[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 92 (Wednesday, July 10, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1226]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       MEDICARE MODERNIZATION AND PRESCRIPTIONS DRUG ACT OF 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. MICHAEL E. CAPUANO

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 27, 2002

  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule and 
in opposition to H.R. 4954, the Medicare Modernization and Prescription 
Drug Act of 2002.
  Tonight we are voting on legislation that represents the most drastic 
change in Medicare since the program was enacted in 1965. With this 
drastic change, one would assume there would be an open and honest rule 
that would allow Members to consider and vote on various legislative 
proposals. Unfortunately, for millions of seniors utilizing Medicare, 
this is not the case. Democrats have been denied the opportunity to 
present their plan to America's seniors. What is left is a bad bill, 
with no amendments, leaving no chance to make it better. Once again, 
the Republican Leadership of the House of Representatives has presented 
Members with the option of voting for a benefit that doesn't do enough, 
or voting for nothing at all.
  The current bill includes provider reimbursements and has been 
endorsed by doctors and hospitals, but this bill does not provide 
adequate benefits to those seniors who really need it. Under the 
proposed bill, Medicare beneficiaries would be eligible to enroll in 
the drug program paying a premium estimated at $35 per month and a 
deductible of $250 a year. For drug expenditures between $251-$1000 the 
beneficiary would pay 20 percent and the government would pay 80 
percent. For drug costs $1001-$2000, the program and enrollees would 
split the cost 50-50. Now comes the unbelievable part, for expenditures 
between $2000 and $3700, the enrollee would have to pay out of his own 
pocket. That's right--there is a $1700 gap where the seniors are left 
with the burden. As a result, nearly half of all seniors will fall into 
the gap and be forced to pay the full cost of their medications.
  If we are going to give seniors a benefit, it needs to be a 
meaningful one that actually provides coverage. Seniors need a benefit 
in which they can afford their drugs and do not have to worry about 
their medications being covered. In addition, there should be one bill 
that will address the problems with Medicare reimbursement and provider 
payments and another that will focus solely on the needs of seniors. 
The bill before us is a combined version of reform--done in order to 
secure votes and pass. The Republicans have catered to the needs of 
various industries in order to pass their bill--knowing that this is 
the only way this proposal could stay alive. This is an insurance plan 
that cannot work. This legislation would rely on private insurance 
companies and health plans to cover the costs of the drugs. In 
particular, the bill before us allows insurers to refuse to participate 
and allows them to control costs at the expense of patients' welfare. 
No insurance program can work unless it attracts premiums from people 
who will not use the service. Those premiums are used to offset the 
cost associated with those beneficiaries whose drugs cost more than 
their premiums. This plan is doomed to failure because there is no way 
premiums can cover costs--especially when it is geared toward the 
senior population. The end result unfortunately is those seniors 
without insurance will still be unable to afford prescribed medicines 
and those seniors with insurance will continue to pay high premiums or 
co-pays for their insurance--ultimately changing little and helping 
very few.
  If we in Congress are serious about strengthening Medicare for future 
generations, we need to invest in our seniors and Congress needs to be 
prepared to spend the funds necessary to provide a suitable 
prescription drug program. If the federal government can afford a $273 
billion farm bill and an $800 billion bill making the estate tax 
permanent, I think we owe it to our seniors to find the money to 
provide a prescription drug benefit. The federal government has a 
responsibility to ensure that Americans who contribute to the Medicare 
program during their working years will have dependable, equitable, and 
affordable health coverage when they retire or become disabled 
regardless of their income or health status.
  Mr. Speaker, the Democrat's intended to do that. We intended to come 
to the floor and present a proposal that would lower drug prices, 
guarantee coverage and enable seniors to get their medicines at the 
pharmacy of their choice. Since we have been denied a fair chance to 
present our proposal I cannot support this rule or the proposed bill 
and I urge my colleagues to vote no on both.

                          ____________________