws" which would cause him to vote against the bill "reluctantly" if they were not fixed.

He offered an amendment requiring that the reviews of the programs should be done by the agencies themselves rather than the Office of Management and Budget.

He and other Democrats said OMB, an agency of the White House, in some cases actually knows relatively little about many aspects of the programs and sometimes had a different view from Congress, which created the programs, on how they should be run and their objectives. Letting the OMB make the reviews could "dilute" Congessional authority and distort programs, they said. Waxman said the bill as written would encourage the OMB to impinge on Congressional interpretations of the law.

Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., opposed the Waxman amendment, saying that it would problematic to allow each agency to evaluate itself.

Waxman replied that the bill would make OMB a "super-authority."

However, the amendment was rejected by voice vote.

Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., then offered an amendment to allow a period of notice to the public and a time for public comment when a program is to be reviewed.

Platts opposed it, saying the bill already had a mechanism to achieve comment.

Waxman said, "Not allowing public input seems absurd," adding, "There ought to be a process so that the public can come in and give its point of view."

However, the committee defeated the Towns amendment on a straight party line vote of 9 "yeas," all Democrats, to 16 "nays," all Republicans.

]]>

Former official: Improper Medicare claims exceed IG estimate

Spencer Rich — Tue, 20 Apr 2004 00:00:00 -0400

That is a nice round sum, almost $1 billion, and in the words of a statement often attributed to the late Sen. Everett McKinley Dirksen, R-Ill., "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."

But it is not a lot of money compared to the total costs of Medicare and Medicaid -- now $550 billion a year -- and some people strongly feel that the amount of improper claims the government does not spot, and therefore pays, is far higher than $988 million a year.

Total improper claims "have got to be several multiples of $988 million," said Joseph Antos, a former high-level Medicare official who is now a health policy expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "The ability to detect improper billing is far less than the ability to do improper billing."

"This has always been a big issue, no question about it," he said, adding that Ways and Means Chairman Thomas, Energy and Commerce ranking member John Dingell, D-Mich., and Ways and Means Health Subcommittee ranking member Fortney (Pete) Stark, D-Calif., had pressed hard for action against fraud and abuse in these programs.

"The problem for any administration is that while you'd like to get money back and clamp down on fraudulent billing practices, you don't want to discourage the bulk of honest doctors," said Antos.

In a statement released by his office, Senate Aging Committee Chairman Larry Craig, R-Idaho, said: "In these tight budgetary times, it is important that every dollar that the federal government spends be spent well and for its intended purpose ... But as we go after waste, fraud and abuse within Medicare, we need make sure that we do not overreact" and scare physicians into declining to participate in Medicare for fear of excessive audits and investigations.

And some experts say it is not only physicians. "Many segments of the health care industries, aside from doctors, defraud the programs," said one government source.

A spokesman said Thomas remains "very interested in curbing fraud and abuse in Medicare."

The flavor of the inspector general's report is revealed in snapshots of different cases.

In several cases resolved through a settlement agreement for a civil monetary penalty, the inspector general's office noted that the "settling party has contested the OIG's allegations and denied any liability" but settled anyhow.

Some cases described by the report involved considerable amounts of money in required payments or penalties. One really big one, according to the IG report, was a $355 million settlement by the AstraZeneca firm to help resolve liabilities "relating to marketing and pricing" of one of its drugs. A company spokeswoman for the company and spokesman for HHS said that settlement remains in effect.

Other settlements described by IG documents were smaller. For example, one was for $80,000 for a physician who allegedly received free samples of a drug from a drug company but was charged with billing "at least some of those samples to Medicare."

Another case alleged a physician had billed Medicare for free samples of drugs received from a drug company; the case involved a $64,000 settlement.

In still another case, the IG's office said a physician agreed to pay $140,000 for allegedly referring Medicare beneficiaries to a certain medical equipment company in return for kickbacks.

Antos said reducing fraud and abuse "has always been a big issue" on Capitol Hill since the 1980s, but "the rhetoric has died down" the past few years with government surpluses and the focus on the prescription drug issue.

"Now that we're back into high and rising deficits, congressional attention will focus once again on fraud and abuse," he said. "It will never be dead as an issue as long as you have Medicare paying for each individual service one by one."

]]>

Panel votes to ease pay 'compression' at upper levels

Spencer Rich — Thu, 18 Mar 2004 00:00:00 -0500

The measure (H.R. 3737) -- which passed the Civil Service subcommittee by voice vote -- addresses situations where higher paid workers stop getting raises because of a pay cap, resulting in a compression of the overall pay scale.

"Pay compression is a serious problem affecting the federal government, especially in high-cost areas, where many senior managers do not receive full pay raises because they are already at the pay cap," said Subcommittee Chairman Jo Ann Davis of Virginia. "Pay compression hinders the government's ability to hire and retain our most experienced and skilled employees."

Davis said the bill would raise the pay cap (base pay plus locality pay) for affected groups "from Executive Level III [of the federal executive pay scale] to Executive Level II. In current dollars, that is an increase from $145,600 to $158,100 -- enough to make a real difference to those affected by the cap."

Originally the bill applied only to administrative law judges, but a substitute by Davis -- which generated no opposition -- added contract appeals board members, as well as senior, scientific and professional employees.

