Phil English's Voting Record on Senior's Issues
new! Opposed Protecting Seniors from HMO Telemarketers
In 2005, English voted against an amendment to protect the privacy of seniors and block the ability of big HMOs to access to the private information of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries for the purposes of telemarketing.
A provision tucked deeply in the 680-page Medicare bill of 2003 allowed the Bush administration to give private health insurers personal information about Medicare beneficiaries for the purposes of marketing and enrollment.
The provision would even allow HMOs to pester the millions of people who have signed up for the federal do-not-call registry.
The amendment to block the provision was rejected, 192-210. Oregonian, 6/25/05; Rep DeFazio Press Release, 6/24/05
The amendment was defeated 192-210. HR 3010, Vote #319, 6/24/05
new! Opposed Medicare Prescription Drug Negotiation
In 2007, English voted against requiring the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices.
The bill included discounts, rebates, and other price concessions that may be charged for drugs covered under the Medicare Part D prescription drug program. Chicago Tribune, 1/13/07; CQ Weekly, 1/08/07
The bill passed 255-170. HR 4, Vote #23, 1/12/07
new! Supported Cutting Medicaid & Medicare by Billions of Dollars
In 2006, English voted in favor of the conference agreement to cut mandatory spending programs by $39.7 billion over the following five years. The measure cut Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) by $6.9 billion, including harmful increases in cost-sharing and premiums that impose large burdens on poor children and families.
In addition, the bill cut $6.4 billion from Medicare in part by raising premiums for some Part B beneficiaries
The measure did not touch a $5 billion HMO slush fund established by the 2003 Medicare bill, and after intense lobbying from the health insurance industry, the budget saved HMOs $22 billion dollars by maintaining Medicare reimbursement formulas that favored the industry. House Budget Committee Minority Staff, "Key Provisions in the Conference Report on the Republican Spending Reconciliation Bill." 12/19/05; CQ Today, 2/1/06; Washington Post, 2/1/06
The conference agreement passed 216-214. HRS653, Vote #4, 2/01/06
new! Supported Raising Medicare Eligibility Age
In 1997, English voted in favor of a motion to instruct the House conferees to oppose a Senate provision raising the age for Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67.
The measure passed 414-14. HR 2015, Vote #257, 7/10/97
new! Supported Spending Every Penny of the Social Security Trust Fund
In 2005, English voted in favor of a budget conference report that spends $1.1 trillion of the Social Security Trust Fund over five years to pay for other government spending. According to the non-partisan Congressional Quarterly, "the budget deficits in the conference agreement are produced, however, only by using surpluses in the Social Security trust fund."
"Without counting these Social Security surpluses, the deficit would be much larger. If the Social Security funds are excluded, the FY 2006 deficit under the conference agreement would be $571.5 billion, instead of $382.7 billion, and the FY 2010 deficit would be $470.8 billion, instead of $210.9 billion. Over the five-year period, the agreement counts $1.1 trillion in Social Security funds to produce these deficits." CQ House Action Reports, "The Budget Agreement," 4/28/05
new! Supported Raiding the Social Security Trust Fund
In 2005, English voted in favor of a GOP budget resolution to raid the Social Security Trust Fund of more than $1.1 trillion over the following five years. According to the non-partisan Congressional Quarterly House Action Reports, the GOP budget, "projects spending and revenues that would result in budget deficits for all five years covered by the resolution ... surpluses in Social Security would offset spending on other programs ... Without counting these Social Security surpluses, the deficits would be much larger . . . Over the five-year period, the budget resolution counts $1.1 trillion in Social Security funds to produce these deficits." CQ House Action Reports, "Budget Resolution for FY 2006," 3/14/05
The budget passed the House, 218-214. HCR95, Vote #88, 3/17/05
new! Supported Spending 86 Percent of Social Security Surplus
In 2002, English voted in favor of a budget that the Office of Management and Budget said would spend 86 percent of the Social Security over the fiscal year plus the following five-year budget window (2002 through 2007). House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, 3/20/02
In total, the Republican plan called for raiding $2 trillion from the Social Security Trust Fund surplus. House Budget Committee, Minority Caucus, 10/25/02
The budget resolution passed 221-209. HCR 353, Vote #79, 3/20/02
new! Supported Republicans' $600 Billion Raid of Social Security
In 2001, English voted in favor of a budget that called for using about $600 billion of the Social Security surplus to fund new privatized retirement accounts for stock market investment. House Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus, 3/27/01
The budget resolution passed 221-207. HCR 83, Vote #104, 5/09/01
English also voted in favor of the previous version of resolution.
The budget passed 222-205. HCR 83, Vote #70, 3/28/01
new! Opposed Protecting 100 Percent of Surplus for Social Security
In 1999, English voted against a Democratic "lock box" plan that would have protected 100 percent of the Social Security surplus and kept it from being spent on other programs or tax cuts.
The proposal was defeated 205-222. HR 1259, Vote #163, 5/26/99
new! Opposed "Lock Box" Plan in 1998
In 1998, English voted against a Democratic plan to institute a Social Security "lock box."
The plan would have held the entire surplus in reserve for Social Security.
The amendment was defeated 210-216. HR 4578, Vote #463, 9/25/98