[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 179 (Monday, November 13, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H12169]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 MAINTAINING THE CURRENT MEDICARE RATIO

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Kim] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KIM. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that having a continuing 
resolution which would leave the government open is in jeopardy because 
of this premium part B on Medicare Program. I wish the people in 
California would listen to me tonight. I want to tell you exactly what 
the part B in Medicare plan is all about so you can make your own 
judgment of who is right and who is wrong.
  I do not think we, the Republican Party, is doing such a good job to 
communicate with the people. I am going to do my best tonight.
  Let us take a look at this chart here. Right now beneficiaries, 
senior citizens, only pay one-third of the total cost of the part B, 
which is to pay for the doctor's fee. Two-thirds, a little more than 
two-thirds is paid by the other taxpayers, roughly 68.5 percent. Many 
people did not know that. My district people did not know it. I did not 
know we had been subsidizing it. They are so busy working every day, 
they did not pay attention to exactly what the part B premium is about.
  Mr. Speaker, it used to be 50-50. Half of it paid by the beneficiary 
and the other half is subsidized by the other taxpayers.
  Now what has happened? One-third is paid by the beneficiary; two-
thirds is being subsidized by the other taxpayers, the working people. 
Who are those people? Some of those people cannot even afford to buy 
their own insurance, but they have to subsidize senior citizens by two-
thirds. Under the current system starting January 1, it is going to 
change even greater: 25 percent by the beneficiary and 75 percent by 
the other taxpayers' subsidy. That is not fair. That is what we are 
saying.
  We are saying that we have to keep this ratio, one-third, two-third 
ratio. That does not increase anyone; that is all. For that we have 
been criticized unfairly.
  Is it wrong that we would like to maintain this one-third/two-third 
ratio? A senior citizen only pay one-third of the premium and two-
thirds subsidized by the younger people? Is that unfair, keeping this 
ratio? Why does it have to go to 25 and 75 percent relationship? How 
can you balance the budget when you have to spend this kind of money, 
additional spending, to subsidize beneficiaries? How can you possibly 
balance the budget?

  We are not cutting anything, we are trying to maintain the same 
ratio. By doing this, as you know, medical costs keep going up. By 
doing this, everybody has to pay a little more, a few bucks a month, 
just to maintain this relationship. We are not increasing anything, 
just maintaining one-third/two-thirds relationship.
  Mr. Speaker, it is not right that we are asking those people out 
there working every day making $50,000 a year, trying to support the 
family, trying to send the kids to school, trying to make the mortgage 
payment, let them at the same time subsidize senior citizens by more 
than two-thirds.
  Now, when our country is in this shape financially, yes, let us 
increase that, maybe 100 percent, but right now we are in financial 
crisis. Our debt is $4.9 trillion. Our interest payment alone last year 
was $230 billion, about the same as our national defense budget. Under 
that kind of circumstances, we are going to ask them to pay more?
  I have to set the record straight. People can see me. I apologize 
that the chart is kind of messy, but I have to speak to you tonight to 
get the facts straight. If you do not think that that is fair, then let 
us know. That is all we are trying to do, maintain this current ratio. 
For that, our President is going to veto the entire continuing 
resolution I think is very unfair.

                          ____________________