[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 143 (Thursday, September 14, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H8937-H8940]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. BONIOR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I ask the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Dreier], my friend, what the schedule will be for the next week.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very dear friend, the gentleman 
from Mount Clemens, MI [Mr. Bonior], for yielding.
   Mr. Speaker, on Monday, September 18, the House will meet at 10:30 
a.m. for morning hour and 12 noon for legislative business. We plan to 
take up the following 11 bills under suspension of the rules: S. 464, 
extension of district court demonstration projects; S. 532, clarifying 
rules governing venue; House Resolution 181, encouraging the peace 
process in Sri Lanka; House Resolution 158, congratulating the people 
of Mongolia; House Concurrent Resolution 42, supporting dispute 
resolution in Cyprus; H.R. 1091, the Shenandoah Valley National 
Battlefields Partnership Act of 1995; H.R. 260, National Park System 
Reform Act of 1995; H.R. 402, the Alaska Native claims settlement 
amendments; H.R. 1872, The Ryan White Care Act Amendments of 1995; H.R. 
558, The Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Consent 
Act; and H.R. 1296, providing for the administration of certain 
Presidio properties.
  After consideration of the suspensions, we plan to take up H.R. 39, 
the Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, subject to a unanimous-
consent agreement.
  Members should be advised that there will be no recorded votes on 
Monday; any votes will be postponed until Tuesday. Members should not 
expect any votes on Tuesday before 11 a.m.
  On Tuesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for morning hour and 10 
a.m. for legislative business. On Wednesday and Thursday the House will 
meet at 10 a.m. for legislative business. Members should be advised 
that there will be no votes on Friday, September 22.
  The House will consider the following bills next week, all of which 
will be subject to rules: H.R. 1617, the Careers Act; H.R. 927, the 
Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1995; H.R. 2274, the 
National Highway System Designation Act of 1995; and H.R. 1323, the 
Pipeline Safety Act of 1995.
  Members should be advised that conference reports may be brought up 
at any time.
  On Monday and Tuesday, we expect the House to conclude its business 
between 7 and 8 p.m. On Wednesday, we plan on working later, but we 
hope to adjourn between 10 p.m. and 12 midnight. It is our hope to have 
Members on their way home to their families and their districts by no 
later than 6 p.m. on Thursday.
   Mr. Speaker, does my friend, the gentleman from Michigan, have any 
questions?
  Mr. BONIOR. I certainly do, Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Dreier] for reading the schedule to us this afternoon.
  Mr. DREIER. My pleasure.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, it would appear from the gentleman's reading 
of the schedule that it seems like a light week next week. I note that 
we are not having any recorded votes on Monday or Friday next week, and 
I was wondering if the leadership on the other side would not entertain 
a resolution that has been sponsored by over 200 Members of this body 
that would require 