The subcommittee also approved by voice vote, an amendment by Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Ill., to determine the impact of the salary increases on other high-level government officials including federal judges, and whether "Congress needs to consider pay raises for other senior positions in government."

]]>

Subcommittee orders study of new dental, hearing, vision benefits

Spencer Rich — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:00:00 -0500

Action by the Civil Service subcommittee on the bill (H.R. 3751) came by voice vote. The subcommittee also approved by voice vote an amendment by Rep. Danny K. Davis, D-Ill., to add glaucoma and hearing benefits to the measure, which covers workers in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

The improved benefits are "an issue of great importance to federal employees," said Subcommittee Chairwoman Jo Ann Davis, R-Va.

"We heard from industry representatives who made a clear case that federal dental and vision benefits are much less generous than those typically offered in the private sector," Davis said last month at hearing.

]]>

Lawmaker may oppose HUD nominee

Spencer Rich — Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:00:00 -0500

Democrats posed the most questions, challenging HUD policies as harmful to the poor and needy. Jackson, a deputy secretary who ran local housing authorities in St. Louis, Washington, D.C., and Dallas, has been heading the department since former HUD Secretary Mel Martinez resigned late last year to pursue a candidacy for the seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla. If confirmed, Jackson would become the third African-American in the Cabinet, joining Secretary of State Colin Powell and Education Secretary Rod Paige.

"Committee members are acutely aware of HUD's troubled past," Jackson said in his statement. "Throughout its history, the department has been plagued by management challenges that left it vulnerable to waste, fraud and abuse."

Jackson pledged to continue administration efforts to correct those failings.

"We are striving to make HUD work better and smarter than it has in years," he said.

But Banking ranking member Paul Sarbanes, D-Md., challenged Jackson over HUD's budget, sharply criticizing what he called deep cuts in the amounts available in the budget for the housing vouchers program. Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del., also said he had "serious concerns about the adequacy of funding" for some programs.

But it was Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo, who made the only outright threat to vote against the nomination. Allard said HUD is writing and promulgating new rules governing various housing transactions without regard to the clear direction and intent of Congress.

"If HUD continues to press forward" with programs Congress does not support, Allard said, "I will be unable to support this nomination at this time."

]]>

House committee backs NASA workforce flexibility

Spencer Rich — Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:00:00 -0400

The House Science Committee on Tuesday overrode Democratic objections and approved a bill that sponsors said would give greater flexibility to the National Aeronautics and Space Agency to restructure and revitalize its aging workforce.

The measure (H.R. 1085) was approved 21 to 14 with only one Democrat voting in favor, despite complaints by Democrats that it made no sense to craft changes in the agency until a report is received from Adm. Hal Gehman, chairman of the Columbia accident investigation board, sometime in the next month or so, and they had had time to study the bill closely.

But to no avail. "Within five years, a quarter of the NASA workforce will be eligible to retire," said Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y.

"I don't think we can wait any longer in dealing with this issue," he said, adding, "Admiral Gehman's report is not likely to say anything specific about workforce reforms-that's hardly the Gehman board's focus."

Democrats complained they had not received the text of the proposed bill "till 7:15 last night," with senior Democrat Rep. Ralph Hall of Texas declaring, "We should not be marking up the bill at this time." But Boehlert went forward nevertheless.

A motion by Hall to block the ability of the chairman to call a recess at any time-which would have made it difficult to keep going without a rest period or timeout-was rejected, 16 to 21.

A so-called "manager's amendment" to the bill-a partial rewrite of the measure offered by Boehlert-was then adopted on another party-line vote, 22-to-16.

An amendment by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, to require NASA to explain how it will ensure that its new workforce authority would not compromise safety, was approved by voice vote.

Adopted by voice vote was an amendment by Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., to make certain that certain workforce authorities are not available to political appointees.

But another Miller amendment to eliminate the demonstration project authority in the bill was rejected on a 20-to-20 tie vote.

An amendment by Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., to clarify language on scholarship eligibility was approved by voice vote.

An amendment by Hall about issues raised by the Columbia accident and NASA safety activities was ruled out of order as not germane, and an appeal against this ruling was then sustained 22-19 vote, killing the amendment. Boehlert said this was an issue where "we should wait for the Gehman report."

An amendment by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, to add a section on workforce diversity was approved by voice vote.

An amendment by Rep. Nicholas V. Lampson, D-Texas, to set goals for NASA's human space flight program was defeated 12-18.

An amendment by Miller to obtain an independent assessment of NASA's existing workforce flexibilities was defeated 9-13.

An amendment by Jackson Lee on minority university reserarch and education was rejected, 12-18.

]]>

Panel backs bill to let private sector workers join feds in getting comp time

Spencer Rich — Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:00:00 -0500

A House Education and the Workforce subcommittee Thursday approved a bill letting employers permit employees who work overtime to defer receiving immediate overtime payments. Instead, they could receive paid time off from their regular work later.

The Workforce Protections subcommittee passed the bill (H.R. 1119) on a party line vote of 8 Republicans in favor to 6.

Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Ill., sponsor of the bill said it is "designed to give private sector workers the opportunity to have more flexibility in their work schedule so that they can, for example, better meet the demands of work and family."

A committee summary of the bill said private sector employees do not have the legal right to compensatory time off now, although public sector employees "have long enjoyed this flexibility."

In 1978, Congress approved an experiment allowing federal agencies to offer comp time in lieu of overtime pay to their workers. Federal officials found that comp time and scheduling flexibility improved productivity and employee morale. Congress made comp time a permanent federal benefit in 1985.

