Would Boccieri Have Voted Against Medicare Too?

So-Called Democrat, and Representative of Ohio's 16th District, John "I get tax-payer supported health care, too bad for you!" Boccieri, explained his No vote on H.R. 3962:

While I fully support quality, affordable health care coverage for everyone, I am disappointed the House bill sadly does not go far enough to reduce the costs of getting there.

Considering most of the inefficiency in the American health care system is due to low Medicare reimbursement rates (resulting in overcharges for everyone else) and unnecessary procedures (under the same program) - both of which are addressed by this very bill (with increased payments to primary providers) - is Representative Boccieri saying he would have voted against Medicare?

Medicare only addressed cost-containment by setting pre-determined (and regionally nonsensical) reimbursement rates and negotiating drug prices.

If cost-containment was such a serious concern for the Representative, shouldn't he have offered an amendment to address these issues, or even joined in forcing the Medicare Plus 5 version of this bill - complete with negotiating provisions - onto the floor?

Another large proportion of the costs of medical care in this country is brought about by uncovered individuals, which (it is true) are rather inadequately addressed by this bill. Again, shouldn't Boccieri have offered or at least supported amendments to strengthen the coverages offered by H.R. 3962?

Medicare sees annual increases in expenditures of 8 percent on average. This bill may reduce those to 6 percent a year through 2019 without reducing any necessary benefits. Is that what Representative Boccieri means by waste and inefficiency?

Based on his rather sweeping comment about costs, I really have to wonder, would John Boccieri have voted against Medicare if it was being voted on during the 111th Congress?

I also have to wonder how all the over-65 voters in this district would feel about that kind of vote?