[[Page H 8938]]
that we have at least 4 weeks of debate and hearings on the Medicare 
issue since the Medicare issue is indeed the biggest, or if not the 
biggest, one of the biggest issues we will face not only in this 
session of Congress, but in the country, and I say to the gentleman to 
just let me finish, and then I would be happy to get an answer from my 
colleague here.
  Mr. DREIER. If my colleague would yield, I would answer.
  Mr. BONIOR. If the gentleman would withhold for a second, I will 
finish my point, and maybe it will become a little clearer to my friend 
from California so he can respond in a more full and understanding way.
  Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that, if we are going to take this issue 
up next week after only 1 day of hearing, that when we are talking 
about the largest increases and cuts in Medicare and Medicaid in the 
history of this country, it seems to me that we are going to 
shortchange the American public, and I would ask the gentleman, with 
over 200 Members supporting this resolution, ask him for at least 4 
weeks of debate.
  Mr. DREIER. I ask my friend if that is the same question he asked 
about 90 second ago, or are there two questions?
  Mr. BONIOR. This is the same. The gentleman can answer them both, but 
I have a feeling I know what the answer is.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would say to my friend that we have gone 
through exhaustive hearings on the issue of Medicare, and to argue that 
this issue has not been debated either in Congress or in the public is 
obviously not the case.
  I see the gentleman from Florida, my friend, here, the ranking member 
of the Committee on Ways and Means, and I understand that this 
particular piece of legislation will not have had the specific hearings 
on this bill, but for more than a day or so, but virtually every 
option, as we have looked at the proposal that came forward on April 3 
from the trustees on the prospect of the entire Medicare system being 
bankrupt within 7 years, virtually every option has been addressed. We 
know the President has demonstrated a need to deal with this issue, and 
I believe that it is going to be timely for us to move forward, and so 
we will be proceeding just as rapidly as possible.
  Mr. BONIOR. I am glad my friend, and I thank my friend, for his 
answer, although I am disappointed in it; I am glad that my friend from 
California acknowledges the fact that indeed there will be not more 
than a day or so, whatever or so means. I assume it is a day of 
hearings on this particular proposal that will be before this country, 
the biggest cuts in Medicare and Medicaid in the history of the 
country. But it seems to me that, if we could do a resolution next week 
congratulating the people of Mongolia, the least we could do is have a 
resolution on the floor to debate the appropriate amount of time for 
hearings on this most crucial issue to this country.
  Mr. DREIER. If the gentleman would yield for just one clarification 
on this, the gentleman said that we are going to have the largest cuts 
when, in fact, we will over the next 7 years see an increase of from 
$4,800 to $6,700 per beneficiary, which is roughly about a 52-percent 
increase in the level of expenditures. We will be expending well over 
$1\1/4\ trillion, or approaching $1\1/4\ trillion, on Medicare over the 
next 6 to 7 years, and so to call it a cut is obviously an inaccurate 
statement.
  Mr. BONIOR. That is what we would like to have the time to debate and 
discuss and have hearings about.
  Mr. DREIER. We are doing it right now, have been doing it over the 
last several months.
  Mr. BONIOR. We obviously are right now, and only in Republican 
Washington, DC, would someone characterize an individual having to pay 
perhaps $500 to $1,000 out of his or her pocket Medicare costs as an 
increase.

                              {time}  1545

  Only in Washington, DC, would that be termed as an increase.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  Let me ask my distinguished friend from California a question about 
this. We have had 2 weeks of Waco hearings here sponsored by my 
