[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 126 (Tuesday, August 1, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H8145]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


              DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S TRIP TO SOUTH AFRICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hoke] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Georgia, Mr. 
Kingston.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Let me just conclude with what some of the options are 
that we are looking at, because I think it is important that our 
seniors know that we want to have reform plans that will simplify and 
strengthen Medicare, and yet give them all of the choices that they 
deserve, and one of them would be to keep the current Medicare plan 
that they are under. The other one is a coordinated benefit plan.
  Mr. Speaker, another possible option is an employer association 
Medicare plan, because currently if someone is 65, they are forced off 
the private sector insurance, but they may want to keep it, and they 
may want to stay on their employer's plan. We want to give seniors that 
option.
  Then there is the medical savings account, which would give seniors 
the right to save money and pocket the difference at the end of the 
year on what they save on their own health care costs. We, under these 
plans, are projecting a spending increase of about $1,900 per person, 
going roughly from $4,816 per person to $6,734 over this time period to 
the year 2002, a 7-year time period.
  Mr. Speaker, this is not a Medicare cut. We keep hearing from the 
hide-their-head-in-the-sand Members of Congress that we are trying to 
cut Medicare. This is not a cut. Now I know Washington DC math does 
funny tricks, but this is not a cut.
  So to conclude, we want to simplify Medicare, we want to say that we 
want to strengthen it. I am confident that we can do it, and I am glad 
to say that it will be on a bipartisan basis, because there are a lot 
of Members of both parties who are stepping forward to make the tough 
decisions and do what is right for our American citizens.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, I yield for just a moment. Actually I want to 
talk about something else, but very quickly.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, just taking a very brief time, in looking at 
this chart there, I have seen this chart several times, but we know 
health insurance is rising faster.
  Mr. HOKE. Reclaiming my time----
  Ms. KAPTUR. The 7 years you are talking about----
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, regular order.
  Ms. KAPTUR. You are talking about over $8,100 a year, so I would 
disagree with the gentleman.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I thank my friend.
  Mr. HOKE. I am reclaiming my time.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I can answer it in 30 seconds if the 
gentleman will let me. Please, the lady is right, medical inflation on 
Medicare is going up 10.15 percent a year, but regular insurance 
inflation is at about 4 percent, and in the private sector, some 
corporations are actually having a 1-percent decrease. So what we are 
going to do, trying to do through all of these options, is slow down 
the rate of that increase so we can get----
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, we are going to slow it 
down to about 6.5 percent per year, and we believe, there is every 
reason to believe, that we as Americans looking forward are going to be 
able to do that, we are going to be able to save Medicare, strengthen 
it, improve it, and simplify it all at once.
                              {time}  1830

  For some reason, and I know that we have been feeling very bipartisan 
tonight, it just irritates me that the minority leader would call this 
report a hoax, or at least say that we are trying to create a hoax. I 
am not sure exactly what he meant. Every American should read this. 
Call (202) 225-3151, ask your Representative for a copy.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to move on to something having to do with the 
Department of Energy. As the chairman of the Committee on the Budget's 
national security task force, I have been examining the Department of 
Energy's defense activities. I introduced H.R. 1628, creating the 
Nuclear Programs Agency, which would be responsible for nuclear weapons 
activity and environmental cleanup for former DOE defense-related 
facilities.
  As a result of that study and responsibility that I was given on the 
Committee on the Budget, I discovered that Energy Secretary Hazel 
O'Leary directed the transfer of $400,000 from defense activities to 
the Office on Nonproliferation and National Security to pay for her 
security when she is traveling.
  Of particular concern is the $241,000, which was transferred from the 
materiel support program, responsible for the production, surveillance, 
and safeguarding of special nuclear materials including tritium. 
Tritium is a gas that is critical to the ignition of thermonuclear 
warheads.
  Secretary O'Leary has recently ordered the 23 DOE program offices, 
the Office of Congressional Affairs, the Office of Public Affairs, the 
general counsel's office, others, to pay the advance costs of at least 
two invitational delegation members, each, for a trade mission that is 
going to take place leaving on August 18 for 6 days to South Africa.
  According to an internal DOE memo, the estimated cost per person is 
$9,570, and that does not include an additional $500 for transport to 
Washington. The per diem cost of $930 for 6 days was figured--has my 
time expired? Is that what that means?
  This is very disappointing, Mr. Speaker. I will seek time later, 
perhaps the gentlewoman from Ohio will give me some time in exchange 
for the time I gave her.


                          ____________________