In continuing coverage from previous editions of Headlines, The Hill (7/11, Raju) reported that President Bush "is expected to lose a hard-fought battle with Congress over Medicare [payment] legislation as nine key Senate Republicans say they intend to vote to override his veto. Eight of the GOP senators say they will stand by decisions to switch votes from no to yes when the bill came up this past week." In addition, a "senator who voted against the bill says he plans to support the override when the bill comes back after being rejected by Bush. With those senators joining nine Republicans who twice voted for the bill, and the 49 Democrats and two Independents in support, the legislation would have 69 votes -- more than enough to trump the White House." The Hill added, "The development is another sign of the waning influence the White House has over congressional Republicans, who are worried that their party's poor approval ratings will lead to major losses during the November elections."

        Congress seen as failing to address long-term Medicare problems. The New York Times (7/13, A18, Pear) reported that Congress "voted to block a cut in Medicare payments to doctors, but has done nothing to solve the fundamental problem that caused the cut, and the issue will come back to haunt the next President and the next Congress, lawmakers and health policy experts say." Both "Democrats and Republicans agree that the formula for paying doctors is broken, but fixing it would be phenomenally expensive, they say. So, Congress provides temporary relief from year to year." Seniors "are directly affected, because they pay higher premiums when Medicare spends more on doctors." The Times noted that although Congress passed a Medicare bill last week that "would give doctors an 18-month reprieve,...it leaves in place the current system of paying doctors, based on a fee schedule that sets payment rates for 7,000 different services."

        Some lawmakers and healthcare experts called "for a new system that wouldn't base reimbursement on the current, complex procedure-by-procedure level, but instead make bundled payments to groups of doctors," the UPI (7/13) added. Still, "doctors' groups are reluctant to propose such changes, because it would create winners and losers within their profession."