[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 56 (Wednesday, May 10, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H2472-H2479]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  ENCOURAGING ALL ELIGIBLE MEDICARE BENEFICIARIES TO REVIEW AVAILABLE 
OPTIONS TO DETERMINE WHETHER ENROLLMENT IN A MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG 
       PLAN BEST MEETS THEIR NEEDS FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUG COVERAGE

  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
agree to the resolution (H. Res. 802) encouraging all eligible Medicare 
beneficiaries who have not yet elected enroll in the new Medicare Part 
D benefit to review the available options and to determine whether 
enrollment in a Medicare prescription drug plan best meets their 
current and future needs for prescription drug coverage.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              H. Res. 802

       Whereas Medicare now offers a prescription drug benefit for 
     its beneficiaries, known as Medicare Part D;
       Whereas more than 35,900,000 Medicare eligible individuals 
     are receiving prescription drug coverage, of which there are 
     more than 27,000,000, including a substantial number of low-
     income and minority beneficiaries, receiving coverage through 
     the new benefit;
       Whereas 8,100,000 beneficiaries have enrolled in stand 
     alone Medicare prescription drug plans;
       Whereas estimates indicate that the average beneficiary 
     will save more than $1,100 this year alone by enrolling in a 
     Medicare prescription drug plan;
       Whereas the average monthly premium for enrolling in a 
     Medicare prescription drug plan is now just $25 per month, 
     which is far below the initial estimate of $37 per month;
       Whereas recent surveys of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled 
     in Medicare prescription drug plans indicate that 
     beneficiaries are satisfied with their coverage;
       Whereas advocacy groups including the AARP, National 
     Alliance for Hispanic Health, the National Medical 
     Association, and the National Council on Aging have all 
     sponsored enrollment events designed to encourage eligible 
     beneficiaries to enroll in Medicare prescription drug plans;
       Whereas Area Agencies on Aging, State Health Insurance 
     Programs (SHIPs), and other local and community organizations 
     are available to provide seniors with assistance and answer 
     their questions about how to select the Medicare prescription 
     drug plan that best meets their needs;
       Whereas pharmacists are on the front line in delivering 
     prescriptions to Medicare beneficiaries and continue to be 
     instrumental in providing valuable information and assistance 
     about the new benefit;
       Whereas in recent months Members of Congress have hosted 
     hundreds of events and the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare &

[[Page H2473]]

     Medicaid Services, and other Administration officials have 
     sponsored thousands of outreach and enrollment events, to 
     educate seniors regarding the new prescription drug benefit;
       Whereas the deadline for enrollment in the new prescription 
     drug plan without being subject to any late enrollment 
     penalty is May 15, 2006; and
       Whereas editorial writers and opinion leaders across the 
     nation have recognized the importance of an enrollment 
     deadline because it encourages beneficiaries to make a 
     decision about enrolling: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives encourages all 
     Medicare beneficiaries who are not yet enrolled in Part D to 
     review carefully all of the options that are available to 
     them and to determine whether enrollment in a Medicare 
     prescription drug plan best meets their current and future 
     needs for prescription drug coverage.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Deal) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would ask unanimous consent that 
the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) be allowed to control 
10 minutes of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.