"We have seen the successes of comp time in the public sector since 1978," said Deron Zeppelin, director of governmental affairs for the Society for Human Resource Management. "It is time that the private sector is able to enjoy this benefit as well."

But Reps. Major Owens, D-N.Y., Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and other subcomittee Democrats and labor representatives opposed the bill. Several said it could harm low-income workers who need to receive overtime pay at time-and-a-half rates at the end of every week to survive.

A labor spokesman said these workers might be pushed out of their usual extra overtime hours by better-paid workers, not needing the money as much, who wanted to bank future time off rights by working overtime now.

Under the bill, workers with time-and-a-half credits from overtime would, in effect, eventually get paid for those hours by using their time off credits in the future but still receiving their regular salaries with an overtime adjustment for the days they took off.

If they did not use the credits they could eventually get paid for them, but critics said it could take up to a year and a month; and if the employer went out of business in the interim, those wages could be lost.

Brian Friel contributed to this report. ]]>

State of the Union promises often go unfulfilled

David Hess and Spencer Rich — Mon, 27 Jan 2003 00:00:00 -0500

But eager listeners should not get too excited: He mentioned all the same stuff last year. And-despite partial action on some things-none of those proposals were enacted.

Every year, presidents deliver a State of the Union message describing their hopes, goals and plans for the nation. Millions of Americans tune in to the televised speech and listen attentively, believing the chief executive will succeed in all his aims. Many are certain it will happen.

But they are bound to be disappointed. Just because the president mentions a proposal does not mean it will be enacted-or even that he will really push it.

Sometimes, presidential promises are just pep talk-declaring what the president thinks should be done someday, but not what he intends to do right now. He sounds as if he favors strong action, but nothing happens. Sometimes the promises are even less than that, lip service to popular policy notions far down on the president's real agenda or not on it at all.

Often the president does make promises he tries to keep, but falters because of congressional or public opposition or changes in the economy or world affairs.

When Bush addressed the nation a year ago, he proposed diverting some of the funds that finance the basic Social Security program into private stock and bond accounts for U.S. workers. "We must make Social Security financially stable and allow personal retirement accounts for younger workers who choose them," the president said.

He did not specifically ask Congress to take up a Social Security overhaul bill during the 2002 session, however. Nor did he send Congress a specific legislative proposal to do it-lest Democrats savage the GOP in the 2002 elections with accusations that private accounts with money diverted from the basic Social Security program would be too risky.

Also in last year's message, Bush proposed "to enact a 'patients' bill of rights' [and] to give seniors a sound and modern Medicare system that includes coverage for prescription drugs." Partial action ensued in Congress on these proposals-but Democrats called GOP versions inadequate, and none became law.

Bush is not the only president whose State of the Union proposals have ended up unfulfilled.

For example, President Clinton in his 1999 State of the Union message proposed to "commit 60 percent of the budget surplus for the next 15 years to Social Security, investing a small portion in the private sector just as any private or state government pension would do. This will earn a higher return and keep Social Security alive for 55 years." It never bore fruit. Nor did Clinton's proposals to use a sixth of the surplus for the next 15 years to keep Medicare sound, and 11 percent to help workers set up personal savings accounts without diverting funds from Social Security. All these plans flamed out.

Among other domestic initiatives Bush highlighted in his 2002 State of the Union address, many were advocated but few were chosen. For example, the president called for:

Declining budget deficits "so long as Congress restrains spending and acts in a fiscally responsible manner." The fiscal 2002 deficit alone was $157 billion, significantly above the $106 billion the administration first estimated. Even if Congress curbs spending, the economic slump, higher defense and homeland security needs, plus scheduled tax cuts-all have guaranteed the persistence of higher deficits.
Extending unemployment benefits and direct aid for health insurance coverage. Disagreements over the scope of the jobless benefits between the GOP-controlled House and Democratic-controlled Senate left nearly 800,000 unemployed workers high and dry by year's end, despite the administration's call for action. Early this year, Congress finally agreed on a scaled-down package, but extended aid will be needed if the economy continues to lag in 2003.
A bipartisan effort to reform the way federal aid to elementary and secondary education is provided. A major bill was enacted, but now the president and Congress are quarreling over the amount of additional money needed to implement the new law. The president agreed to $1 billion in extra money; but Democrats and some Republicans say $4 billion to $7 billion is needed.
A production-oriented energy bill that called, among other things, for opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil exploration. A stalemate between the administration and Senate Democrats has stalled that legislation-although Senate Republicans, now restored to power, are talking about trying to insert ANWR drilling in this year's budget reconciliation package to avoid a threatened Democratic filibuster.
A new trade bill giving the president authority to negotiate free trade deals with other countries. That bill was enacted into law.
Making permanent, beyond 2010, the president's $1.7 trillion tax cut law enacted in 2001. Senate Democrats blocked that effort, contending the tax cut would chiefly benefit affluent taxpayers and add to future deficits.
Passage of a new economic stimulus package, consisting mainly of more tax cuts, to prod the sluggish economy. The administration held back on that effort until this month, when the president urged the new Congress to pass a $674 billion stimulus bill.
Cracking down on corporate fraud by insisting on "stricter accounting standards and tougher disclosure requirements." Congress passed a reform bill, but the powerful accounting lobby, which opposes tough new rules for accounting firms, has impeded its implementation.
Extending federal aid to churches and other faith-based organizations to provide social services for the poor, the mentally ill and the physically disabled. Both "separation-of-church-and-state" liberals and conservatives fearful of government intrusion put up a wall of opposition to obstruct that particular initiative.

