[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 165 (Tuesday, October 24, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15517-S15520]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  MEDICARE MISINFORMATION AD CAMPAIGN

  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, this morning I rise today to sound an 
alarm, an alarm about a $1 million television advertising campaign that 
supports the Republican plan to cut Medicare and is currently airing 
all over the United States.
  I am here to explain to my colleagues why this commercial does not 
tell the whole story and why the public needs to know more about the 
organization that is actually paying for this TV commercial that 
advocates the Republican cuts in the Medicare program.
  Mr. President, the organization paying for this television commercial 
is called the Seniors Coalition. We might not have heard a great deal 
about the Seniors Coalition because it has not been around all that 
long. It is an operation founded by Mr. Richard Viguerie.
  The star of this ad is our colleague and good friend from Tennessee, 
Senator Bill Frist.
  Let me make it clear at the start that I mean no disrespect to 
Senator Frist. I talked to him this morning, stating I was going to 
make this statement, and that I was not questioning his integrity in 
any way.
  In fact, I sincerely doubt our colleague, Senator Frist, is aware of 
the information that I will share with my colleagues this morning.
  The ad, Mr. President, which features Senator Frist talking about the 
Republican plan to cut Medicare, is not paid for by the Republican 
Party but by the Seniors Coalition.
  First, some background on the Seniors Coalition. The Seniors 
Coalition is one of three so-called seniors organizations that have 
been working exclusively with the GOP leadership. It is working with 
the GOP leadership to push and help organize and in some cases to fund 
activities that support the Republican plan to cut Medicare by $270 
billion and to provide a $245 billion tax break--most of it or a lot of 
it, Mr. President, going to the wealthiest in our society.
  Here we see a chart that includes the Seniors Coalition. We also see 
60-Plus here. And, we see United Seniors, or USA, here. These are all 
founded by Mr. Viguerie, who has control of perhaps some of the most 
sophisticated mailing lists in America.
  The Coalition to Save Medicare was founded to support the House 
Republican plan to cut Medicare. As one columnist has recently put it, 
the Coalition to Save Medicare is ``deliriously misnamed,'' and is a 
``coalition of huge corporations and insurance companies out to loot 
Medicare to pay for corporate tax breaks.''
  In fact, Mr. President, the Seniors Coalition, United Seniors 
Association, and 60-Plus, are all 501(C)(4) organizations. They pay no 
taxes whatsoever. They have use of a nonprofit mailing permit. They are 
being subsidized by the American taxpayer.
  The other coalition, which is the Coalition for America's Future--and 
here is a letter of September 22--was created by the majority party, by 
the Republican leadership, to apply pressure 

[[Page S 15518]]
during efforts to push the Contract With America, including tax breaks 
for the wealthy, through the House of Representatives.
  Let us look at this letter of September 22. This letter is addressed 
to me:

       On behalf of the more than 7 million families, senior 
     citizens and large and small businesses of the Coalition for 
     America's Future, we are writing to urge you to make good on 
     the promise of the budget resolution to provide $245 billion 
     in tax cuts over the next 7 years.

  One of the so-called members of the Coalition for America's Future is 
the National Committee To Preserve Social Security and Medicare. They 
are listed along with the Seniors Coalition, United Seniors 
Association, and 60-Plus as seniors organizations who are members and 
who support the Coalition's agenda.
  Mr. President, just this morning I received a letter from the 
National Committee to Preserve Social Security, and I will read part of 
it now:

       Regrettably, that letter lists our organization as a member 
     of this Coalition and falsely implies our support for its 
     position in favor of the $245 billion tax cut package 
     contained in the budget reconciliation bill.

  Martha McSteen concludes by saying:

       I want to emphasize in the strongest possible terms that 
     the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and 
     Medicare did not endorse this letter or approve of the use of 
     our organization's name in connection with this letter.