Republican friends, 2 weeks of Waco hearings. We have had so many weeks 
of Whitewater hearings that everybody has completely lost interest in 
that nonsubject, and yet we are beginning to take up what I recognize 
is the toughest vote on the Republican side. How do you take as much 
money out of Medicare to give to a tax cut as is scheduled to be taken 
out of Medicare?
  The majority has taken all of this money out of Medicare 
beneficiaries and poor people's pockets to give to the wealthy, and yet 
we are only entitled to perhaps 1 day of hearing. As of this moment we 
do not have your plan. The majority has been in charge of this body for 
11 months, 10 months now, and we do not have a plan. We have never seen 
a plan. This is the only copy of your plan I have ever seen, this blank 
piece of paper that I hold here. Now, when are you going to let the 
American public in on what you are going to do to them? When are you 
going to let them see it?
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding. The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons], if memory serves, 
in fact sat in with the Subcommittee on Health, not being a member of 
the Subcommittee on Health, wanting to make sure that any Member who 
was interested in being informed on the subject matter, sat in on 
several of the Subcommittee on Health hearings. We had 16 of them over 
every possible option that could be put into a Medicare package. We had 
two full Committee on Ways and Means hearings.
  Mr. Speaker, we are in the process of compiling that information. The 
original criticism was that one cannot write a bill without hearing 
from all of the folks who are going to be affected. We thought that was 
good advice. So we held hearings to hear from all of the people who 
were affected. Now we are being criticized because we have been here 
for 10 months, holding hearings during the first 9 months, and we are 
now in the process of writing legislation, and we are being criticized 
because we did not write the legislation before we held the 16 
hearings.
  Now, you know, you are damned if you do and you are damned if you 
don't. I understand that is the role of the minority. We played that 
for a while. But we are in the majority; we have a part A payroll tax 
trust fund for the seniors that is going bankrupt, and we are putting 
together a program to make sure that does not go bankrupt, and we have 
a part B program which is eating up enormous resources from our young 
people. What we are going to do is create a system, long overdue, which 
gives seniors choice, and through the exercise of that choice, we will 
make sure that the part A program does not go bankrupt, and that the 
demands on the budget will be less.
  Now, that is a complicated program. The gentleman from Florida knows 
all of the parts that would go into that program. His objection is that 
he has not seen all of the parts assembled. He will, and under the 
rules of the House, as the ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Ways and Means, will have the ability to fully exercise his rights to 
ask for hearings on his side of the House, and we will certainly honor, 
under the rules, the maximum ability of the ranking member from Florida 
to exercise his privileges and rights under the rules.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, as 
I understand the proposal, it is that perhaps one day next week we will 
have a full day hearing on the Medicare proposals. But as everyone who 
has ever dealt with the subject, and I am sure the gentleman from 
California is wrestling with the problem right now, the devil of all of 
this is in the details. These are huge matters that require a great 
deal of money and a great deal of substantive law, and they require 
understanding by all of the 40 million people who are on Medicare and 
their families; and of the hospitals and of the doctors and of other 
providers, of all of the medical educators, of all of the kidney 
failure people, of all of the hospitals that get special payments out 
of Medicare for all of the unpaid patients that they have to treat. 
These are extremely complicated problems, and 