                             General Leave

  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material on 
the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss something of great importance to 
all Medicare beneficiaries. As my colleagues are no doubt aware, on 
January 1 of this year, prescription drug coverage for our seniors 
became more than just something we talked about in this body. It became 
a reality for every single person eligible for Medicare.
  This legislation accomplished a very important thing. It helped 
millions of senior citizens save thousands of dollars on their 
prescription drugs.
  For years, before enactment of this new benefit, we heard the horror 
stories of our seniors having to choose between groceries or their 
medicines, or having to cut their pills in half, all because they just 
couldn't afford their prescription drugs. Well, now, all those 
beneficiaries have the option to have good drug coverage and have the 
quality of life that we wish for all of our American seniors.
  As of today, we have nearly 37 million Medicare beneficiaries with 
drug coverage. This is an outstanding number. The unparalleled effort 
to get this brand-new change to Medicare up and running and get people 
enrolled has truly been incredible. However, there are still 
individuals who have not yet signed up, and we want to make sure that 
they are aware of this new benefit and can examine the options 
available to them, and can and will make a decision as to whether or 
not to sign up.
  We have to remember, though, that this is a voluntary benefit. If a 
beneficiary chooses not to enroll, then that is his or her choice. 
However, we will ensure that all seniors have the information available 
to them to make such an informed decision.
  We are on the verge of an important date in the implementation of the 
new Medicare prescription drug benefit. The initial enrollment period 
for drug coverage ends at midnight, May 15. All beneficiaries who have 
not signed up for this new benefit will need to make a choice. If there 
is a Medicare prescription drug plan out there that will save you money 
on your prescriptions, I would urge these seniors to sign up before May 
15 in order to avoid paying a penalty. Like Medicare part B, if a 
beneficiary fails to enroll in part D during their initial eligibility 
period, then they may have to pay a penalty.
  Even if you are a Medicare beneficiary who doesn't have any 
prescription medicines right now, I urge you to consider signing up. 
You can't wait until you have had an automobile accident to buy 
automobile insurance. And if you are eligible today and can save money, 
then I urge you to sign up before the open enrollment period ends.
  Local outreach efforts and enrollment events are being continued 
across the country, and the capacity is in place to help callers who 
phone to 1-800-Medicare. People with Medicare can join a Medicare drug 
plan through the mail, by phone or over the Web now through May 15 of 
2006. All completed applications postmarked on May 15 must be 
processed.
  I urge all my colleagues to help their constituents to examine all 
the options available to them. We can't afford to let the opportunity 
to save thousands of dollars on prescription medicines pass even one of 
our seniors by.
  I encourage, therefore, my colleagues to adopt this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield half 
of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2\1/4\ minutes.
  Here are the facts. They aren't pretty. It is the evening of May 10. 
That means there are three working days left until the part D 
enrollment deadline.
  If you are one of the more than 5 million Medicare beneficiaries who 
lack coverage and you are not on Medicaid, this deadline is binding on 
you.
  Unless you enroll by the 15th, you face a late penalty that increases 
each month until you do enroll. Your next enrollment opportunity isn't 
until November, but the penalty rises anyway.
  When and if you do enroll, the accumulated penalty will be added to 
your monthly part D premium. Most beneficiaries who sign up in November 
will pay a 7 percent penalty for as long as they have coverage.
  Why should seniors be tied to the original deadline when the part D 
program missed its own deadline?
  Part D was supposed to be up and running by January 1. Unless you 
believe that mass confusion, major computer glitches, daily bad press, 
hit-or-miss consumer assistance qualifies as up and running, then part 
D was not up and running by January 1 or February 1 or March 1. It is 
barely up and running now.
  Why are Medicare enrollees being pressured into a drug plan? Where is 
the line between pressure and coercion? And what right does the Federal 
Government have to let the drug industry and the insurance industry, 
and what right does the President have and the Republican leadership in 
Congress have to let the drug companies and the insurance industry 
write this bill, pass in the middle of the night and then penalize 
seniors when they are confused by this bill? If some seniors are wary 
of enrolling, who can blame them?
  Aided by a less than hospitable Web site, a blizzard of insurance 
company marketing materials, an overburdened Medicare hotline, seniors 
are being asked to choose a drug plan that they simply can't 
understand, that no one can understand very well.
  State and local agencies trying to help Medicare beneficiaries, 
including my office and the office of Mr. Green and Mr. Allen and Mr. 
Stark and Mr. McDermott, are doing the best we can. But navigating part 
D hasn't been easy for any of us.
  There are 400,000 Medicare beneficiaries in my State who have not 
signed up. They shouldn't be pressured. They shouldn't be penalized. 
Seniors didn't ask the Republican majority to bypass Medicare and build 
a drug coverage obstacle course. Seniors didn't ask the Republican 
majority to let the drug companies write the bill and let the HMOs 
shape Medicare policy. That was this body's decision. That was the 
President's decision, based on huge numbers of HMO and drug company 
contributions. Seniors have to live with it. Giving them time is the 
least that we can do.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Georgia for yielding time to the members of the Ways and Means 
Committee Health Subcommittee.
  Well, there you have it, folks. There it is. Almost 90 percent of 
seniors have drug coverage today, more than ever before in America's 
history, and

[[Page H2474]]

