[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 151 (Tuesday, November 15, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H10193-H10194]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PROGRAM AND PLAN FINDER COMPLICATED FOR 
                                SENIORS

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take the time of 
the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) since I am next on 
the list.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oregon?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes.


                          Tribute to Ed Roybal

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, first, I missed the earlier discussion of 
Chairman Ed Roybal, but I had the privilege of serving with him for a 
number of years on the Transportation Committee, and he was a wonderful 
inspiration to a young Member of Congress. I was much younger then, and 
I learned a good deal during his leadership and would say that he 
provided a tremendous leadership and a legacy for Californians and all 
Americans in terms of his investment in transportation infrastructure 
for America. So my condolences to the family.
  I rise tonight to discuss the Medicare prescription drug benefit. I 
went online today to see what seniors would experience. It is fairly 
extraordinary, mind-boggling, particularly given the fact that a large 
number of seniors have never experienced the Internet.
  Seventy-six percent of seniors have never been online. I have. It was 
still not easy. Twenty-six percent of people on Medicare have cognitive 
impairments. Some of my detractors on the other side of the aisle might 
say I have that, but I do not. Three million have visual impairments. I 
wear corrective lenses. And 2.3 million reside in nursing homes.
  These are all extraordinary complications for an unbelievably, 
unnecessarily complicated program. Why was it constructed this way? For 
two reasons: the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry, 
not the 40 million seniors and others who are eligible for Medicare in 
this country. The bill was designed by the Republicans to reward their 
very, very generous contributors in the pharmaceutical and insurance 
industry.
  The insurance industry is an industry, of course, which is exempt 
from antitrust law. It can and does collude to set prices, exclude 
people and is quite profitable. Then, of course, the pharmaceutical 
industry is the most consistently profitable industry in the world.
  They are both given subsidies through this legislation. We could have 
done something much simpler, much less expensive. This plan will cost 
$1 trillion over 10 years for the American taxpayers in addition to 
incredible sums for seniors, particularly those who make wrong choices.
  In my little survey, 41 plans came up; and in comparing three, it is 
going to take me all night if I wanted to compare all 41. I keep going 
back to the screen that only allows three at a time. My annual costs 
would vary between $2,457 and $5,243; and, of course, the 
pharmaceutical companies can change the drug benefit weekly. Seniors 
can change the plan once a year, and you know what will happen if they 
have large claims during the year and they actually get a benefit? They 
will be disallowed. They will not be allowed to reenroll in that plan 
by the private insurance sector next year. There is nothing that 
requires that they be reenrolled if they are willing to pay the 
premiums to get the benefits.
  We could have had the government, like we do with the VA, go out and 
negotiate the lowest price for prescription drugs for the Nation's 40 
million Medicare eligible citizens. That would have saved billions of 
dollars; but the Republicans said, well, that is unfair, that is 
anticompetitive. Well, no, actually we are forming a buying group. We 
are using market power to negotiate lower prices. They say, no, we 
should give subsidies to the pharmaceutical industry and subsidies to 
the noncompetitive insurance industry. That

[[Page H10194]]

is their version of a free market. Of course, again, they are generous 
campaign contributors so we can understand some of this rhetoric on 
their side of the aisle.
  Nonetheless, an incredibly expensive, confusing plan which gives all 
of the benefit to the pharmaceutical and insurance industry, puts 
seniors at risk, puts taxpayers at risk, and we could have done so much 
better for so much less. It would cost nothing to negotiate those lower 
prices. The VA gets prices at a 70, 75 percent reduction from list 
price; but, no, the Republicans had a special provision in this bill.
  Medicare, the default provider for anybody who cannot buy into an 
insurance plan that is red-lined by the insurance industry, and they 
can do that legally under this bill, they say, oh, we are not selling 
you a premium; you have got too many drug claims; we are not going to 
take you. But they can go to Medicare as a default provider, and guess 
what? Medicare is the only entity in the world, other than uninsured 
individuals, who will have to pay list price for drugs. Nobody can 
afford list price for drugs except the superwealthy and, according to 
Republicans, Medicare. This will bankrupt the program, but that is 
where the highest risk seniors, the ones that are not desirable to the 
industry, will get pushed after maybe 1 year of enrollment, if they are 
lucky enough to get enrolled in the first year.
  So huge costs to taxpayers, confusion and risks for seniors, the end 
of Medicare in the not-too-distant future by bankruptcy, by design, by 
the Republicans, all to profit the private insurance industry and the 
pharmaceutical industry.
  You should be really, really ashamed of this horrible product.

                          ____________________