[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 207 (Friday, December 22, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S19234-S19235]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          BUDGET NEGOTIATIONS

  Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, these budget proposals now being 
negotiated will directly affect virtually every segment of the 
Government and every citizen of this country.
  I am strongly in support of deficit reduction and favor the 
elimination of the national debt over a period of time. I have long 
supported a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. I supported 
the 1993 reconciliation bill which has already led to significant 
reductions in our annual deficits. But as with any omnibus legislation 
of this type, there is a right and wrong way to pursue the same goal.
  In our endeavor to achieve reductions in deficit spending, our 
priorities should be to reach an agreement on a 7-year budget and 
eliminating the Federal deficit. I think this is the wrong time for tax 
cuts. Eliminating tax cuts from the equation at this time will enable 
us to reach an agreement on the budget, and overcome this political 
impasse. Consideration on the proposed tax cuts should be postponed for 
2 years to determine if deficit targets are being met, and in order to 
allow intensive study and hearings to determine what taxes should be 
reduced and how much taxes can be cut without detouring off the road 
toward a balanced budget.
  Furthermore, focusing our attention to balancing the budget and 
reducing the Federal deficit, while postponing consideration of tax 
cuts, will allow hundreds of thousands of Federal workers to return to 
work and return a sense of financial stability to our country.
  I have several major concerns surrounding the proposals, but the most 
disturbing are the cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. The Republican plan 
would cut Medicare growth by $270 billion over 7 years. It mandated a 
major restructuring of the program to supposedly give Medicare 
enrollees a wide range of options to join private health plans. 
However, I am concerned that instead of options, senior citizens would 
be faced with fewer alternatives, and forced into certain plans because 
they have no choice.
  This direction would ultimately cause senior citizens to be charged 
more for health care while receiving less in Medicare. A great portion 
of the savings in Medicare would result by raising the part B premium. 
The premiums that our senior citizens pay would rise from the $46.10 
per month to nearly $90.00 by the year 2002.
  I have reservations and misgivings with regard to any Medicare reform 
that threatens the access to, and quality of, health care for senior 
citizens. I am fearful that the Republican plan would cut inpatient 
hospital service, home health care services, extended care services, 
hospice care, physicians services, outpatient hospital services, 
diagnostic tests, and other important services to our senior citizens.
  In addition to a reduction in services, the following immediate 
burdens would be placed on our senior citizens: For fiscal year 1996, 
the monthly premium would rise to $53.70. Participants in the part B 
program would be required to pay the first $150.00 of expenses out-of-
pocket rather than the current $100 deductible. These combinations with 
the proposal to raise the eligibility age to 67 leads me to believe 
that seniors are being singled out to bear the brunt of budget cuts.
  These extreme cuts to Medicare also threaten health care for millions 
of people of all ages living in rural America. Since rural hospitals 
rely on Medicare for a significant proportion of their revenue, they 
will be particularly hard hit. Some will be forced to close altogether. 
Hospitals in rural areas are 

[[Page S19235]]
few and far between. A hospital closing affects all rural residents in 
the vicinity, not just seniors on Medicare. Under the GOP plan, these 
Americans will be forced to drive further to the nearest hospital, 
putting lives at risk.
  Not only do these proposals cut Medicare, but Medicaid is also being 
reduced over the next 7 years. For the past 30 years, the Medicaid 
Program has been America's health and long-term care safety net. The 
Republican proposal was to repeal Medicaid, slash its Federal funding 
over the next 7 years, and to turn remaining Federal funds over to the 
States in the form of a block grant. In a State like Alabama, which is 
habitually faced with budget proration, the effects of such additional 
burdens would be huge and devastating.
  The bottom line is this--these Medicaid cuts are simply too much, too 
soon. Our State will not be able to cope without hurting people 
severely.
  Mr. President, as I stated before, our primary objective must be to 
first focus on passing a budget that reduces the Federal deficit 
without putting Americans who rely on Medicare and Medicaid at risk, 
and then after 2 years, turn our attention to the issue of reducing 
taxes.

                          ____________________