[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 160 (Tuesday, October 17, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H10084-H10085]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 SUPPORT THE MEDICARE PRESERVATION ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of May 
12, 1995, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Bartlett] is recognized 
during morning business for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, this week, this Thursday, the 
House of Representatives will vote on a plan that will save and 
preserve the Medicare program for the current generation of senior 
citizens by introducing choice and competition into this 30-year-old 
health insurance program for the elderly and disabled.

[[Page H 10085]]

  Let me start by reviewing why these changes are necessary. Then I 
want to talk about some of these changes.
  The trustees of Medicare, four of them appointed by President 
Clinton, three of them Cabinet Secretaries, warned America in their 
April annual report that the Medicare part A trust fund that pays 
hospital bills will go bankrupt by 2002.
  Beginning next year, in 1996, for the first time in the history of 
Medicare, more money will be spent on senior's hospital bills then will 
come into the trust fund from the payroll taxes that are paid out of 
the wages of current workers.
  If we do nothing, seniors' out-of-pocket costs would continue to 
climb and Medicare would be bankrupt in 7 years.
  If we do nothing and Medicare goes bankrupt, the Government does not 
have the authority to pay for the hospital bills of any one senior, let 
alone the 37 million who now depend on it, and the millions more who 
will need it in the future.
  Clearly doing nothing was not a responsible or acceptable option. The 
problem will not go away--it will only get worse.
  Republicans stepped up to the challenge of saving Medicare because 
Medicare is a vital program that is too important for politics as 
usual. That is why we began in the spring and have continued throughout 
year to hold hearings here in Washington. In fact, between the House 
and the Senate there have been 50 hearings.
  More importantly, we have held meetings back at home with seniors, 
doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, insurance companies, advocacy 
groups such as the American Association of Retired Persons--AARP.
  Based on what the people in western Maryland told me and what other 
members learned from their constituents, we developed the Medicare 
Preservation Act.
  The Medicare Preservation Act is based on two simple, but effective 
principles: First, choice for seniors, and second, competition among 
health care providers.
  Choice and competition always do two things in our free enterprise 
system: Lower costs, and improve quality. That is what the Medicare 
Preservation Act is about. That is what the Medicare Preservation Act 
will do. It will give seniors the right to choose the health care and 
health care insurance plan that best meets their needs, not the 
Government's. It will give seniors the choice between traditional 
Medicare or new options.
  If seniors do nothing, they will keep traditional Medicare. It will 
preserve seniors' right to keep their current doctor and hospital. I 
have two special concerns that the Medicare Preservation Act solves.
  Rural areas of America, such as western Maryland, will greatly 
benefit from the new option of provider service networks--or PSN's. 
Provider service networks are collaborative partnerships between 
hospitals and doctors that will compete against insurance companies. 
Provider service networks already exist in western Maryland, but they 
are hampered by unbelievable amounts of redtape.
  The unnecessary redtape is eliminated under the Medicare Preservation 
Act so that doctors and hospitals can concentrate on what they want to 
do and should do--take care of patients. That is why the Maryland State 
Medical Society supports the Medicare Preservation Act.
  Seniors know that fraud is a big problem in Medicare. The GAO 
estimates 10 percent or so. The Heritage Foundation estimates up to 20 
percent of Medicare costs--that is up to $32 billion is estimated to be 
lost to waste, fraud or abuse each year.
  For instance, Mr. Charles Hardy of Cumberland, MD, found that 
Medicare was billed for services for his mother--after she died. The 
Medicare Preservation Act attacks waste, fraud, and abuse in two ways.
  First, it sets up a rebate program that will award people like Mr. 
Hardy with 10 percent of savings over $1,000. Mr. Hardy got no reward 
for being diligent. People like Mr. Hardy deserve a reward for taking 
the time and trouble to look for and report mistakes they find in 
Medicare bills. Health care providers need to be aware that people like 
Mr. Hardy are paying attention.

  Second, the new options for seniors that will be created by the 
Medicare Preservation Act means that doctors and hospitals, health 
management organizations, insurance companies, and provider service 
networks will have to compete for senior's business based on quality 
and price.
  The Medicare Preservation Act is a real, honest, practical, long 
term, solution that will save Medicare because it is based upon the two 
key advantages that we seniors have.
  We are smart because of the accumulated wisdom of our experience.
  We have the time to pick the plan that is right for us.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting the Medicare 
Preservation Act.

                          ____________________