[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 205 (Wednesday, December 20, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H15277-H15278]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    REPUBLICAN PROPOSAL ON MEDICARE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, that was quite a display we just saw, for 
all the fire and volume, kind of a temper tantrum really at the 
rostrum. I think it is very unfortunate that we are not proceeding in 
more of a thoughtful way reflective of the weighty issues that we have 
responsibility to resolve.
  The gentleman hollering, describing how nothing is impacted under the 
Republican-passed budget regarding Medicare, in point of fact that is 
simply not the case. The part B premium alone, Mr. Speaker, $46.10 a 
month today, in the final year of the Republican plan that will be 
$88.90, compared to $46.10.
  Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. POMEROY. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Would the gentleman also admit that under the 

[[Page H15278]]
  President's plan there is only a $4 difference between the Republican 
plan and the President's own plan?
  Mr. POMEROY. Reclaiming my time, it is not at all clear to me where 
the administration is on the part B premium number. But I will tell the 
gentleman this. The only plan that virtually doubles the part B premium 
is the GOP-passed budget resolution.
  Let me tell my colleagues another thing. I used to regulate 
insurance. I spent a lot of time dealing with the insurance needs of 
senior citizens in the State that I represent. There is an issue called 
balanced billing. In the old days, I mean back just now a decade, even 
less than that, Medicare would pay a portion of the bill, but the 
physician could bill the senior citizen that amount. Then any amount 
more, Medicare would pay the Medicare part, but the senior citizen out 
of pocket would be eligible for the difference.
  Congress in its wisdom a few years ago in a bipartisan vote voted to 
say, no, no, no, doctors, you cannot charge unlimited amounts over 
Medicare. You can only bill in fact when fully implemented, I believe 
the difference is 15 percent over what Medicare approves as an 
appropriate charge. If you are in an indemnity plan under the 
Republican budget, you are again exposed to that virtually unlimited 
amount over what is a Medicare approved charge.

  So we can talk differences in part B premium. I believe they are very 
serious differences, new out-of-pocket costs for seniors. But I think 
even more serious is this whole business of balanced billing, the 
physician billing over and above what the Medicare has said is an 
acceptable charge.
  Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to 
yield, please just clarify for me. The administration proposal is 
scored, shows a $4 difference in the year 2002 between the Republican 
plan. I mentioned that before, and then the gentleman said that he did 
not know if that was the case, but said the Republican plan was the 
only plan that doubled premiums. If in fact that is the case and that 
has been documented in the Post and other publications, then the 
President's plan too would double it, would it not, if there is only a 
$4 difference in premiums in 2002?
  Mr. POMEROY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, the only plan that 
causes part B premiums to double is the GOP budget plan. The things 
that the gentleman does not consider Medicare cuts in fact to a senior 
citizen that suddenly has to pay a lot more out of pocket because 
Medicare does not pay it anyone, I am telling the gentleman, they think 
their benefits have been cut. They think it in a very real and personal 
way.
  I yielded happily to my friend from South Carolina, and we had an 
interesting exchange. In fact I wish we had a lot more of that going on 
right now in constructive circumstances, most particularly at a 
negotiating table.
  I have been in public life a long time. It has been my opportunity, I 
have not been in Congress long, but I have got the opportunity to work 
for public issues on behalf of North Dakotans in the State legislature 
and for the insurance commissioner. In addition to that, I was in the 
private sector practicing law in my hometown. I have been involved in 
lots of negotiations, lots and lots of negotiations.
  What I learned is, you come to the table with the position. You care 
deeply about it. The other side comes to the table with a position. 
They care deeply about that. And then you start to deal. I do not mean 
callously, just cutting deals willy-nilly. But you begin to negotiate, 
engaging the other side, talking about the things that really matter to 
you, trying to find common grounds.
  I think it is a tragedy that this afternoon, with the Federal 
Government, portions of it shut down, with budget talks at an impasse, 
we do not have this kind of negotiation under way. I urge all of my 
colleagues to insist we get negotiations underway and let us fund 
Government while these important talks proceed.

                          ____________________