NewsMine — cabal-elite — w-administration — big-money — drug-bill — Viewing Item

Medicare administrator withheld cost estimates for congress { September 8 2004 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)    http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/09/08/us_urged_to_punish_ex_medicare_official/ http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2004/09/08/us_urged_to_punish_ex_medicare_official/ US urged to punish ex-Medicare official GAO cites law against keeping Congress in dark By Knight Ridder | September 8, 2004 WASHINGTON -- Congress's watchdog agency recommended yesterday that former Medicare administrator Thomas Scully reimburse the Health and Human Services Department for roughly half of his $145,600 salary, on grounds that he improperly ordered his agency's top actuary to withhold cost estimates from Congress. HHS spokesman William Pierce said the department would not pursue the Government Accountability Office's proposal, however. "We have a difference of opinion and do not see the need to act on their recommendations," Pierce said. At issue are Scully's threats to fire Medicare's chief actuary, Richard Foster, in 2003 if he shared with congressional Democrats his estimates of the 10-year cost of the then-pending prescription drug benefit. Foster's numbers indicated the benefit would cost roughly $100 billion more than lawmakers had been told by the Congressional Budget Office. The benefit, which the Bush administration favored and pushed using the CBO's $395 billion estimate, passed narrowly. Knight Ridder first reported in March that Foster considered resigning over Scully's threats and the gag order. The stories spawned several congressional hearings and three separate investigations. The GAO report cites a federal law prohibiting government agencies from using appropriated funds to pay a government official who prevents a federal employee from communicating with Congress. It concludes that Scully blocked Foster on five separate occasions between June and December 2003 in what was "a prime example of what Congress was attempting to prohibit." The report said that with Foster's estimates, showing costs over $500 billion, "Congress would have had better information on the magnitude of the legislation it was considering and its possible effect on the nation's fiscal health." Scully, now a lawyer in private practice, did not return repeated calls for comment that a receptionist said had been passed along to him.

6 democratic candidates attack medicare measure { November 19 2003 } Aarp members burn cards Aarp spends 7m ad campaign supporting gop bill { November 19 2003 } Candidates take on aarp over drug bill Congressman bribed to pass medicare { November 27 2003 } Democrats threaten sue over medicare cost estimates Drug makers protect their turf { November 21 2003 } Drug plan faces enrollment challenge Drug prices for elderly climb 50 percent { July 1 2004 } FDA and states at odds over drugs { February 22 2004 } House probe medciare bribery allegation Medicare administrator withheld cost estimates for congress { September 8 2004 } Medicare costs kept secret Medicare drug benefit will cost more than reported { February 9 2005 } Medicare drug bill could be tough sell { November 17 2003 } Medicare drug cards produce confusion { July 29 2004 } Medicare drug cost estimate increases { January 30 2004 } Medicare reform bill is a disaser { November 28 2003 } Medicare secrecy inquiry is silenced { April 2 2004 } Medicare wont cover cancer drug costs { September 8 2004 } Medicares hidden bonanza { March 4 2004 } New drug benefits too complicated for seniors Nine dems back medicare bill Offered money to change vote { December 8 2003 } Some experts foresee revolt by elderly { November 26 2003 } Top democrats want us house probe on medicare vote US offers senior drug cards amid criticism { May 3 2004 } Files Listed: 27

Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security Archives

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purpose of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.