  At this point, I would like to explain how these groups were founded, 
how they operate and exactly who they are.
  First, letters that will grab the attention of seniors, usually 
through scare tactics, are sent to thousands of seniors across America. 
These letters make senior citizens think that their Medicare is in 
jeopardy, that it is in danger, and that what they need to do 
immediately is to send their money in to one of the three groups 
founded by Mr. Viguerie. Here is what happens.
  The letter is sent by one of these groups to Mr. or Mrs. Smith, 
Anytown, USA. Then the older American receives this letter, writes a 
check out of their savings account to either the Seniors Coalition, 
United Seniors Association, or 60-Plus. Then the dollars go, first--
where? To Mr. Viguerie. We have the contract for Mr. Viguerie that we 
will show in a few moments, that shows that Mr. Viguerie gets up to 50 
percent, possibly one-half of all of these checks sent in by mail by 
the senior citizens to United Seniors Association. Some of the 
remaining money is used to generate some more mail to send out to scare 
the seniors.
  These groups also use some of the remaining money to lobby the 
Congress. For example, Seniors Coalition had enough money left over to 
run TV commercials like we are seeing running in many parts of America 
today. This ad campaign is telling seniors that the Medicare cuts are 
necessary to save the Medicare system.
  Last year, in 1994, these same groups were doing the exact opposite. 
They were scaring seniors by telling them that President Clinton was 
cutting $124 billion out of Medicare as part of his health care reform 
proposal. Here is one letter dated March 28, 1994 from the same 
organization, the Seniors Coalition, and it was sent out to thousands 
of seniors all over the country, requesting contributions. In the body 
of the letter the Seniors Coalition states:

       Now President Clinton wants to cut an additional $124 
     billion. This is all part of his plan to have the Government 
     take over health care.

  Well, they reversed themselves now, 2 years later, because of the 
Contract With America, because of their desire to cut $270 billion out 
of the Medicare proposal, because they want to give a $245 billion tax 
break for the wealthy, and because now they are all in the league with 
the Republican leadership.
  This year, however, the same groups are scaring seniors by telling 
the seniors if the Republican plan to save Medicare is not adopted, 
they might lose their Medicare benefits. What the letters do not show 
is that the Seniors Coalition strongly supports the Republican plans to 
cut Medicare by $270 billion and to provide a $245 billion tax break, a 
great portion going to the wealthiest in America.
  Second, many seniors are dipping into their savings--from their piggy 
banks, like the one shown here--to send so-called contributions to 
these three groups, thinking the money would be used to lobby Congress 
to save their Medicare Program. But what these seniors are not told and 
what they do not know--and they would have no reason to know--is that 
their dollars are being used, not to save Medicare, but to cut 
Medicare. A senior sends his check in to one of these groups, and their 
own money is being used against them, to cut Medicare benefits. This is 
a fraud. It is a sham.
  And, after collecting savings from seniors, the groups spend a lot of 
it, up to 50 percent in the case of the United Seniors Organization, to 
pay direct-mail companies. Here we have the direct-mail contract 
between United Seniors Association and Mr. Viguerie. As part of the 
contract, Mr. Viguerie takes up to one-half of all of the dollars that 
are sent into USA. And Mr. Viguerie also does the direct mail for 
another of these groups called 60-Plus.
  Experts have taken a look at this contract between Mr. Viguerie and 
60-Plus. In fact, they have taken a very close look at this contract. 
These experts have all concluded that the provisions in Mr. Viguerie's 
contract, when added up, indicate that in fact he controls as much as 
70 percent of the so-called ``not-for-profit'' 60-Plus. If this is 
true, what it means is that the American people, through tax 
exemptions--because it is a nonprofit organization--and postal 
nonprofit permits, are subsidizing a private fundraiser's operations. 
In these days of budget cutting, this sort of thing must be stopped.
  Mr. President, I think this is an absolute outrage. In fact, it is my 
understanding the Postal Service is now investigating some of these 
issues. I hope they will pursue that investigation to its conclusion.
  The money that remains after the direct mail people get their cut is 
used to send out more scare letters to seniors and to support the 
Republican plans to cut Medicare by $270 billion. Once again, the 
message is clear: Medicare is growing broke. Send us your money, and we 
will save it.
  Well, seniors are sending in their money. And what they are doing 
with the seniors' money is it is used to cut, not to save, Medicare.
  As I have stated, documents make it very clear that these groups are 
actively supporting the Republican plans to cut Medicare by $270 
billion and to provide a $245 billion tax break, mostly for the 
wealthy. The ironic thing is that this is not what their members truly 
want.
  This summer I received a petition from the United Seniors 
Association, one of Mr. Viguerie's groups, and they had on this 
petition the names of almost 300 Arkansans listed as ``members.'' I 
thought something looked strange about this petition, so I instructed 
my staff during the August break to sit there and call the people on 
this list, on this petition, and simply ask a very few basic questions. 
What we learned was most educational. It made me realize that their 
``members'' do not necessarily know that they are members. They do not 
understand what these groups support, nor do they understand that their 
names are being used to lobby to cut their Medicare benefits.
  This chart also shows the results of a phone survey of these 
Arkansans listed as USA members. First, 53 percent of the seniors 
listed on the USA petition that I received from Arkansas as members 
were not actually members. They said they were not members of USA, 
despite what the petition to me said.
  Second, seniors listed in the USA petition to me expressed confusion 
about the positions that USA takes; 83 percent said they did not know 
that USA is working to rally support by the Republicans to cut Medicare 
by $270 billion.
  These same seniors, on this list that was sent to my office as a 
petition, listed their opposition USA position's position on Medicare. 
Again, as a matter of fact, on Medicare, 89 percent were in fact 
against cutting it by $270 billion. They oppose the very position of 
USA that USA and the House majority claims they support.
  In sum, the Republicans are saying that a lot of senior groups are 
supporting these cuts in Medicare. These charts I have shown indicate 
what these senior groups actually are, how they are motivated, and with 
whom they are associated. 