]]>

Senate panel passes health, workers' comp, whistleblowing bills

Spencer Rich — Wed, 09 Oct 2002 00:00:00 -0400

The panel approved the bills on a 9-0 vote. All those present and voting were Democrats. Republicans, according to Committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., had decided to boycott Senate committee actions because of unhappiness with how a judicial nomination was being handled elsewhere.

The three bills passed were as follows:

S. 2936, providing that federal workers under the Federal Employee Retirement System who receive workers' compensation when injured for at least a year, and subsequently return to work for at least a year, will receive an increase in their FERS retirement benefit of 1 percent for the period during which they were receiving workers' compensation. The measure is intended to compensate for the fact that while they are on workers' compensation, the employees earn no Social Security wage credits, nor do they or their employer make contributions to the federal Thrift Savings Plan. The committee estimated the bill's cost at $8 million over 10 years.
S. 2527, authorizing individuals covered by a health benefits plan administered by the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. The OPIC plan is being phased out.
S. 3070, reauthorizing and revising some rules for the Merit Systems Protection Board and Office of Special Counsel, agencies that "safeguard the merit system principles and protect employees who step forward to disclose government waste, fraud and abuse," according to an explanation from the committee. The bill makes numerous changes to clarify protections for such whistleblowers, and the rules that apply to them.

]]>

Agriculture secretary defends implementation of farm law

Spencer Rich — Tue, 17 Sep 2002 00:00:00 -0400

Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman told the Senate Agriculture Committee Tuesday that she is "pleased and proud of the progress the department is making so far in implementing" the bipartisan farm bill.

But Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Kent Conrad, D-N.D., accused her of dragging her feet on certain provisions or all but deliberately ignoring or changing certain mandates in the bill, implying it was done in order to save money or toughen regulations on some payments to farmers.

"Did officials in the White House direct you to limit payments to dairy farmers?" asked Leahy, who is from a key milk-producing section of the nation. "We wrote a farmer-friendly program," he said, but the department has failed to put milk provisions into effect quickly enough and farmers have suffered.

"We need to get these payments out," added Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn.

Conrad told Veneman, "In item after item you and your department are defying Congress." He cited a provision in which conferees had explicitly directed that payments for certain oil seed crops should be 9.6 cents a pound but the department had set the figure at 9.15 cents.

"Why are you not following the clear intent of Congress?" he asked, noting that one farmer in his state had lost $30,000 as a result. "You've substituted your judgment" for "the clear intent of Congress," he said.

Veneman denied the charges. She and top aides said certain provisions of the bill were unclear or contradicted each other so the department had to reconcile them.

"There have been differences among lawyers on what some of the language means," she said. A department official accompanying Veneman said sections of the bill gave her the authority to adjust the crop payment.

]]>

Senate panel approves anti-terror role for Veterans Affairs

Spencer Rich — Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 -0400

The bill (S. 2132) would establish four VA emergency preparedness centers to craft medical strategies to prevent the medical crises after a chemical, biological or radiological disaster, according to a summary released by Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va.

The centers will conduct basic and clinical research and teach medical professionals both inside and outside the VA on preparing for disasters, the summary says.

The bill also would authorize the VA to furnish health care during a major disaster or emergency, and establish the position of Assistant Secretary of Operations, Preparedness and Security to oversee emergency operations.

The panel reported the measure by voice vote en bloc with three other bills. A similar bill (H.R. 3253) passed the House on May 20.

]]>

VA panel authorizes construction, approves new bioterror research centers

Spencer Rich — Fri, 10 May 2002 00:00:00 -0400

The committee approved the measure (H.R. 4514) by voice vote.

The bill also authorized $2.6 million to lease a veterans' satellite outpatient clinic in Charlotte, N.C.

All the construction projects involved improvements in existing facilities. The projects included two in Palo Alto, Calif., one each in San Francisco, Calif.; West Los Angeles, Calif.; Long Beach, Calif.; San Diego, Calif.; Cleveland, Ohio; Anchorage, Alaska; West Haven, Conn.; and Tampa, Fla.

The committee also reported a bill (H.R. 3253) giving VA a role in combatting bio-terrorism. The measure was approved by voice vote.

Under that bill, the VA would set up at least four new "National Emergency Preparedness Centers" at VA medical centers. They would do research on radiological, chemical and biological threats and on ways to develop "health responses" to such threats.

The centers would also train VA and community health workers on how to deal with threats and how to provide "rapid response laboratory assistance to local healthcare authorities" in national emergencies.

The bill would authorize $100 million over five years for the new centers and add one more assistant secretary position in the VA.

Before the final vote, the committee by voice vote endorsed changes in the original bill made by its Health Subcommittee.

]]>

Panel approves anti-terror role for VA

Spencer Rich — Thu, 02 May 2002 00:00:00 -0400

Under the guidance of Chairman Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, and supported by Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., the "National Medical Emergency Preparedness Act of 2001" (H.R. 3253), was approved by voice vote.

