[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 113 (Thursday, July 13, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1435]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           IMPROVING MEDICARE

                                 ______


                       HON. GEORGE P. RADANOVICH

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, July 13, 1995
  Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, recently, Mr. Frank J. O'Neill, a 
constituent of mine from Dunlap, CA, wrote to me about his concerns 
regarding Medicare. I think he expressed his views very well, and I 
want to take this opportunity to share with my colleagues his words, 
which were also printed in the Fresno Bee.
  Mr. O'Neill recognizes the need to slow the unsustainable high rate 
of growth in Medicare spending. However, he points out that many other 
programs are in desperate need of reform, such as food stamps and 
Social Security disability.
  I want to assure Mr. O'Neill that there is a very big difference 
between the two parties. Republicans are committed to protecting and 
improving Medicare. We also are committed to reforming every other area 
of our Government, rooting out waste and fraud, and getting the Federal 
Government out of functions that are more appropriately handled at the 
State or local level or by the people themselves. And I think our 
commitment will be borne out in the months ahead.
  The people want us to save Medicare, but at the same time they want 
us to bring fundamental reform to other programs. I urge my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle to heed Mr. O'Neill's wise words of advice:
                  [From the Fresno Bee, June 10, 1995]

         Medicare Recipient Says all Programs Need Examination

                         (By Frank J. O'Neill)

       George Wallace had it exactly right. While campaigning for 
     president as an independent he said, ``There's not a dime's 
     worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans.''
       I was thrilled at the Republican landslide last November. I 
     really thought it would make a big difference. I'm 68 years 
     old. You'd think I'd know better.
       As I write there is an American Association of Retired 
     Persons announcement on the radio. In a doomsday voice the 
     speaker is asking if I know what Congress is planning to do 
     to Medicare. He asks, do I know what the reductions in 
     Medicare will cost me?
       Why isn't the AARP looking at the big picture and lobbying 
     for a plan that will be good for me, good for my children, 
     good for the country? If they succeed in terrifying all the 
     seniors it will only precipitate a partisan screaming match 
     and solve nothing. Of course it will promote a ``who's to 
     blame'' contest and generate innumerable bumper stickers for 
     next year's election.
       Is it possible that I don't understand the problem? My 
     hero, Rush Limbaugh, coming from the right, challenges that I 
     must understand that ``something must be done about 
     Medicare--it will be broke in 2002.'' Well, a pox on both 
     their houses. I am willing to accept numbers that we say we 
     can't keep spending at the current rate. I am also more than 
     willing to cinch up my belt and contribute my share. But I am 
     not willing to do it alone.
                               Not alone

       Limbaugh says the government has become a giant sow with 
     everyone looking for a nipple. Well, he may be right. And 
     I'll agree that one of the nipples may be labeled 
     ``Medicare,'' but what about all the others?
       I'll share my nipple as soon as there is an overall plan to 
     get everyone else to do the same thing. No way will I agree 
     to be penalized as long as I can stand in line at a 7-Eleven 
     in Henderson, Nev., watching a young 30-something buy a 
     package of gooey cinnamon buns with food stamps and then walk 
     across the store to play the slot machine with the change she 
     received in cash. My Medicare is threatened when there is a 
     big new sign in front of the Subway sandwich restaurants 
     announcing, ``We now accept food stamps!'' Food stamps to eat 
     out! And my Medicare is the economic culprit?
       Even if a child's disability is the result of physical 
     abuse inflicted by the parents, the child is still eligible 
     for Social Security disability payments--payments made to the 
     parents who caused the disability. A spokesman for Social 
     Services says, ``Well, it is extremely difficult to remove a 
     child from the home of its natural parents!'' Need money? 
     Hurt the kid. While my Medicare is threatened.
       Drug abusers are in many cases classified as disabled. As 
     such they are eligible for Social Security disability 
     payments. But my Medicare is threatened.
       What is needed is an across-the-board analysis of these 
     programs to make sure all facets are examined and treated 
     fairly. The very first step is something that could be done 
     quickly. Separate the Medicare program for seniors over 65 
     from all these other Social Security activities.


                           Clear distinction

       The Republicans are reported to be surprised to find from a 
     survey that most people don't realize that Medicare and 
     Social Security are separate and different. Oh, yeah? If so 
     how come the Part B payment I must make for Medicare is 
     deducted from my Social Security check? And where does that 
     money go? Into a ``trust fund''? Sure. Just like my 40 years 
     of Social Security payments.
       I accept as a fact that the Medicare program needs a close 
     examination but I will not support any revisions that 
     penalize me without correcting abuses that are financially 
     impacting the system.
       AARP is wrong. Limbaugh is wrong. George Wallace was right.
       

                          ____________________