[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 169 (Thursday, November 20, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H11856-H11857]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENIORS DESERVE BETTER PRESCRIPTION DRUG COVERAGE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, last night I took a special
order, and I talked about what seniors are going to pay under the new
Medicare prescription drug program if it is passed in its present form;
and I understand it is coming out of committee just a little bit
different than that we said last night, but the end result is the same.
They are changing the annual deductible from $275 to $250, but the
seniors will be paying 25 percent of the next $2,250 minus the annual
deductible. So the seniors for $1,500 in coverage will be paying
$1,170, and that is not well known by most of the seniors with whom I
have talked. And then there is a doughnut hole which goes up to $5,100,
and seniors will pay an additional $2,850 with no coverage for that.
That means seniors up to $5,100 under the new prescription drug
benefit will pay $4,020 and the government will pay $1,500.
Now, that is not what I think seniors are expecting. I think they are
expecting coverage that is much broader than that; and I think they are
going to be very unpleasantly surprised when they realize that they
will be paying a tremendous amount of money for very small amount of
coverage.
Now, above the $5,000 level, the catastrophic health care benefit
kicks in, and that is 95 percent of that. But the average senior pays
about $1,800 year in prescription drug costs, and they will not reach
that level. There will be very few that reach that level. So most
seniors, if they pay $5,000 for their prescription drugs in a given
year, the average senior, they will pay $4,020 and the Federal
Government will pay $1,500. I think they will be very angry when they
find out that is the case.
I believe we should pass a bill that takes care of those who are
uninsured, who do not have prescription drug coverage. Right now, 76
percent of American seniors have some form of prescription drug
coverage. And the program that we are talking about in most cases is
going to give them less coverage than what they already have. Now, the
24 percent of the seniors that do not have coverage, we should deal
with them. We should help them. Those who are indigent, those who have
health problems where they cannot get coverage, we need to take care of
those. But those who are already covered, I do not believe our
government should start taking care of.
The cost of this program is estimated to be somewhere around $400
billion over 10 years. I have another chart which I am not bring
forward right now, but it shows what happened with Medicare. Medicare
when it was passed in 1965 cost $3 billion. Two years ago in the year
2001, Medicare cost $241 billion. That is an 80 times increase.
{time} 2045
It went up 80 times since 1964. The Medicaid program which we passed
in Indiana under duress started out, we thought, costing a few million.
We estimated a top figure of $20 million. It has cost well over $1
billion just for Indiana's share, and it has gone up about 70 times
since 1969.
Anybody who thinks that this donut hole is not going to be a big
issue to seniors is sorely mistaken, in my opinion; and I believe that
they will demand that this donut hole, this $2,850 that is not covered,
will shrink. When that happens, there is going to be a tremendous
increase in the cost of this program. I believe the $400 billion price
tag for 10 years is very low. I believe it will be more than double
that, maybe up to $1 trillion over 10 years, but only time will tell.
The other thing that really concerns me is we are paying $70 billion
to American industry so that they will not dump their retired employees
on the Federal Government program. The fact of the matter is I believe
long term the businessmen and industrialists in this country are going
to say we do not know what Congress is going to do tomorrow, and they
are going to start dumping their employees on the Federal program
anyhow; and when that happens, the retirees are going to see the
program that they are under with their previous employer go out the
window, and they are going to be put on the government program.
Their coverage right now under their retired benefits with their
previous employer is probably much, much better.
[[Page H11857]]
In fact, I am sure it is much better than what they are going to get on
the Federal program, and so the $70 billion buyout or payout they are
going to give to industry I do not think is going to stop the dumping
of employees on to this program out of independent industrial programs
that are covered by private industry and companies.
I think it is very realistic to believe those people will be put on
the government program. So that is another cost that will be added to
this program over the next 10 years.
This is an open-ended entitlement. The floor, the floor is $400
billion. There is no ceiling. They will tell you there are some cost
controls in it, but the fact of the matter is there really will not be,
not over the long period of time; and the ultimate result of this is
going to be an entitlement that is going to be like Medicare, like
Medicaid. It is going to be out of control. It is not going to provide
the benefits that the seniors anticipate, and I think they are going to
be very, very angry.
So I would just like to say to my colleagues, tomorrow or the next
day when we decide to vote on this bill, think about what the seniors'
reaction is going to be. In 1988 we passed a catastrophic health care
bill. Only 11 Members, as I recall, voted against it. I was one of the
11, and 1 year later we repealed it because the seniors were so angry
when they found out what was in it. I think they are going to be angry
with this bill as well, and I hope my colleagues will take that into
consideration.
____________________