thanks to Medicare part D and its 10,000 grass-roots partners who have 
reached into communities across our country to provide personal, face-
to-face advice to millions of seniors on signing up.
  In Connecticut, 75 percent of our Hispanic seniors are signed up; 69 
percent of our African American seniors are signed up; 65 percent of 
our Asian American seniors have signed up because, for the very first 
time ever, Medicare has partnered with people right in their local 
communities to give them the help, support, advice, to make their own 
choice about Medicare, which Medicare part D plan helped them do.
  And you know what? Poll after poll shows how seniors are happy with 
the benefits provided by these plans. AARP, the largest organization 
representing seniors, found that eight out of ten seniors enrolled in 
the program said that it met or exceeded their expectations. A Kaiser 
Family Foundation poll found that three out of four seniors enrolled in 
a Medicare D plan are satisfied with their plan and are not having 
trouble getting the drugs they need.
  Seniors are signing up and they are liking it. Why? Because it saves 
them money. It saves them lots of money. It saves some couples $4-, 
$5,000 a year.
  Why are they signing up? Because it protects them from dangerous, 
adverse drug interactions. They have never had that protection before.
  Why are they signing up? Because it protects them from catastrophic 
drug costs. They have never had that protection before. They have never 
had that financial security before.
  When Gail Glazewski from Cheshire, Connecticut, found out that her 
part D drug program was going to save her $2,000 a year, she just let 
out a whoop of glee and said, I am the happiest senior citizen in town. 
Gail is one of the millions of seniors that the New York Times reported 
last month as Medicare's satisfied customers. The newspaper said, They 
are not vocal, they are not organized, but they are saving hundreds, 
and in some cases, thousands of dollars for our seniors.
  The only sad note has been the dedication of some to scaring our 
seniors. It is not uncommon to have a senior tell me how complicated 
the program is, how unfair it is, how wrong that I worked so hard to 
pass it, only to come back and tell me later, after they went to the 
choices counselor, as I proposed, how easy it turned out to be, and how 
much money they were saving.
  You know, nothing has moved me more than some of the seniors who have 
come to me after these counseling sessions with the buses that CMS has 
provided, with the State counselors, with the local people, and as one 
said, she said, you know, I was sad when I came here. This is the 
difference between my staying in my home and having to give up my home.

                              {time}  1915

  So this is a big step forward for Medicare. It is a dramatic change. 
It is really exciting to see how people have come forward and signed 
up. We have a few more days, and the message is sign up, sign up, sign 
up. It not only saves you money, it gives you health protection and 
financial protection. You have never before had access to through 
Medicare.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer a resolution urging seniors to 
sign up for a Medicare drug benefit plan before the deadline. Why? 
Because it will save you money on prescription drugs, protect you from 
harmful drug interactions, and cover 95 percent of your costs if your 
personal expenditures exceed $3,600. Medicare Part D will 
fundamentally, improve our seniors' health and financial security.
  The Medicare momentum we're witnessing is undeniable. Of the 42 
million seniors in Medicare, 9 million have drug coverage, either 
through TRICARE, FEHBP, or as active employees, and do not need to 
enroll. The 33 million remaining, includes 28 million seniors that are 
now benefiting from the program. Of the 5 million remaining another 1 
million are expected to sign up before the deadline and another 2 
million seniors, that qualify for extra help, can continue to sign-up 
throughout the year. So at this point it looks like 40 million of the 
42 million seniors in Medicare will enjoy prescription drug coverage or 
can sign up for it at any point during the year.
  A truly remarkable fact and it is due to the spectacular commitment 
of over 10,000 grassroots organizations that in partnership with CMS, 
have been conducting face-to-face enrollment of seniors. CMS and its 
10,000 grassroots partners are conducting more than 1,800 enrollment 
events across the country each week, right up until the May 15th 
enrollment deadline. Additionally, CMS has increased resources to keep 
the wait times down and beneficiary support up at 1-800-MEDICARE and 
the Medicare.gov website.
  And these seniors and the disabled are filling more than 93 million 
prescriptions a month--an average of 3 million a day. As important, 
once enrolled in the program seniors are happy with the benefits 
provided. AARP, the largest organization representing seniors found 
that 8 out of 10 seniors enrolled in the program said that it met or 
exceeded their expectations. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll finds that 
3 out of 4 seniors enrolled in a Medicare drug plan are satisfied with 
their plan and are not having trouble getting the drugs they need. 
Seniors are giving this new benefit their stamp of approval!
  But this is a major change in the Medicare program and it is not 
surprising that there have been implementation pitfalls along the way 
as we heard from GAO and other witnesses at our subcommittee hearing. 
Because CMS has aggressively taken ownership of these implementation 
problems, most of the problems were addressed within the first two 
months of the year. For some, the solutions have been agreed to and 
implementation is now proceeding as states submit their bills. Once the 
program is free to focus on the delivery of benefits to our seniors, we 
will, I'm sure, identify refinements that need to be made with either 
CMS' contracting standards or the law.

