[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 109 (Friday, September 15, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8630-S8631]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BUSH HITS GORE ON DRUGS AND TAXES
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I want to close with a comment about an
article that appeared in today's Washington Post under the headline,
``Bush Hits Gore on Drugs and Taxes.''
I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed in the Record
immediately after my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 1.)
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, according to this article, there is a new
30-second ad being run that is entitled ``Drugs and Taxes.'' According
to the Washington Post article, the audio of this tape begins as
follows:
Al Gore's prescription plan forces seniors into a
government-run HMO. Governor Bush gives seniors a choice.
The Post, in its analysis of this statement, makes the following
comment:
In a classic contrast ad furthering the theme that Gore is
untrustworthy, Bush misrepresents the vice president's drug
plan. First, it isn't mandatory; seniors can opt for drug
coverage or not. Second, Medicare recipients could remain in
traditional choose-your-own-doctor plans. Drug payments would
be administered through private cost-control groups--such as
those now employed by the insurance industry--that are not
``government-run'' or health maintenance organizations. In
fact, many analysts say Bush's plan, while providing choices,
would encourage more seniors to join cost-conscious HMOs.
I only add to that analysis of this ad that it is interesting to me
that the word ``HMO'' is inserted in the ad of Governor Bush as a
pejorative. This Senate has been trying for the better part of the last
2 years to pass a Patients' Bill of Rights in order to lay out some
basic standards of protection as they relate to the beneficiaries of
HMOs, the citizens who look to the HMO to finance their health care,
the providers--doctors and hospitals--who are the source of that health
care, and the HMO which has received the premium dollars from the
patients and is now called upon to pay the providers for the cost of
services delivered to the beneficiaries.
It has been my position--and I believe today a majority of the
Senate's, as well as a very strong majority in the House of
Representatives--that it is a Federal responsibility to establish some
basic standards of that relationship so that there will be a comfort
level that people know what will be expected. They will know how they
would be treated, whether it is in the emergency room, whether it is in
access to a specialist physician, whether it is a woman's right to use
her gynecologist as her primary care physician; all of those very
intimate issues will have a known, federally established standard.
Yet in spite of that majority support in both Houses of the Congress,
we have gone month after month after month unable to even have the
conference committee report out a bill that we can debate and decide
whether it meets the appropriate standards of providing those standards
of treatment for patients, providers, and the HMO itself.
It is surprising to me, therefore, in that context that now Governor
Bush apparently has concluded that the HMOs are sufficient pejorative
that he can use them as the target of his attack of what we don't want
in our health care system. I hope this ad might serve the probably
unintended purpose of galvanizing an even broader coalition within the
Congress behind the necessity for HMO reform and for the establishment
of a basic set of patients' rights.
If Presidential candidate Governor Bush has seen the HMO as such a
pejorative figure that he is now attacking it in his ads, that might
send a signal as to what the American people want us to do in terms of
beginning to rectify that negative image by providing some effective
nationwide standards of Patients' Bill of Rights for HMOs.
[[Page S8631]]
So I will conclude with that side comment. I do hope that on this
important issue of the provision of prescription drug benefits, we will
deescalate the misrepresentation of both parties' plans. I happen to
have my own strong preference as to which plan I think will best serve
the needs of the American people, and particularly our 39 million
Medicare beneficiaries, but I think we ought to treat both plans with
the respect they deserve, have a full and serious debate on those
plans, use the election of November 7 as a national referendum as to
how we wish to proceed, and then if, unfortunately, we have failed to
act on prescription drugs during the remaining weeks of this session,
we would reconvene in January of 2001 with a President who has a
mandate from the people for a clear direction, and we will respond to
that mandate by effective action.
If we achieve that goal, then to the extent of this very critical
issue, the democratic process is alive, healthy, and performing one of
its fundamental functions of converting public aspirations into policy
that will benefit their lives.
Exhibit 1
Bush Hits Gore on Drugs, Taxes
(By Howard Kurtz)
Candidate: George W. Bush.
Markets: Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and 14 other
states.
Producer: Maverick Media.
Time: 30 seconds.
Audio: ``Al Gore's prescription plan forces seniors into a
government-run HMO. Governor Bush gives seniors a choice.
Gore says he's for school accountability, but requires no
real testing. Governor Bush requires tests and holds schools
accountable for results. Gore's targeted tax cuts leave out
50 million people--half of all taxpayers. Under Bush, every
taxpayer gets a tax cut and no family pays more than a third
of their income to Washington. Governor Bush has real plans
that work for real people.''
Analysis: In a classic contrast ad furthering his theme
that Gore is untrustworthy, Bush misrepresents the vice
president's drug plan. First, it isn't mandatory; seniors can
opt for drug coverage or not. Second, Medicare recipients
could remain in traditional choose-your-own doctor plans.
Drug payments would be administered through private cost-
control groups--such as those now employed by the insurance
industry--that are not ``government-run'' or health
maintenance organizations. In fact, many analysts say Bush's
plan, while providing choices, would encourage more seniors
to join cost-conscious HMOs. Bush's education plan does place
more emphasis than Gore's on holding schools accountable,
though the Texas governor would spend less. Bush's $1.6
trillion tax cut would reach far more Americans than Gore's
$500 billion cut, which would be tied to specific behavior,
and the Gore camp essentially concedes the point by saying
that 40 million taxpayers, not 50 million, would get no
benefit.
____________________