A large group of Local 237 retirees joined hundreds of other enraged elderly outside the Manhattan offices of Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton Nov. 21 to demand that they support a filibuster to defeat passage of a Republican-backed Medicare prescription drug bill.

Unfortunately, the outrage expressed at that rally and by seniors across the country was not strong enough to stop the GOP-insurance company-pharmaceutical firm troika from pushing that disastrous bill through the Senate, which passed it 54 to 44.

The angry citizens gathered shortly before 1 p.m. to take part in an hour-long rally at 3rd Ave., between 47 and 48 Sts. The rally was to voice their opposition to the bill, which an AFL-CIO official said could result in four million retirees losing their employer-paid drug benefits. Many of the protesters also carried angry messages for executives of AARP, whose offices are near those of the Senators in the midtown area. The retirees strongly opposed the AARP endorsement of the drug bill, which they considered a sell-out to the drug and insurance companies.

AARP was formerly known as the American Association of Retired Persons. Gerry Shea, the AFL-CIO’s assistant to the president for government affairs, said the bill’s possible effect on retirees was a large temptation for many firms. “That’s a lot of incentive for employers to drop coverage,” he noted.

He added that the AFL-CIO would spend at least $1 million in TV ads to urge that legislators defeat passage of the Republican-endorsed bill, which was in a Senate-House conference committee for almost four months before it was distributed for study Nov. 20.

Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi sent a letter two days before the protest rally to William D. Novelli, executive director and chief executive officer of AARP. They said that 500 senior citizens, many of them members of AARP, had traveled to Washington Nov. 19 to protest the proposed legislation and to demand that Congress reject it.

In their letter, the legislators said that under the bill, up to one quarter of Medicare beneficiaries would have to pay more for prescription drugs than they do now. It also said that seven million seniors would pay higher Medicare premiums unless they join an HMO and give up their choice of doctor.

Many more million retirees would lose drug coverage provided by their former employers, and millions more would have to go without drug coverage for parts of every year, even though they would be charged premiums year-round.

A poll by Peter D. Hart Research found that by a margin of 61 percent to 26 percent, AARP members viewed the pending Medicare bill unfavorably, the legislators charged.

Their letter asked: “How can you reconcile AARP’s strong endorsement of this legislation with the documented rejection of the bill’s policies by seniors, including AARP members, by a 3 to 1 margin?”

To dispel any perception of a “possible conflict of interest,” they asked if AARP is “willing to make a commitment not to become a direct or indirect marketer of discount cards, pharmacy drug benefit plans, or any other managed care health plan offerings to Medicare beneficiaries called for in this bill.”

The Democratic leaders said they agreed with AARP that action on prescription drug legislation is long overdue, “but we believe that the policies being sponsored by AARP in this bill are severely flawed, not in the best interests of America’s seniors, and can and must be improved upon.”