Before final action, a new text incorporating two other bills was adopted without objection. The incorporated measures were the "Medical Education for National Defense in the 21st Century Act" (H.R. 3254) and the Department of Veterans' Affairs Reorganization Act of 2002 (H.R. 4559).

"The VA will have a leadership role in emergency preparedness," Fliner said. But then he asked rhetorically, "How are we going to fund it?" Filner expressed hope that the funding would not take away from what the VA is already spending on its existing responsibilities. Moran said he wanted to be sure any of the implementation funds would not come out of VA health funds.

A senior committee staff aide said the VA would "be recasting its budget formulation data" and it was expected that the VA "will include a line item in its next budget request" to cover the additional costs of the new program.

According to a subcommittee summary, the bill would establish at least four new "national emergency preparedness centers" at VA medical centers. The new preparedness centers would do research on chemical, radiological and biological threats and on how to develop "health responses."

In addition, the centers would educate and train VA and community health workers on how to deal with such threats and provide "rapid response laboratory assistance to local healthcare authorities" in any national emergencies.

The bill would authorize $100 million over five years for the new centers, and authorize one more assistant secretary in the VA.

]]>

Bill to streamline Medicare contracting sails through committee

Spencer Rich — Fri, 12 Oct 2001 00:00:00 -0400

The measure passed on a voice vote.

The bill would give the HHS Secretary and the department's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which administers the Medicare program, "the tools to manage Medicare program operations more efficiently," said Health Subcommittee Chairwoman Nancy Johnson, R-Conn.

Johnson said it would create "a more collaborative relationship between providers of health care and the CMS. Specifically, the legislation would streamline the regulatory process, enhance education and technical assistance for doctors and other healthcare providers, and protect the rights of providers in the audit and recovery process to ensure that the repayment process is fair and open."

Relations between Medicare officials and providers of health care and other services have sometimes been confrontational, particularly in the recovery process where CMS seeks to force providers to return Medicare money it finds providers have erroneously billed.

Among other things, CMS would be allowed to competitively contract "with the best entities available to process, make payments and answer questions," giving it more flexibility in obtaining services from outside, Johnson said.

]]>

Panel votes to sweeten long-term care insurance

Spencer Rich — Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:00:00 -0400

The bill (H.R. 2559) passed by voice vote.

According to the committee, the measure would allow certain individuals who are now ineligible for the program to join and buy the insurance. They are persons who are receiving a deferred annuity, or a survivor annuity based on a deferred annuity.

People with such annuities are not now eligible to participate.

In addition, the bill would exempt policies issued under the program from premium taxes imposed by states, local governments, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, according to the committee.

The bill was sponsored by Rep. Joe Scarborough, R-Fla.

]]>

Social Security Administration

Spencer Rich — Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:00:00 -0400

Established: 1935
Address: 6401 Security Blvd. Baltimore, MD 21235
Phone: 800-772-1213
2001 Budget: $467.4 billion
Employment: 63,956
Web Site: www.ssa.gov
Function: SSA administers the federal retirement, survivors, and disability insurance programs, as well as the Supplemental Security Income program for the aged, blind, and disabled. The agency also performs certain functions with respect to the black-lung benefits program. Jo Anne Barnhart
Commissioner (designate)
800-772-1213
A key mandate for any commissioner is to make sure that Social Security checks go out on time and that retirees are paid the proper amount. In addition, workers' earnings records must be kept accurately and appeals handled swiftly. Those are the basics of the job. In the past, the commissioner also had policy-making duties, but in recent years, most of the decision-making on structural and financial policy has been taken over by the White House. Barnhart, 50, has the experience on Capitol Hill and in administering social and welfare programs to be not only an effective administrator but also a useful voice in the coming debate on the future of Social Security. Born in Memphis, Tenn., she received her B.A. from the University of Delaware in 1975. She later worked in nutrition projects, and as legislative liaison for the Mental Health Association of Delaware. From there, she moved to congressional and federal administrative jobs. From 1977-81 she was legislative assistant to then-Sen. William V. Roth Jr., R-Del. In the Reagan Administration, she served as deputy associate commissioner and associate commissioner for family assistance in HHS. She also worked as a consultant to the White House Office of Policy Development. Barnhart managed Roth's 1988 election campaign and was Republican staff director of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee from 1986-90. She became assistant secretary of HHS for family support in 1990 and was assistant secretary for children and families from 1991-93. Barnhart served as political director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee in the mid 1990s. She is also a member of the Social Security Advisory Board.

Return to Main Story

]]>

Panel votes to create "super scientist" position at EPA

Spencer Rich — Fri, 18 May 2001 00:00:00 -0400

"This legislation is based on recommendations made to Congress in a National Research Council report and on numerous other studies calling for strengthening science at the EPA," said Subcommittee Chairman Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., who co-sponsored the bill along with the ranking Democrat, James Barcia, D-Mich.

Approved by voice vote with no dissent, the bill (H.R. 64) would create a new position, deputy administrator of EPA for science and technology, "who shall coordinate and oversee the science and technology activities of the agency and ensure that agency decisions are informed by the results of appropriate and relevant research, development and demonstrations."

The President would appoint the new deputy, who would be subject to Senate confirmation, with a requirement that he or she have "an outstanding science and technology background." There have been complaints that the agency does not have an outstanding scientist directing research to help determine the scientific justification for rules that are intended to protect public health and that can cost industries huge amounts of money.

