[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 41 (Tuesday, March 16, 1999)]
[House]
[Page H1271]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 0945
WE MUST NOT PRIVATIZE MEDICARE
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Morella). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 19, 1999, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, the National Bipartisan Commission
on the Future of Medicare is poised today to vote on a proposal that
would end Medicare as we know it.
The Commission's charge was to come up with a scheme for putting
Medicare on solid financial footing and improving its value to seniors.
They definitely came up with a scheme, a scheme to privatize America's
best government program.
Under the Commission proposal, known as Premium Support, Medicare
would no longer pay directly for health care services. Instead, it
would provide each senior with a voucher good for part of the premium
for their private health insurance coverage. Medicare beneficiaries
could use this voucher to buy into the fee-for-service plan sponsored
by the Federal Government or to join a private plan.
To encourage consumer price sensitivity, the voucher would track to
the lowest cost private plan. Seniors then would shop for the best plan
that best suits their needs, paying the balance of the premium and
paying extra if they want higher quality health care. The Commission
proposal creates a system of health coverage but it abandons Medicare's
bedrock principle of egalitarianism.
Today, Medicare is income blind. All seniors have access to the same
level of health care. The Commission proposal, however, is structured
to provide comprehensiveness, access and quality only to those who can
afford them.
The idea that vouchers will empower seniors to choose a health plan
that best suits their needs is quite simply a myth. The reality is that
seniors will be forced to accept whatever plan they can afford.
The Medicare Commission is charged with ensuring Medicare's long-term
solvency. This proposal will not do that. Proponents of the voucher
plan say it would shave off 1 percent of the Medicare budget per year
over the next few decades. It will only do that by charging senior
citizens more. In fact, Bruce Vladeck, a Commission member and former
Medicare administrator, doubts Premium Support will save the government
even a dime.
The privatization of Medicare is nothing new. Medicare beneficiaries
have been able to enroll in private managed Medicare plans for some
time now, and their experience does not bode well for a full-fledged
privatization effort. Managed care plans are profit oriented, and the
theory that they can sustain significantly lower costs than traditional
Medicare simply has not panned out.
Profit-driven managed care plans do not tough it out when those
profits are unrealized. Last year, 96 Medicare HMOs deserted 400,000
Medicare beneficiaries because the HMOs' customers did not meet the
HMOs' profit objectives.
Before the Medicare program was launched in 1965, more than one-half
of America's senior citizens did not have health insurance. Private
insurance was the only option then for seniors. Insurers simply did not
want seniors to join their plans because they knew the elderly would
use much of their coverage. The private insurance market still avoids
high-risk enrollees and, whenever possible, dodges the bill for high
cost medical services.
What is perhaps most disturbing about the Commission's Premium
Support plan is what it does not tell us. It does not tell us how we
can make Medicare more efficient while still preserving its egalitarian
underpinnings. It does not tell us how much the Nation can or wants to
spend on health care for seniors. It does not give us options for
reconciling what the Nation wants with how much we have or are willing
to spend.
If we privatize Medicare, like the Commission wants, we are telling
America that not all seniors deserve the same level of care. The wisest
course for the Medicare Commission is to disband without delivering a
final product. We should go back to the drawing board and we should
construct a plan that builds on Medicare's strengths and ensures its
long-term solvency. Selling off Medicare to the managed care industry
is the easy way out and it is wrong.
____________________