[[Page H 8939]]
they need a thorough public understanding.
  The way I understand it, though, is that we are going to get 1 day of 
public hearings which will probably be taken up by most of your 
witnesses and that will not get any chance. I doubt by that time that 
we will even have a copy of your plan. So that is the problem. We need 
and the public needs to know.
  I can only imagine what is in your plan. I have attended your 
hearings. With no disrespect to the gentleman from California, the 
gentleman did the best he could, but we did not have a plan then, and 
as far as I know, he does not have a plan as of this moment. We have to 
start voting on this the week after next in the Committee on Ways and 
Means, and we have seen nothing in writing as to what he plans to do.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding, and I would hope that not only would we get this debate about 
the debate that we would choose to have, and unfortunately, if the 
Republicans do not grant us your resolution to have that debate or to 
provide for several weeks of discussion on these Medicare cuts, then we 
are left, as the gentleman has said, with 1 day in the Committee on 
Ways and Means.
  We do not know what this plan is. We have seen speculation in the 
press about this, that there is $110 billion taken from providers and 
there is an $80 billion black hole that looks back and maybe hits 
providers or beneficiaries 2 or 3 years from now. But the fact is, as 
the gentleman from Florida knows, the Medicare system is more than just 
Medicare, it is teaching hospitals, it is poor widows that have the 
premium, Medicare premiums, paid for by Medicaid; it is a very complex 
system. And simply announcing the bill and having the hearing and 
voting on it a week later does not satisfy our obligation to the people 
that we represent, because the plan will look very different to 
different people depending upon where they are in the American health 
care system, whether they are in an urban hospital or a rural hospital, 
whether they are poor and their premiums are paid by Medicaid, whether 
they will be able to continue or not continue on Medicare, whether they 
are a teaching facility, and that takes time.
  I can understand the Republicans not wanting to have this time, 
either in the Committee on Ways and Means or anywhere else. But the 
fact is, this is the biggest change we have in the history of American 
health care since the advent of the American Medicare system, a system 
that has provided health care to millions of seniors, that their 
families rely on. We are now seeing a whole series of discussions by 
medical analysts that families, people my age who are in their 50's, 
who are in their 40's, whose parents are in their 80's, now have the 
threat that these Medicaid cuts could mean that hundreds of thousands, 
if not more, people will not have access to long-term care, or to 
nursing home care.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Diaz-Balart). Does the gentleman from 
Michigan yield for a parliamentary inquiry?
  Mr. BONIOR. No, Mr. Speaker, not at this point.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak to the 
gentleman's motion and his inquiry of the minority. Sixty-seven percent 
of the Medicaid costs to go pay for elderly people's long-term care 
that their families cannot afford. And that is why we want this 
discussion. But we want this discussion in front of the Committee on 
Ways and Means where people can be cross-examined, where their points 
of view can be examined, their figures can be examined and the American 
public can then make a determination. Having all of this discussion, 
have all of this discussion prior to the Committee on Ways and Means 
hearing has nothing to do with this bill.
  We have examined the options for Medicare since 1948. But this is 
where the rubber hits the road. This may not cut Medicare, that is your 
claim, but it is going to certainly cut household income for people, 
and it is going to certainly cut their disposable income as their 
premiums continue to go up and the cost of their relatives continue to 
go up and the care of their parents continue to go up.
  That is what this debate is about. The gentleman ought to have the 
courage of your convictions, he ought to put that bill into the 
Committee on Ways and Means. We have experts on the committee in terms 
of the Members of the Congress, the staff there, and we ought to cross-
examine the different opinions about what this bill is going to do or 
not do to families in this country who are deeply concerned about their 
future health care and the health care that their parents and their 
grandparents are receiving today, because that is what is on the 
chopping block and we do not know anything about it. But one day's 
hearing just does not satisfy it.
  We had hearings on the Committee on Ways and Means I believe earlier 
this year on every cockamamie tax loophole that some Member wanted for 
somebody in their district. Those went on for days. But now we are 
talking about the largest single change in American health care in the 
history of this country since the beginning of the Medicare-Medicaid 
system, and it is one day's worth of hearing.
  What we are asking for and the gentleman is asking for is consider a 
resolution that says we can examine this in the Committee on Ways and 
Means for 4 weeks, let the people be heard, let the providers be heard, 
let the beneficiaries be heard, let the teaching hospitals be heard, 
let the rural hospitals be heard, and then let the American people 
decide. But apparently, apparently, there is a great fear on the other 
side of the aisle that the public discussion will not allow their 
proposal to be successful.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, let 
me just respond to my very good friend from Martinez who has raised 
some very, very good questions. The fact of the matter is, as the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas] indicated, 16 hearings were held 
in the Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, but they were not on 
this specific proposal.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, 
they were on the issue of Medicare reform. Those have come forward. 
This has been debated in the media, here in the Congress, and I hasten 
to add that to hear my friends on the other side of the aisle argue 
that in some way we are going to be not utilizing the proper procedures 
of the House as we proceed with this really makes one incredulous, in 
light of the fact that we have seen legislation rammed through here 
when my friends on the other side of the aisle were in the majority for 
years and years and years, and we are planning to comply with the rules 
of the House, and we will continue this debate.
  The evidence that we have right here is that during this 1-minute, 
which has lasted about 20 so far, we have seen a vigorous debate take 
place, and I suspect that it is going to continue. It will most likely 
continue this weekend on the television, and I believe that we will see 
a full airing, and those groups to which my friend referred have been 
heard from by many of the different committees that have been involved 
in this.
  Mr. BONIOR. But they have not been heard on this specific bill.
  Mr. DREIER. That relates to the program itself that we are going to 
be considering next week.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the people in this 
country have not been heard on your specific proposal and the 
resolution which I refer to in the debate that we are having now, the 
one offered by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell] and supported 
by over 200 Members of this body calls for hearings of 4 weeks on that 
specific proposal.
  As the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] has said, with the 
largest change in American medical history, the largest, in our view, 
of cuts in Medicaid and Medicare in the history of this country, it 
seems to me preposterous to deal with this with 1 day of hearings. It 
is an outrage, quite frankly, and all we are asking for is a small 
piece of fairness on behalf of the American people, for all these 
various groups and individuals who have a huge stake in this.