The bill would also require the naming of an assistant administrator for research and development, who would also have the title of chief scientist, and serve for a term of five years.

Ehlers released a list of groups supporting the bill including, among others, the American Chemical Society, the Business Roundtable, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Health Physics Society, the Entomological Society and the New York University School of Medicine.

Before the subcommittee voted on the bill, it adopted an Ehlers substitute by voice vote. Ehlers said it clarified the role and duties of the new deputy administrator, reduced the assistant administrator's term from six years to five, and dropped a paragraph outlining "the sense of Congress" on how the Office of Research and Development should operate.

Barcia said the bill "will ensure that science plays a proper role at the EPA." He said it will help ensure that the agency does not "unduly impede" activities that do not harm the environment.

"That depends on who you appoint," said a member of the audience as the session ended.

]]>

House panel pushes more retirement savings

Spencer Rich — Fri, 27 Apr 2001 00:00:00 -0400

H.R. 10) also boosts the amount that a person can contribute to an Individual Retirement Account, including both traditional and Roth IRAs, from the current $2,000 a year to $5,000, phased in by 2004. In addition, the bill includes "catch-up" provisions, allowing workers age 50 and older to begin in 2002 putting the full $5,000 a year into their IRAs and up to $5,000 above their regular pension contributions instead of phasing in the increases, according to a summary put out by Rep. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, the bill's sponsor along with Rep. Ben Cardin, D-Md. This would enable them to catch up with opportunities lost when they weren't able to save or were out of jobs. Portman and Cardin said these and other changes would help people put away more money for their retirement years, a time when half the labor force has no pension coverage. The bill is estimated to cost an estimated $52 billion over 10 years. Backed by all Republicans and most Democrats, the measure has over 300 co-sponsors, Portman said. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., said the bill is essentially the same as last year's Portman-Cardin bill that passed the House easily. The final committee vote to approve the bill was 35-6 [Vote 4], with all the opposition coming from Democrats who said it did little or nothing for the lowest-income workers -- such as those making under $25,000 a year -- while providing ways for the best paid workers and small business owners to improve their own pensions. "This legislation is not bad legislation--it's good. But it doesn't do anything for low-income workers," Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., said. Additional bill provisions increased the maximum annual allowable pension payment to a person in a traditional (defined benefit) pension plan from $140,000 to $160,000; boosted the maximum annual allowable combined employer-employee contributions to a defined contribution plan from $35,000 to $40,000, and the maximum amount of pay on which a pension formula can be based from $170,000 to $200,000, according to the summary put out by Portman. In addition to the $10,500 IRS limit on Thrift Savings Plan contributions, federal employees can only contribute up to 10 percent of pay to their TSP accounts, depending on their retirement plan. The percentage limits will rise 1 percent per year until 2006, when the percentage limits will be eliminated. ]]>

Committee approves funds to repair crumbling vets' hospitals

Spencer Rich — Thu, 22 Mar 2001 00:00:00 -0500

Action on the bill, H.R. 811, came by voice vote. Committee Chairman Christopher Smith, R-N.J., said he hoped to put the measure on the suspension calendar the week of March 26, since compromises had been worked out and the text of the original bill had been revised accordingly before it was presented to the full committee at Wednesday's markup session.

The Department of Veterans' Affairs and several major veterans' groups had told the committee at a March 14 hearing that there are substantial concerns about the safety, adequacy and privacy of many veterans' hospital and health facilities. Some of the facilities are crumbling and falling apart or are unable to deal with the needs of modern medicine, witnesses said.

"The infrastructure must be maintained," said Rep. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas

]]>

A civil servant with clout

Spencer Rich — Mon, 05 Mar 2001 00:00:00 -0500

Chief Actuary, Social Security Administration

Steve Goss is not a government decision-maker and policy boss. He controls no votes in Congress, writes no executive orders, and can order no changes in the program to which he devotes his professional life.

Yet Goss' opinions could have a big impact on one of President Bush's most ambitious campaign proposals: his plan to privatize part of Social Security.

Goss, 51, is the man in charge of the numbers, the chief actuary for the Social Security program. He will be a major player as the President and Congress consider how to keep the program solvent after 2037, when its surplus will disappear as baby boomers retire.

He won't write the laws, but he and his actuarial team give the lawmakers the crucial information they need to do so.

"We are very much by design not policy-makers. We try to inform policy-makers about the implications of potential policy," said Goss, who studied math and economics at the University of Pennsylvania, received a master's degree in math at the University of Virginia, and learned his actuarial skills during 27 years on the job at Social Security.

Goss' post is unlike the other positions highlighted on these pages, in that he's not a Bush appointee. But his expert opinions could end up helping -- or hurting -- the political prospects for any privatization efforts advanced by the Bush Administration.

Under a 1994 law making the Social Security Administration an independent agency, the chief actuary is appointed by the Social Security commissioner and can be removed only for cause. Outgoing Social Security Commissioner Kenneth Apfel appointed Goss on Jan. 3. Goss' predecessor as chief actuary, Harry Ballantyne, served for 18 years under three different Presidents.

Goss' job is to estimate how much money Social Security will take in from payroll taxes and from the interest on Social Security loans to the Treasury for the next 75 years, and how much it will spend on benefits under different economic scenarios.