  But at this point, the enrollment numbers and survey after survey 
attest to the tremendous value of the Medicare drug benefit. The real 
story is that seniors across the country are saving money!
  For example, seniors like Gail Glazewski from Cheshire, CT are saving 
$2,000 a year who described herself with glee as ``the happiest senior 
citizen in town when I realized how much I was going to save!'' That is 
the real story of the Medicare prescription drug benefit and it is 
being repeated all around the country. Gail is one of the millions of 
seniors that the New York Times reported about last month as 
``Medicare's Satisfied Customers.'' The newspaper said ``they are not 
vocal, they are not organized,'' but they are saving hundreds and in 
some cases thousands.
  The only sad note has been the dedication of some to scaring our 
seniors. It's not uncommon to have a senior tell me how complicated the 
program is, how unfair, how wrong I was to work so hard to pass it--
only to admit that they haven't tried to sign-up--and only to say after 
we help them--that it wasn't hard and look at the money I'm saving.
  When I travel around my district, I meet senior after senior who has 
signed up and is saving money and each day help seniors sign up and 
save. As we approach the end of the enrollment period, I urge every 
senior to sign up, save money, and protect yourself against 
catastrophic costs and harmful drug interactions.
  There are still seniors that have questions about the program and 
haven't enrolled. It's natural to have questions with a change this 
big. But every senior--especially those without drug coverage--should 
assess the drugs they take and talk to a counselor at 1-800-MEDICARE, 
at one of the many hotlines states are operating, or at their local 
senior center or agency on aging. They should not let questions about 
this program dissuade them from saving money like so many of their 
friends, family and neighbors are.
  This brings me to my final point. Some are urging delay of the 
deadline for signing up. Unfortunately, too often these are the same 
Members who use scare tactics to discourage beneficiaries from signing 
up early. All programs have deadlines. Shame on them! We must enforce 
the deadline so the plans can deliver! We need to let the system work 
so any needed refinements needed be addressed promptly.
  For years Members of Congress have talked about adding prescription 
drug benefits to Medicare. But today--right now--a Medicare 
prescription drug benefit is a reality. Thirty million seniors are 
benefiting from it, including 8 million who had no drug coverage 
before. That is a great, historic achievement for both the health and 
financial well-being of our seniors.
  I reserve the balance of my time.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a parliamentary 
inquiry to the Chair.
  Is this motion amendable?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Inglis of South Carolina). No, it is 
not.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, second parliamentary inquiry. Is it possible 
for the gentlewoman from Connecticut, the author of the amendment, to 
withdraw the motion, accept a friendly amendment to urge the 
administration

[[Page H2475]]