[[Page S 15519]]

  It is not the case that these so-called seniors groups--Seniors 
Coalition, United Seniors Association, and 60-Plus--are fighting 
against these cuts in Medicare. In reality, two things are happening:
  First, much of the money is going into the budgets of Richard 
Viguerie and other direct mail vendors.
  Second, the lobbying that these groups are doing amounts not to the 
saving the Medicare Program but rather supporting the Republican 
Medicare cuts--even though these cuts could jeopardize the health care 
received by seniors.
  Mr. President, now that we have basically looked at who the players 
are in this scheme to confuse and to manipulate older Americans, I 
would like to talk about the million-dollar television campaign that 
the Seniors Coalition is running across America.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is advised that the time for 
morning business is expired.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I see no other Senator seeking recognition, 
and I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed for an additional 6 
minutes.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Could I ask 
unanimous consent that it would be 10 minutes, and that I could have 4 
minutes after the Senator?
  Mr. PRYOR. I would have no objection to that. I see my colleague from 
Minnesota. I did not see him.
  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I have no objection. I had 10 minutes 
reserved earlier this morning. But I know the leader wants to close off 
morning business as early as possible because of the remaining debate 
on the resolution S. 1322 dealing with the Israeli question.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, if I might, I would like to ask my friend 
from Minnesota, is my friend from Minnesota going to be one of the 
managers or one of those involved with the resolution or with the issue 
before the Senate?
  Mr. GRAMS. No. I was going to go ahead with another statement. But I 
will yield to the Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, if I could perhaps clarify this, it has been 
my understanding that we are operating under a unanimous-consent 
agreement which will cause the Senate to begin literally right now at 
11 o'clock on the debate on the Jerusalem Embassy bill, and that the 
vote would then occur at 11:40. Is that a correct understanding?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. KYL. And the leader has asked that we begin that debate as soon 
as people are here to speak to it. Until the leader or Senator Helms 
arrives, I would be acting in their stead. I see Senator Feinstein is 
here. I do not know whether others may wish to, but I would suggest, in 
order to comply with the unanimous-consent agreement, that we wind up 
the business we are on so we can get to that.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a moment?
  Mr. KYL. Sure.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas has the floor.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I might say to my colleague from Arkansas that I 
withdraw my request, and I think the only question is whether the 
courtesy might be given to the Senator from Arkansas to finish his 
statement. He only has a few more minutes to go.
  Mr. PRYOR. I will try to be very brief. I will try to proceed if I 
may.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas will proceed under a 
unanimous-consent request.
  Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that I may be allowed to proceed 
for an additional 5 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I think it would then be important to 
indicate to Members that the vote would occur at 11:45, and not at 
11:40.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair would observe that under the 
unanimous consent, under the previous order, the vote will not occur at 
11:40 but at 11:45.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I want to sincerely thank my colleagues, 
and my colleague from Arizona, for allowing me to proceed.
  Mr. President, as part of the million-dollar Seniors Coalition ad 
campaign that we are talking about, the television commercials state 
that in the Republican plan there are ``no cuts in benefits.'' The 
facts are simple and indicate otherwise. With this particular 
Republican plan that the ad campaign is supporting, $270 billion will 
taken out of Medicare. The question is this: If this level of cuts 
causes the only hospital to which we have access to close its doors, is 
this not a cut in benefits? In rural America this is exactly what is 
about to happen to hundreds of hospitals.