[[Page H 8940]]

  I mean, I am talking 175,000 people in my State alone not being able 
to have long-term Medicaid care over the 7-year period if this goes 
through, 16,000 in the first year.

                              {time}  1600

  We are talking perhaps, what we hear, of doubling the premium. And we 
are talking about people here on Social Security, people who get half 
of their income, 60 percent of the people on Medicare get over half of 
their income from Social Security. We are talking primarily about 
women. We are talking about people with incomes of about $18,000, and 
absorbing $1,000 extra a year. This is important stuff to important 
people, and it ought to have more than 1 day of hearings.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I am just incredulously mystified by the 
arguments I hear here. As the gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas] 
said, I attended these meetings, even though I am not a member of the 
subcommittee. They were pabulum hearings. They had nothing to do with 
the meat of the program. They were just people making suggestions or 
complaining.
  But nobody yet has seen a plan. And when that plan comes out, it is 
going to be not just 1 page of paper, but it is going to be 400 or 500 
pages of paper, crammed with details.
  This is a very complex program. It is more than just medical care for 
the aged. It is medical care for all of the disabled in the United 
States, it is medical care for all of the kidney failure patients in 
the United States, it is all long-term care for aged people or for 
disabled people. It is medical education. I do not know what can be 
more important than training doctors, and the Medicare Program trains 
them. There that is where the money comes from.
  What about all of the hospitals that take care of all of these 
indigent people that do not have any money? That is where Medicare 
money is spent. We know nothing of what they plan to do in all of this 
program. They have never mentioned the first line of it.
  I ran into a newspaper reporter out here in the Speaker's lobby the 
other day that was carrying around a copy of your program. I said, 
``You know, that is what I put out as to what I thought was going to be 
in the program.'' He was peddling it to me as if it were the program.
  This is ridiculous. I never heard of anybody making as big a change 
in the economic and social and safety net of this country, and not 
telling the American people what they plan to do. This is preposterous.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Diaz-Balart). The gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Bonior] will be advised that his 1-minute is expiring 
soon.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I believe my request was to speak out of 
order.
  Mr. DREIER. To inquire of the program for the week.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct. The Chair would construe 
and did construe the gentleman's request as the traditional request to 
speak out of order for 1 minute.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I do not think I asked for a time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. To discuss the program for next week.
  Mr. BONIOR. I will respect the Chair's views on this and the 
Speaker's views on this, and would yield if I could for just one more 
comment to my friend from Michigan, Mr. Levin, and to my friend from 
California, Mr. Dreier, if that would be permissible.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Having informed the gentleman from Michigan 
of the reality of the time soon expiring, the Chair would certainly 
permit that.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield for a short comment or question to 
my friend from California before we terminate the debate.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say in terms of the schedule 
for next week, I have now read this document, an outline released by 
the House leadership. I would say to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
Gibbons], it is worse than a blank piece of paper. It says little, and 
what it says is often untrue.
  For example, it says that there is no change in copayments that is 
strictly false. Copayments under current law would go up to $61. This 
plan, apparently, at least from what we have read in the paper, would 
push this up to $90 or $100 a month over the present $46 in the year 
2002.
  I simply want to say as to the schedule next week, it is disgraceful. 
In the Committee on Ways and Means, they have planned one day of 
hearings, as the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] has said.
  We were promised a plan today. We do not have it. I think it is 
partly you do not want us to have it until the last minute, and it is 
also because not only is the devil in the details, but they are having 
a devilish time with the details.
  So I am glad the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior] asked for the 
schedule for next week. I just want to say this is a schedule totally 
inadequate for the mammoth radical changes that have been proposed in 
general by the majority, the details of which are being held back or 
scrambled with or both. Here it is Thursday, and we still do not have 
them.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from Pasadena.
  Mr. DREIER. Close.
  Mr. BONIOR. Close by.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to respond to all three of my 
friends here who are discussing what is clearly a very important issue 
by saying, first, it has been concluded we will have only one day of 
hearings. It is possible that there could be an additional hearing. The 
distinguished ranking minority Member, my friend, the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Gibbons], is in a position to look towards an additional 
hearing on this.
  I think it is also very sad to take an issue which is so critically 
important, which we have agreed to step up to the plate and address in 
response to the Board of Trustees' Report that was signed by Secretary 
Rubin, Secretary Reich, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
Ms. Shalala, stating this system will be broke within seven years.
  The American people overwhelmingly are supportive of our goal of 
dealing with this. As I said earlier, the President of the United 
States has acknowledged that we are going to have to slow this 
exponential growth in the cost of Medicare, well beyond the rate of 
inflation, nearly three times the rate of inflation, based on the 
figures that just came out yesterday.
  So it strikes me we are doing the responsible thing. And to have my 
friends just criticizing willy-nilly, when there is going to be 
opportunity to look at this issue, and to say that somehow when this 
hearing opens, it will be the first time that the word ``Medicare'' 
will have been uttered in any committee, is preposterous, because we 
for months and months and months have seen this debate raging on. I 
think we have a very good and adequate schedule put together for next 
week.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I would conclude by just saying to my friend 
on the Medicare Trustee issue, that the Medicare trustees have said 
that the proposal by the Republicans will not extend the life of 
Medicare by one day, because that money is going into a special fund 
for tax cuts that are going primarily to the wealthiest individuals and 
the wealthiest corporations in America.

                          ____________________