to move the May 15 enrollment deadline to the end of the year, thereby 
enabling another 1 million people to enroll and saving 7 million people 
from extra penalties, and then reoffer the motion to suspend the rules 
and pass this resolution?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The motion would be permitted to specify 
whatever text might be proposed for adoption by the House.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, that is the question.
  I would therefore, Mr. Speaker, like to address a question to the 
author of the bill. Would she be willing, as you have said, she has the 
clear authority to withdraw her motion, amend it so that 1 million 
Americans would have extra time to sign up and save the money and then 
resubmit it to the House. Then I am sure we will all support her 
resolution.
  I would be glad to yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut if she 
would care to respond.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. I would be happy to respond. Actuaries 
estimate things differently. The CMS actuaries estimate that 1.1 
million won't sign up if we move the deadline. In other words, they 
will lose the pressure they have today to sign up by May 15 and the 
total will be lower, not higher.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her response. I 
would like to note that the gentlewoman, Mrs. Johnson from the Fifth 
District of Connecticut, having the clear opportunity to afford 
millions of Americans the extra time to sign up for this marvelous 
program has declined to do it. In doing so, she has condemned probably 
7 million people to paying an extra 7 to 10 percent on their premiums 
for the rest of their lives.
  If this plan is so good, then my question would be why the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut, who is refusing to extend the time for 
these seniors, why they are doing that. It just amazes me, Mr. Speaker, 
that if the plan is good why they would try to deny this. The extra 
million people that the Congressional Budget Office tells us would sign 
up and for the great savings that would come it would cost an extra 
maybe $100 million.
  But out of a $1 trillion bill that would seem to me to be a paltry 
amount and it would save 7.5 million seniors from this additional 
Republican tax on their Medicare benefits. I just wanted to know 
clearly that it is Mrs. Johnson, the author of this, who refuses to 
allow us to vote on the opportunity to extend the deadline for those 
many millions of Americans who haven't been able to participate.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. Actually, Mrs. Johnson is not the author of the resolution. I 
believe I am. I would have the same response because I find it somewhat 
interesting that the gentleman from California who, according to my 
statistics, says 83 percent of his seniors who have signed up for the 
program, who I believe voted against the inception of the program to 
begin with, and who has repeatedly said how bad the program is, would 
now say we need to give more time to sign up for a program that he 
doesn't like to start with. There is something basically inconsistent.
  If we had seen as much effort on the other side to encourage seniors 
to sign up as we have seen to discourage them from doing so, perhaps we 
would have had a higher percentage rate. He is to be commended because 
83 percent is a very good rate. I commend the citizens of his 
congressional district for having the foresight to be able to take 
advantage of this great opportunity.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green), who has pointed out the problems 
in this program with the drug industry and all but has been a leader in 
trying to fix it.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 
resolution and thank my colleague from Ohio for all eligible 
beneficiaries to enroll in part D before Monday's deadline. Last night 
our office did hold two enrollment workshops to help seniors in our 
district navigate the Medicare Web site to choose a plan that best 
suits their needs.
  Large numbers could not choose a plan because of the confusion that 
they had, even though they walked out with the principal versions from 
our volunteers who worked the Internet.
  I didn't vote for the Medicare Modernization Act, and we could have 
provided seniors with a more comprehensive and less confusing benefit. 
But make no mistake, I want every Medicare beneficiary to get the most 
out of what benefit Congress did pass. That is the reason I support the 
resolution. What I question, however, is the House Leadership's 
decision to schedule this particular bill.
  We could be spending time on legislation to actually fix the problems 
associated with part D. We could consider legislation to reduce the 
price of the drugs by allowing Medicare to negotiate with the 
pharmaceutical companies. That was a question my seniors had at the 
workshop.
  We should also consider legislation to extend an open enrollment 
period and give beneficiaries a one-time chance this year to change 
plans if they decide to instead of discussing ways to improving the 
clearly flawed plan, which does nothing substantive for our seniors.
  Also, my colleague from Connecticut talks about CMS actuaries. These 
are the same actuaries I think that told us this plan was going to cost 
400 billion. Now we know with the money we may spend on it we could 
actually give seniors a quality plan without so much confusion.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Washington State (Mr. McDermott).
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, the Medicare prescription drug benefit 
plan is doing a bad job, and it is doing a worse job of helping those 
who need the help most. I was down in the lunchroom in the Longworth 
Building, and one of the cashiers stopped me and said can you explain 
to me how this works? She said, I figured out what it is going to cost 
me to join, and I can save more money by going to Costco. My drugs will 
cost less in Costco. If you added it all up, I am going to be better 
off staying out of the program and buying my drugs at Costco.
  Now, this program was faulty in its inception, and of the millions of 
people on Medicare who still haven't signed up, 85 percent of them are 
poor enough to qualify for the low income subsidy. When this bill was 
in the Ways and Means Committee, we offered the opportunity to the 
chairman to sign up these poor people at the beginning, automatically, 
because they are low income. We know what their income is. They are not 
going to get rich all of a sudden. But, no, we are going to let them 
flop around out there trying to figure out this complicated program.
  Now, how could we have let it happen? Well, haven't the Republicans 
been telling us that the Medicare drug benefit was intended to help 
those most in need, those eligible for low income subsidy?
  They turned down, the author of this turned down tonight Mr. Stark's 
offer to rewrite this thing and get all these people in.
  But that is not what really went on here. Just encouraging people or 
threatening or, as the gentleman from the Energy and Commerce Committee 
says, keeping the pressure on old people is not sufficient. That is not 
humane public policy. You ought to be ashamed of saying something like 
that. We want to pressure.
  My mother is 96 years old. I don't need you pressuring my mother on 
this drug plan if she can't figure it out. Now the low income 
beneficiaries are twice as likely to have health problems, mental 
problems or live in a nursing home. Many have difficulty with English. 
You can't just stand out here and say, hey, folks, sign up, sign up. 
They can't figure out what to do.
  You have made it so complicated so that they wouldn't sign up. That 
is what you did. You wanted the ones who were most needy to be unable 
to figure out how the plan would work so they could be left out.
  Now, just to show what a warm heart you have, you slap a 7 percent 
penalty on them for the rest of their life. You say to them, if you 
don't sign up by the 15th of May, you can't sign up for 6 months, and 
it is going to cost you 1 percent a month for every month you don't 
sign up. That kind of loving treatment is, in my view, exactly what 
this program does not need.
  It is a mess, this is a bad resolution. We will all probably, you 
know, vote

[[Page H2476]]