The calculations could be particularly delicate because the volatile stock market has entered into the Social Security policy debate. Bush and many Republicans favor allowing workers to divert a portion of the existing payroll tax into private stock accounts, on the theory that they will provide a higher rate of return. Many Democrats call such "privatization" proposals too risky.

During early discussions held by a 1994-96 Social Security advisory committee that discussed privatization, Goss consulted analysts of long-term stock trends and determined that the after-inflation return on stocks has averaged 7 percent over the past century. He concluded that 7 percent would be an appropriate initial long-term assumption to calculate returns on a possible privatization plan.

In discussions since then, he said, "we've worked very closely with people who favor privatization and people who don't."

Gene Steuerle, an economist and Social Security expert at the Urban Institute, said that Goss won't be swayed by politics in making his assumptions. "Steve and the entire Office of the Actuary display the highest level of public service and nonpartisanship," Steuerle said. "They have tremendous influence."

Return to main story

]]>

Panel orders 'fraud audit' of Education Department

Spencer Rich — Fri, 26 May 2000 00:00:00 -0400

The House Committee on Education and the Workforce approved a bill (H.R. 4079) Thursday ordering the General Accounting Office to complete within six months a careful review of certain Education Department accounts for evidence of fraud.

The bill, which passed by voice vote, specifically calls for "a fraud audit of selected accounts at the Department of Education that the Comptroller General determines to be particularly susceptible to waste, fraud and abuse."

Before the vote, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., said the department had failed its last two audits, for fiscal years 1998 and 1999.

"Real fraud is actually taking place," he said. For example, a contract employee stole $300,000 worth of computer equipment; an employee and a co-worker received $600,000 in falsely claimed overtime pay from the department, "aided and abetted by a full-time department employee who oversaw his work"; and the department "has issued over $100 million in duplicate checks to grantees since October 1999," Hoekstra said.

The committee adopted by voice vote a substitute text offered by Hoekstra, which added the specification that the audit focus on accounts thought to be particularly susceptible to waste, fraud and abuse, rather than auditing all the accounts in the department.

]]>

House panel OKs bill for arrests of overseas personnel

Spencer Rich — Fri, 12 May 2000 00:00:00 -0400

The House Judiciary Crime Subcommittee approved a bill Thursday that would make some U.S. citizens and foreign nationals-including military and federal civilian personnel-subject to criminal prosecution in the United States for crimes committed in foreign countries.

The subcommittee approved the bill (H.R. 3380) by voice vote.

Subcommittee Chairman Bill McCollum, R-Fla., said the Senate passed a similar bill (S. 768) last year. The measure is urgently needed, he said, to close loopholes in existing law that allow some to escape prosecution, such as members of the U.S armed forces and their spouses, contractors and others employed by the armed services overseas and foreign nationals employed abroad by the U.S. armed forces.

When members of the military or civilians employed by the military commit crimes overseas, they can be prosecuted by the host country, but often the host nation waives jurisdiction or doesn't act, McCollum said. Armed forces members can also be prosecuted by the United States under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

But there are limitations on U.S. prosecution of the civilians overseas and members of U.S. military may escape prosecution under the Uniform Code because their crime is not discovered or established until after they have left the military and are no longer subject to the Uniform Code, McCollum said.

As a result, many cases of rape, sex abuse, fraud, assault, drug distribution and other crimes go unpunished, he said.

To correct this problem, the bill would make subject to U.S. criminal prosecution:

Members of the armed forces who commit crimes overseas but were never prosecuted by the host country or the U.S. armed forces, and are now out of the armed forces and no longer subject to the Uniform Code;
Foreign nationals working for the U.S. military overseas who have committed crimes and have not been prosecuted there. This would normally involve a person of one nationality (a Balkan national, for example) who is working for the U.S. military establishment in another country (say, Japan) and commits a crime in Japan, a staff aide said. A Japanese national working for the U.S. armed forces in Japan would probably be prosecuted by his or her own government.
Those employed by or accompanying the military overseas, such as a contractor or subcontractor, and their spouses and dependents. However, the dependents must live with the military person or contractors and not be a national or usual resident of the nation involved.

While there was no apparent opposition to the basic bill, Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., cited one "loophole" in the bill. He said people should get some legal protection before they are plucked out of a foreign country to face prosecution in the United States since the evidence and witnesses needed to defend themselves may be in the foreign land.

Scott first proposed an amendment allowing a suspect to make an initial appearance in the country involved before a magistrate knowledgeable on federal procedure, before being "uprooted and sent thousands of miles" without knowing the exact legal nature of the charge.

But McCollum, while conceding the point was "well-taken," said that such a remedy was impractical and would force the United States to send a magistrate overseas.

Scott responded, "But under the bill, you can ship them off even before the U.S. attorney decides whether to indict."

But McCollum held his ground and promised to work with Scott to craft a solution before the full Judiciary Committee takes up the measure. Scott then withdrew the amendment.

Scott also proposed an amendment making regulations to implement the bill effective when the bill went into effect. But he withdrew it after McCollum noted, "You can't draft a regulation until the bill is passed."

A McCollum amendment with what were described as minor changes in some bill language was approved by voice vote. The bill was then approved, also by voice vote.

]]>

Military health care, pay measure advances in Senate

Spencer Rich — Wed, 03 May 2000 00:00:00 -0400

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., said Tuesday that the Committee's Personnel Subcommittee, meeting in closed session Tuesday morning, approved draft provisions that seek "to improve health care benefits for active duty personnel, their families and, most significantly, for military retirees."