  Second, if this level of cuts causes the nursing home or a doctor in 
our town to stop taking Medicare beneficiaries, is this not a cut in 
benefits?
  Third, if this gives incentives to home health care agencies and 
other providers to treat only healthy people, is this not a cut for 
older and more frail citizens?
  There is another claim expressed in this television commercial. This 
commercial states that ``the Republican plan increases spending by 
nearly $2,000 per senior.''
  The fact is, Mr. President, that the yearly per beneficiary growth 
rate allowed under this plan is 4.9 percent. It is, in fact, much below 
the expected 7.1 percent growth rate in private sector health care 
costs. Medicare's ability to respond to health care costs decreases 
with the severity of these cuts.
  Mr. President, the commercial further states that the Republican plan 
gives ``patients more choices.'' The fact is what good is offering 
choices when only bad choices are offered? While seniors may have more 
health care plans to choose from, choosing the one that they can afford 
may mean they must give up their choice of a physician.
  And, finally, the proposed medical savings account threatens the 
viability of Medicare by allowing insurance companies to cherry-pick by 
moving healthy, wealthy people out of the Medicare pool. The result 
would be far higher costs to the beneficiaries who stay in Medicare.
  Also, the Seniors Coalition television ad says nothing about the 
Republicans using the cuts in Medicare to fund tax breaks for the 
wealthy. Why is this, Mr. President? It is perhaps because seniors who 
are actually paying for these commercials do not want the Medicare 
Program to be cut to fund tax breaks. I think this is a legitimate 
question.
  Mr. President, only $89 billion is actually needed to shore up 
Medicare's trust fund in the short term. Why then are our people not 
being told where the $181 billion cuts are actually going to go? Were 
those same seniors who sent their dollars to Mr. Viguerie's groups told 
this? Of course not. They have been used, they have been abused, and 
they have been manipulated by a slick campaign of distortion and 
untruths.
  Mr. President, this is a situation where the seniors of America are 
being scared to death. They are sending their money in to basically, as 
the letters call for, to protect Medicare.
  Mr. President, this television advertising campaign cost the Seniors 
Coalition $1 million and is running in 19 markets across the country. I 
want to make sure everyone knows that this campaign was paid for by the 
elderly, many of them poor and disabled, who sent in money thinking 
that the Seniors Coalition was going to lobby the Congress to save 
their Medicare Program-- not cut it.
  That is why my advice to seniors who are thinking about sending their 
hard-earned savings to these three so-called seniors groups is that 
``Contributions May Be Hazardous to Your Health.'' They should think 
twice before writing a check to a Viguerie-founded group.
  As I said earlier, I am here today to sound the alarm and expose this 
scam. I am concerned not only because some seniors are being taken 
advantage of, but also because this scam is a cynical manipulation of 
our political process. It threatens the democratic principles under 
which we operate.
  Americans who think they are getting involved with the political 
process are actually being financially exploited. Furthermore, they are 
not being represented the way they think they are. This is a perfect 
example of why so many people today have such little confidence in our 
political system.
  Mr. President, older Americans--all Americans--can say ``no'' to this 
type of cynical manipulation and misrepresentation.
  Let me encourage every senior to get involved with reform of their 
Medicare 

[[Page S 15520]]
Program. They can write a letter to us in the Senate. They can call. 
They can visit. They can fax. But, they do not need to send money to a 
direct-mail vendor in order to be heard in the Congress.
  Mr. President, before seniors send in $10, $20, or $30 to these so-
called seniors groups they should consider the following. The most 
effective way only costs 32 cents. I will always place more importance 
on a personal letter or a visit from one of my constituents than on a 
letter or preprinted card from a group that distorts their views.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
certain material, editorials, and extraneous matter that relate to this 
issue that I have discussed this morning.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                    National Committee to Preserve