for it. But when you let the drug companies write the bill, it was 
never meant to work for ordinary people.
  The program needs time to find these people and help them.
  Blindly adhering to the May 15th deadline, just five days away, 
dramatically penalizes many seniors who have not signed up.
  This program has been a mess from the start.
  If Republicans are serious about helping seniors, we must extend the 
deadline for enrolling, remove the penalties for not signing up, and 
streamline the procedures, so that our most distinguished citizens can 
actually understand this.
  Just because Republicans let big drug companies help write the 
legislation doesn't mean we are helpless to take action.
  Republicans were wrong about the real cost of this program. Now they 
are wrong when they say they want to help seniors.
  An artificial deadline won't help seniors. A real prescription drug 
benefit will.
  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield the 
additional time I may control back to Mr. Brown.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I recognize myself for 1\1/
2\ minutes.
  I do find it really quite remarkable that my colleagues from the 
other side of the aisle, who spent literally months scaring seniors 
away from signing up for this benefit, claiming it was too complex, 
claiming it was this and that. I can't tell you how many seniors I had 
call my office saying oh, I cannot do this, it is too hard.
  Then when we show them they say, oh, it is not so hard. Fifty-four 
percent of the people who signed up signed up themselves. The tools 
provided made it not so hard.
  Yet colleague after colleague, and I read it in the paper and I saw 
it, spent their entire time and effort scaring seniors, shameful 
behavior for elected officials.
  Of course, now we come to the end and they want to extend the 
deadline. They should have been out there the last few weeks saying 
sign up, sign up. Let me tell you, I can't tell you how many we helped. 
I would just like to remind you that your own bill had an earlier 
deadline than the bill we are dealing with. So let us pull together, 
get everybody to sign up. Then let us let the plans deliver the goods.
  You who said this was complicated ought to be the first one who wants 
these plans to have some time to deliver the services to the seniors 
who signed up, the 90 percent, the seniors who signed up, so we can 
make sure that the plans will run according to Hoyle, according to 
their promises, that they will deliver, and that we can know whether 
there is any fine-tuning that needs to be done before the next round of 
sign-ups.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the difference may have been our 
legislation was written by senior advocates while theirs was written by 
the drug companies and the HMOs.
  I yield 2 minutes to my friend from Maine (Mr. Allen), who has fought 
to make this program work way better than the drug companies and the 
insurance companies designed it to.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. 
Speaker, there is no amount of public relations spin or resolutions 
which can cover up the frustration that people felt in the beginning.
  People in my office, on this side of the aisle, all of us, were 
trying to help people sign up because we knew that this bill would help 
some of our constituents. This is one area where we agree. There are 
some people who are helped by this legislation. Not surprising, we are 
moving over half a trillion dollars into this program over 10 years, 
billions and billions of dollars in excess funds to the pharmaceutical 
companies, billions and billions of dollars in excess funds to the 
insurance companies, but it is absolutely true. Seniors do get some of 
it.
  But the problem with this legislation is, from the beginning, 
confusion, inability of people to understand the program. The 
frustration has been just remarkable.
  The problem here today is that the people who have not signed up for 
this program are often the people who need the drug assistance the 
most.

                              {time}  1930

  They are the ones who are not signing up.
  Nationally, only about 1.7 million of the 7.2 million low income 
seniors are actually receiving the low income subsidies that this 
legislation should provide. That is what is happening in Maine. We have 
6,000 low income residents who have been in the State Pharmaceutical 
Assistance Program, and, as of today, we still don't have word from CMS 
that these people are eligible to receive the low income subsidy, so 
they are not getting the coverage they need.
  What is wrong with some additional time? Why slam the door on these 
people, make them pay this Bush prescription drug tax for the rest of 
their lives? Why not give them the extra time and do this program 
right? That is what we ought to be doing, so the people who need the 
coverage the most can get it.
  One final comment: The gentlewoman from Connecticut said millions 
have signed up. Many of those millions didn't sign up at all. They were 
automatically enrolled.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me clarify a statement that Mr. McDermott attributed 
to me about keeping the pressure on senior citizens. I did not say 
that. The New York Times said that.
  He said he had a 96-year-old mother who is confused. I have a 99-
year-old mother. I am sure he was like me, a good son, who helped his 
mother figure out what is the plan that was best for her, and she 
signed up and she is very happy with it.
  He also alluded, as did the last speaker, to low income seniors who 
are under a deadline. CMS has made it very clear if they are entitled 
to the low income subsidy, that the deadline will not apply and they 
will take care of that problem. So the problem is a nonexistent one.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of House Resolution 802, 
encouraging America's seniors to take a serious look at the new 
prescription drug benefit under Medicare. There is less than one week 
left before the May 15 deadline, and I want to encourage all seniors to 
take this hard and thoughtful look to find the program that best fits 
their needs.
  There are more than 37 million seniors enjoying the benefit of 
prescription drug coverage, and I want to share with you some the 
success stories I have heard from the great state of Georgia.
  Mary and Jerry O'Brien of Cobb County sent me an e-mail highlighting 
their success with Medicare part D. Mr. O'Brien wrote, ``I went to 
Medicare.gov and I found a comparison of various programs. I chose one 
for my wife for $70 a month which has no deductible. We had no 
prescription insurance before and find Medicare part D to be very 
effective. We saved enough on the first prescriptions to pay for two 
months of premiums. I realize the program got off to a shaky start, but 
as far as I am concerned, it is now working well.''
  Mae Thacker of Kingston, Georgia, and her husband had heard the 
Medicare benefit was too difficult and wouldn't save them any money. 
But after learning a little about the program and enrolling, Mae was 
sold on Medicare part D. She was paying $781 a month for her drugs. 
Now, Mr. Speaker, with the Medicare part D plan she pays only $178 a 
month, saving $600 each and every month.
  Mr. Speaker, I can go on and on highlighting the success stories I 
have heard from the Eleventh District, but I will just mention quickly 
an additional two.
  Lola Squires of Cedartown lives on a fixed income and she qualified 
for the low income supplement. Last year, her monthly drug bill was 
$1,016. However, when she got on Medicare part D, she is now paying, 
guess what, $27 a month, saving more than $900 per month on her 
medications.
  Cornelia Kinnebrew of Rome was paying more than $700 a month. Now, 
with the new drug plan, she pays only $37 a month, saving $600.