Warner said the panel's portion of the draft fiscal year 2001 defense authorization bill was approved without dissent. The panel essentially agreed that a stand-alone military health care bill (S. 2486) that Warner and most members of the subcommittee introduced Monday should be attached to the authorization bill, according to a knowledgeable source, who did not want to be identified.

For their part, subcommittee members declined to describe any of the actions they took in the closed session, saying they had been asked not to comment until after the full committee completes work on the authorization bill, probably next week.

According to statements made earlier this week by Warner, a key element of the health care provisions approved Tuesday would extend a "pharmacy benefit to all Medicare-eligible beneficiaries of the military health care system."

All military retirees under 65 already have access to a prescription drug program through military bases and to a national mail-order pharmacy and retail drug stores, under special co-payment and cost rules. Currently, military retirees lose their eligibility for drug coverage when they qualify for Medicare at age 65 but the new legislation would let then qualify for coverage under the same procedures as the younger retirees.

Sen. Tim Hutchinson, R-Ark., a co-sponsor of the health care provisions, described the proposal in a statement in the Congressional Record May 1. The proposal, which was included in the measure approved on Tuesday, provides that beneficiaries age 65 or over would pay 20 percent of the cost if they used a retail pharmacy network, and $8 for a 90-day supply of drugs with no enrollment fees or deductibles, if they bought them through the existing mail-order pharmacy program.

In a May 1 statement in the Congressional Record, Warner said he understood the importance of a comprehensive pharmacy benefit.

Meanwhile, other provisions of the bill would waive co-payments for active duty family members, under the military HMO program called TRICARE Prime, and also set up special HMO networks in remote areas where there are no bases, according to a non-congressional source.

The source familiar with the subcommittee action said the health care provisions would also extend current demonstrations allowing Medicare-eligible retirees to participate in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, but in any part of the country, not just the current eight locations, subject to a maximum national test enrollment of 66,000.

Sources also said that military pay will continue to increase annually at half a percentage point above the wage growth in the private sector. The bill also improves housing allowances for military personnel, eliminating most of their out-of-pocket costs.

National Journal News Service Reporter George C. Wilson contributed to this story.

]]>

Senate panel approves cyber-security mandates

Spencer Rich — Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 -0500

The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on Thursday approved legislation (S. 1993) to provide "a comprehensive framework" for protecting federal computer records against cyber-attacks by outside hackers.

The bill also seeks to guard against unauthorized disclosures caused by accidental or careless procedures in handling and protecting information.

Co-sponsored by Committee Chairman Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., and Ranking Democrat Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, the bill passed by voice vote. The Clinton Administration had worked with the committee to iron out some issues in the original version of the bill, according to committee aides.

When the bill was first introduced last Nov. 19, Thompson complained that "federal agencies continue to use a band-aid approach to computer security rather than addressing the systemic problems which make government systems vulnerable to repeated computer attacks."

"Hopefully, the recent breaches of security at the various 'dot.com' companies is the wake-up call needed to focus attention on the security of government computer systems," Thompson said.

At that time, Lieberman also observed, "Government computers are rife with sensitive information ... on national security, the strength of our economy, transportation and communications systems and the personal lives of millions of citizens"-as well as the mechanisms for controlling weapons of mass destruction, tracking the offensive movements of enemy states and controlling the economy and threats to public health. All these appeared vulnerable to computer hijacking, he said.

Yet, Lieberman said, the General Accounting Office had found that a test unit it set up could crack computerized information systems controlling spacecraft and information gleaned by space exploration, obtain access to State Department networks, veterans' records, tax records and benefit and demographic information. In some cases, the test unit found it would have been able to alter the information in these systems if it wanted to do mischief, he said.

Thompson said the weaknesses of the computer information system were essentially a management issue.

To correct this, the bill approved Thursday would set up a tight chain of command and responsibility for strengthening and protecting computer records. It would stretch from the director of the Office and Management and Budget at the top to individual departments and agencies below. Each one's progress in developing plans to strengthen computer security and protecting information would be monitored peridiodically by an outside agency, such as the GAO.

Each government agency would have to develop a security plan, switch to procedures identified as "best practices,"and make sure the relevant employees are properly informed and trained, under the bill.

At the head of this chain of command would be the OMB director. Under him, Thompson explained at Thursday's committee meeting, the deputy OMB director for management "will be responsible for seeing that agencies do what they should in non-defense areas," and the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence would have similar responsibility with regard to national security, defense and other "classified information systems."

"They must adopt progams and plans that will make us secure," Thompson added.

Thompson said the GAO would monitor the various computer security programs at departments and agencies annually. "This will make it as secure as possible," said Lieberman: "an annual plan and independent audit" of each agency.

According to the committee, the bill, as approved, would:

Establish clear federal agency accountability for information security.
Require each agency to have an annual independent evaluation.
Give the Defense Secretary and CIA director responsibility for national security and other classified information system security. (Addition of this provision was one of the major changes made in the original bill by the substitute text, staff aides said.)
Give agency managers flexibility to attract the "best and brightest technology talent through the use of scholarships, fellowships and federal service agreements." (This was another major change made by the substitute text, the aides said.)
Focus on the importance of training programs.

An amendment by Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, added by voice vote, would require agencies to report on the time periods and resources needed to implement agencywide security programs.

]]>