Public interest group Public Citizen has filed a lawsuit against the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2005, charging that the legislation is unconstitutional.
The Washington, DC, group filed the lawsuit March 21 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The lawsuit charges that the DRA is unconstitutional because the version passed by the Senate and signed by President Bush is different from the version passed by the House of Representatives.
The error occurred when the House and Senate were trying to reconcile different versions of bills that each legislative body had passed. A Senate clerk made a substantive change to one bill, changing the duration of Medicare payments for durable medical equipment like oxygen tanks, wheelchairs, and hospital beds from 13 months to 36 months. The House then passed the version with the clerk's error, but Bush signed the version that was passed by the Senate, which did not contain the error.
Public Citizen believes the legislation is unconstitutional because it violates the Bicameral Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which states that every bill must have passed the House and Senate before it becomes law.
The Public Citizen lawsuit is the second legal action filed seeking to throw out the DRA. Alabama attorney Jim Zeigler filed a lawsuit last month in a federal court in Alabama seeking to have the legislation declared unconstitutional.
By AuntMinnie.com staff writers
March 22, 2006
Related Reading
Alabama lawyer takes on Deficit Reduction Act, March 21, 2006
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 puts radiology through the grinder, March 3, 2006
Lawsuit takes aim at Deficit Reduction Act, February 21, 2006
Bush signs bill cutting Medicare payments, February 9, 2006
Congress passes steep Medicare imaging cuts, February 2, 2006
Copyright © 2006 AuntMinnie.com