[[Page H2477]]

  So, Mr. Speaker, America's seniors should not take my word for it, 
but listen to their peers and hear what this program is doing for them. 
Medicare part D is worth looking into. Take the time to call 1-800-
Medicare and find out what plan works best for you and your needs, and 
do it today.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).
  (Mr. CARDIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I must tell you that I agree and have been 
talking to my seniors that they need to, and I quote, ``review 
carefully all the options that are available to them and determine 
whether enrollment in a Medicare prescription drug plan best meets 
their needs.''
  I have had over 30 town hall meetings since this bill has been 
enacted, and at these meetings I have had people from our Office on 
Aging to help seniors go through the different options to make a 
decision whether they need or they don't need to join a plan and which 
plan they should join.
  But, Mr. Speaker, the problem is, the information that was made 
available to them when this bill was passed was wrong. The information 
is extremely confusing. In my State we have 47 or 48 different plans 
with deductibles that range by great numbers, and it is very difficult 
for my constituents to understand this bill.
  I have gotten e-mails from people in Maryland who tell me the bill is 
very confusing, and they should at least be allowed more time to make a 
decision. I got e-mails saying that this one constituent is going to 
make a decision, but he is not sure whether it is right or wrong 
because he needed more time and he doesn't have that time.
  So, Mr. Speaker, yes, we want our constituents to make the right 
decision, and we urge them to focus in on making the right decision, 
but it is absolutely wrong that we are not extending the May 15 
deadline. Our constituents need more time, and we certainly shouldn't 
be imposing a lifetime penalty because a senior perhaps makes the wrong 
decision in part because of our failure to get the right information to 
our constituents.
  Mr. Speaker, I would have hoped that we would be using the time now 
to correct this bill. This bill is structurally flawed. We need to make 
this a real benefit within Medicare. We need to take on the cost of 
prescription drugs. We need to deal with the coordination of the 
benefits with retiree benefits so that retirement plans don't terminate 
retirees' prescription drug coverage. We need to do all that.
  We need to cover drugs that aren't covered today. I could tell you of 
a person in my district, Barbara Waters, who had her drugs for epilepsy 
covered before this bill was passed, and now it is not covered because 
it is under a class of drugs not covered under Medicare. We need to 
correct that. There is a whole group of organizations that are urging 
us to correct the bill.
  So I appreciate the fact that we have a resolution on the floor 
urging seniors to focus on what is in their best interests under the 
law we passed, but what we should be doing is having a bill on the 
floor giving our seniors more time, eliminating this penalty and then 
correcting the mistakes that we made when we passed this bill.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
for yielding and the gentleman from Georgia for his leadership on this 
issue.
  I want to tell the story about Bennie and Katheryn, real people in 
Vidalia, Georgia. This is a couple who was paying $2,200 a month for 
their prescription drug bill. One of my staffers happened to be related 
to them and heard about it, and he went over there and sat down with 
them on all their drug needs and went over the website. He did not make 
a recommendation, but he showed them the information and they made 
their own choice. Now their total drug cost has gone from $2,200 a 
month to $104 a month, a 95 percent savings.
  When they saw stuff like that, they did not believe it was possible, 
because they too had heard some of the rhetoric, some of the angry, 
some of the bitter rhetoric that comes out of Washington, D.C., and 
they thought, well, there is no way. But, in fact they are enjoying it 
now, and they need that extra income just like so many other millions 
of seniors do around the country.
  Mr. Speaker, I heard former Secretary of Health and Human Services 
Tommy Thompson say that when 
Gladys starts talking to Mabel, this thing will really take hold. And, 
indeed, that is the truth. My office has had 48 workshops helping 
people decide which program works for them. Maybe it doesn't work for 
them, because I am always quick to say, it might not be the best thing 
for everybody. That is part of what a public offering is. Sometimes it 
works, sometimes it doesn't. But it works for most people. It is about 
a 50 percent to 60 percent savings for most people. Bennie got a 95 
percent savings. Not everybody is going to get that.
  But the interesting thing is that Gladys is talking to Mabel, because 
my friend Gil Gutknecht always quotes Ronald Reagan in saying that 
markets are more powerful than armies. In this case we have an army of 
people saying this is a horrible program that should be thrown away, 
thrown out; it is bad, it is wicked, it is the Republicans up to no 
good.
  But look at the market. In my district, with my 48 workshops, our 
market penetration is about 70 percent right now. The interesting thing 
is one of my colleagues who is not in favor of this bill has about the 
same penetration, and he hasn't held one workshop.
  That is one the ironies of it. I thought I am going to go out as a 
salesperson and really wave the flag and tell everybody how great it 
is. I am irrelevant. The market is more powerful than the army, the 
army for it or the army against it. The market is selling this thing, 
not the Republican Party, not the Democrat Party, wherever they may 
stand on it at the moment.
  The reality is the seniors like it, and the reality is our seniors 
need it, because so many of them were having to choose between food on 
their table and prescription drugs.
  My mom, who takes Tamoxifen from now on for the rest of her life, and 
my dad who has diabetes and their friends, they have some choices. Not 
everybody is going to sign up for it, but everybody is aware that the 
program is out there.
  I will close with a quote from my good friend from Minnesota, who had 
voted against this bill. He said he has moved from being an atheist to 
an agnostic, but pretty soon he is going to be a holy roller and a 
believer like everybody else, because markets are stronger than armies.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Chicago, Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), who has been fighting in her 
district to explain this bill and to improve it.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, there are times that I wonder whether my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle live in a different reality from the rest 
of us. This resolution encourages senior citizens and persons with 
disabilities to carefully review all the part D private plan options 
before them and determine whether to purchase a policy.
  We all want senior citizens and disabled people to make informed 
choices, and we have been helping them, but the reality is there is no 
way that the millions of beneficiaries who have not enrolled are going 
to be able to do that in the next 5 days.
  The Republican resolution completely ignores the complicated mess 
that the Republican Congress created in part D. It ignores the fact 
that current HHS Secretary Leavitt's parents, who he helped, got it 
wrong and had to change plans.
  It ignores the Kaiser Family Foundation report that nearly half of 
all citizens don't know about the May 15 deadline or the lifetime 
financial punishment they will face if they miss it, permanent higher 
premiums as long as they live.
  It ignores the GAO report that the Medicare hotline gave inaccurate 
or inadequate information on which was the best plan to 60 percent of 
the callers.
  It ignores the fact that independent counselors are inundated and 
unable to provide unbiased advice to sort out the dozens of private 
plans available.

