[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 120 (Monday, July 24, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H7469-H7470]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                MEDICARE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, 27 years ago, on July 3, 1968, my 
predecessor in Congress, the late James Howard, spoke eloquently on 
this floor in honor of the second anniversary of the Medicare Program. 
Medicare was enacted during Congressman Howard's first term in 
Congress. I know he looked upon this opportunity to be part of that 
Medicare debate as a great honor.
  I just wanted to quote something that he said in the Record on that 
day in 1968. He said:

       As we celebrate the second anniversary of Medicare, we are 
     really celebrating the enrichment of many lives, the elderly 
     who are already served by Medicare, those who will be served 
     in the coming years and the rest of us whose lives are 
     enriched daily as we watch our elders lead more productive 
     lives.

  Now, I would like to compare what Jim Howard expressed so eloquently 
to what the Republican leadership of today is saying about Medicare.
  According to one of the Republican leaders recently, ``Medicare is a 
program I would have no part of in the free world. Medicare,'' he said, 
``teaches seniors the lessons of dependence.''
  Mr. Speaker, the differences between Congressman Howard's statements 
and those Republican statements and the differences in the philosophies 
underlying them could not possibly be more stark. On the one hand you 
have Congressman Howard, a man of great compassion, expressing what 
most Americans believed then and still believe now, that Medicare is a 
hugely successful program which have been responsible for dramatically 
enhancing the quality of life of senior citizens and that this, in 
turn, has enriched the lives of all Americans, young and old.
  On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, you have the Republican leadership of 
the 104th Congress tearing down Medicare as somehow unAmerican and 
implying that senior citizens should be ashamed of themselves for using 
their hard-earned Medicare benefits to pay for their health care, that 
participating in Medicare is somehow learning the lessons of 
dependence.
  Of course, none of this is at all surprising. It is exactly what 
congressional Republicans have been
 saying about Medicare since it was started. After all, the 
congressional Republicans of today are indeed the direct ideological 
descendants of the party that did everything it could to prevent 
Medicare from ever being enacted.

  Next week, we will be marking another anniversary, the 30th 
anniversary of the House passage of the Medicare Program. 
Unfortunately, unlike when Jim Howard came to the floor 27 years ago, 
this anniversary is not an occasion for celebration. Rather, it is a 
time to rally against yet another wrong-headed Republican attack on 
Medicare.
  So far the Republican side has tried very hard to keep the specifics 
of their plans to change Medicare a secret from the American people. 
Who can blame them when you consider that the vast majority of 
Americans are against them. But last week we noticed in the papers that 
Senator Gregg of New Hampshire announced legislation with the goal of 
replacing Medicare coverage with a voucher program.
  Mr. Speaker, a voucher system, no matter how you cloak it, amounts to 


[[Page H7470]]
turning back the clock 30 years and abrogating the contract Congress 
made with America's seniors. Republican proposals to implement a 
voucher system are motivated exclusively by their desire to reduce the 
Federal budget by $270 billion at senior citizen's expense. The amount 
the voucher provides will not likely be based on the cost of a quality 
health care plan but, rather, what level of funding is politically 
acceptable in a given fiscal year.
  The Federal Government would, in effect, be walking away from 
Medicare and saying to seniors, Here is what we can afford; you make up 
the difference and fend for yourselves.
  Since the overwhelming majority of seniors live on fixed incomes, 
they will not be able to pay more. Most would be forced to buy 
inadequate coverage. Some may not be able to find any health insurance 
and, rather than having choice, as Republicans claim, seniors would 
struggle in an increasingly expensive insurance market to buy 
diminished coverage with limited funds.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to read from a statement that a 
senior citizen named Arthur Martin submitted to the Committee on Ways 
and Means on November 20, 1963. It poignantly conveys just why Medicare 
was needed then and why we need it today.
  Mr. Martin said that his total income is his Social Security check of 
$174, out of which he pays rent, utilities, food, et cetera. Three 
years ago, he said, he contracted bronchial asthma and was hospitalized 
five different times. The only remedy he had available was charity.
  The stigma and indignity to self-respect to a resident of 50 years in 
the same community leading a respectable life as a taxpayer and in the 
evening of his life having to resort to charity was unbearable and 
humiliating. Whatever savings he had were wiped out in hospital and 
medical care.
  Mr. Speaker, unless these Republicans plans are stopped in their 
tracks, we are going to turn back the clock and create another 
generation of seniors who face the same indignity and pain that Mr. 
Martin endured 30 years ago, before we had Medicare. That would truly 
be an American tragedy, which I think that we in this Congress have to 
stop.

                          ____________________