[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 148 (Thursday, September 21, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H9408]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1415
                          DEBATE OVER MEDICARE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Myrick). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from New York [Ms. Slaughter] is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, in the 1930s I was growing up in the 
coal fields of eastern Kentucky, in a family with four children, and I 
watched for years as my mother and father took responsibility for the 
health care of both sets of their parents.
  It was an enormous burden. Health care was not all that good in the 
1930s. Blood transfusions were given by anybody who came in off the 
street, and they did not go through typing and crossmatching as we do 
today. I had a sister that died in North Carolina, as they were 
operating on her for appendicitis, and she died of double pneumonia. So 
you can see that the benefits of medicine have increased enormously in 
the past half century.
  One of the most important beneficiaries of that improvement has been 
the elderly of the United States. Since 1965, families like mine when I 
was a child no longer have to struggle to meet the health care needs of 
elderly parents. I remember when the debate took place in 1965, and I 
remember when it passed, and there was rejoicing in the country that 
senior citizens who were alone or senior citizens who were in 
impoverished circumstances could get the same kind of health care, the 
same appropriate kind of health care as the wealthiest person in the 
country. And we felt very good about this development.
  But the debate over Medicare, like the debate over Social Security, 
was vitriolic in both houses. There was no unanimity of consent in 
either the House of Representatives or the Senate for Social Security 
or Medicare. Indeed, if you were to read that debate, you would be 
surprised I think at some Members who are still here who voted against 
the Medicare program and spoke very strongly against it.
  It was the Democrat Party that gave us Social Security. It was the 
Democrat Party that gave us Medicare. Now it is the Democrat Party that 
is struggling to try to save Medicare.
  There is a recommendation by the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives to have the largest cut in Medicare in its 30-year 
history. They are recommending $270 billion be cut out of Medicare over 
the next 7 years in order to pay for a $245 billion tax cut for the 
rich, the wealthy and corporations.
  This is going to be done with one hearing, which will take place here 
tomorrow. The Democrats have not been allowed to ask for a hearing or 
even to participate very much in the meeting that let up to the 
decision for the hearing tomorrow. And for that reason, the Democrat 
Party, which gave this country Medicare, will have to hold its hearing 
tomorrow out on the lawn of the Capitol of the United States.
  I am confident that has never been done before. The Capitol is a 
pretty large building. Meeting rooms all over it. But we have been told 
that not a single one is available for us tomorrow to hold a hearing.
  So tomorrow we will have ordinary Americans, hospital administrators, 
caregivers, rural hospitals, community health associations, home care 
specialists to be here to say what these awful cuts are going to do in 
the services that they can provide.
  Thirty-seven million seniors now are on Medicare, and by the year 
2002, if you factor in for inflation, we will need to be paying $8,400 
a year to cover the same benefits that $4,800 buys today. The 
Republican proposal only provides $6,700. Now, how is the difference 
going to be made up? Higher premiums, higher deductibles, inability 
perhaps to choose your own doctor or accept fewer services, fewer 
choices, and lower quality.
  I think that is a rotton set of choices for the elderly in this 
country.
  Last week, the Speaker of the House assured the American people on 
television that Medicare beneficiaries could expect their premiums to 
increase by only $7 a month. Within days, the leadership was forced to 
admit the figure was actually going to be more like $32 a month, about 
$400 a year. For people who live on a fixed income, that can be a 
devastating blow and can really make the difference in their lives as 
to whether they can eat or pay their rent. If they cannot afford it and 
if they are lucky enough to have children or grandchildren who will 
chip in, perhaps they can survive it. But a lot of our seniors do not.
  Those premium increases will hurt not only the people who are 
recipients of the care, but we anticipate the closure of a lot of 
hospitals and a lot of services and perhaps even of home care.

                          ____________________