                                 Social Security and Medicare,

                                 Washington, DC, October 23, 1995.
     Hon. David Pryor,
     Ranking Minority Member, Senate Special Committee on Aging, 
         U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Pryor: Thank you for forwarding the September 
     22, 1995 letter of the Coalition for America's Future. 
     Regrettably, that letter lists our organization as a member 
     of this coalition and falsely implies our support for its 
     position in favor of the $245 billion tax cut package 
     contained in the budget reconciliation bill.
       I want to emphasize in the strongest possible terms that 
     the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and 
     Medicare did not endorse this letter or approve of the use of 
     our organization's name in connection with this letter. We 
     had no advance knowledge that it was sent to Congress and 
     only learned of its existence today after you forwarded it to 
     us.
       Our position in strong opposition to the pending budget 
     reconciliation bill is well known to Congress. It is the 
     position of this organization that the $270 billion cut in 
     Medicare to finance tax cuts, primarily for upper income 
     individuals and corporations, is unfair and unjustified. We 
     supported an alternative bill in the House which eliminated 
     the tax cuts and made only those cuts in Medicare necessary 
     to insure its solvency.
       If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.
           Sincerely,
                                                Martha A. McSteen,
     President.
                                                                    ____


                [From the Washington Post, Oct. 2, 1995]

                  Fundraiser Already a Medicare Winner

                (By Jack Anderson and Michael Binstein)

       The battle to reform Medicare still has a long way to go on 
     Capitol Hill, but it's already clear who one of the biggest 
     winners will be: Richard Viguerie, the conservative king of 
     direct-mail fund-raising.
       Three groups founded by Viguerie--the Seniors Coalition, 
     the United Seniors Association and 60-Plus--have teamed with 
     the House Republican leadership to gather public support for 
     its controversial Medicare changes. The Coalition to Save 
     Medicare was launched in July and includes the three seniors' 
     groups, in addition to leading industry groups such as the 
     National Association of Manufacturers and the Alliance for 
     Managed Care.
       But according to documents uncovered by the Democratic 
     staff of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, much of the 
     money being raised by two of the three seniors' groups is 
     going straight to Viguerie's for-profit company.
       Although the Seniors Coalition is no longer associated with 
     Viguerie, having severed its ties with him in 1993, the two 
     other groups remain dependent on Viguerie's fund-raising 
     prowess. United Seniors Association, for example, signed a 
     contract with Viguerie's for-profit direct-mail firm, 
     American Target Advertising, that calls for ATA to receive as 
     much as 50 percent of gross revenue from direct mail until 
     July 30, 1996. After that, ATA will get 25 percent of the 
     take.
       In Viguerie's contact with 60-Plus, Viguerie & Associates--
     later reorganized to become ATA--is slated to own 70 percent 
     of the income for the life of the mailing lists. According to 
     direct-mail experts, this means Viguerie ``owns'' 70 percent 
     of the organization, including its fund-raising operation. 
     Some direct-mail experts wonder if 60-Plus should be allowed 
     to retain its nonprofit status, which lets it mail 
     solicitations at taxpayer-subsidized rates.
       ``I've never seen anything like this [contract],'' Sen. 
     David Pryor (Ark.) told our associate Jan Moller. Pryor, the 
     ranking Democrat on the Aging Committee, has been directing 
     the Hill investigation. ``I've never seen one this flagrant. 
     The worst part of it is the real deception. They're 
     collecting the dollars from the seniors and using those 
     dollars to reduce these programs that are so necessarily for 
     their quality of life.''
       The Viguerie style of fund-raising is as familiar as it is 
     effective: It starts with a ``scare'' letter warning seniors 
     of the imminent collapse of Medicare unless something is 
     done. It ends with a request for money, often accompanied by 
     a petition to sign or some other device so respondents can 
     get their ``voice'' heard in Washington. Viguerie did not 
     respond to our telephone calls.
       But when Aging Committee staff members called a sampling of 
     Arkansas seniors whose names appeared on a ``telegram'' sent 
     to Pryor's office by United Seniors Association, they got a 
     surprise: Less than 15 percent of the seniors said they 
     supported the Republican effort to cut Medicare spending by 
     $270 billion. And only 47 percent acknowledged being members 
     of the association.

  Mr. PRYOR. I thank the Chair. I also once again thank my colleagues 
for allowing me to go a little longer than I had originally 
anticipated.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________