[[Page H2478]]

  It ignores the Family USA Report that three out of four low income 
seniors have not signed up.
  It ignores the fact that half of the seniors who didn't have drug 
coverage last year still don't have it today. That is 10 million 
people.
  It ignores the fact that yesterday's CNN poll said that 47 percent of 
seniors said the part D program isn't working.
  As hard as the Republicans may work to ignore reality, the real 
reality out there for most people, it won't go away. And the pressure 
should not be on older and disabled Americans to act over the next 5 
days. It should be on the Republican majority to extend the deadline 
and fix this mess.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  In spite of the doom and gloom, I am pleased to say to Ms. Schakowsky 
that in her State of Illinois, 72 percent of her seniors feel it is a 
good idea and have signed up. I think that is a good percentage.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am confused by that. Are you saying 
72 percent chose to sign up of those eligible?
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Seventy-two percent of those eligible are on the 
program, yes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I am confused. Did they choose to sign up, or were 
some forced to sign up from Medicaid?
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Surely as our ranking member on the the Health 
Subcommittee, you know on dual eligibles they are signed up under the 
program, as the law provides. So dual eligibles are included.
  Mr. Speaker, I will reclaim my time. The gentleman has more time 
remaining than I do. I will be glad to debate him on his time.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Burgess).

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Health and Chairwoman Johnson for bringing this important bill to the 
floor of Congress this evening.
  Mr. Speaker, we have heard some talk about how complicated the 
program is and how confusing it is. I would like to just take a moment 
to point out that if you have a couple of things at your disposal it is 
not that confusing at all. And if you will put your prescriptions in 
one hand and in the other hand your Medicare card, and then call 1-800 
Medicare, the people at the other end can help you with choosing the 
right prescription drug coverage for you.
  Yes, there are a lot of plans. In my State of Texas, there are 20 
different drug plans that have a variety of different permutations, and 
36 different prescription drug options are out there.
  But if you approach it from cost, coverage and convenience, look at 
how much the cost is, if that is your most important driver, look at 
the coverage of the medicines provided, if that is your most important 
driver, or if you want to get mail order or your mom-and-pop pharmacy 
down the street, if that is the most important thing, make that the 
issue that becomes the top of the list, and then cost, coverage and 
convenience.
  You can go through with their Plan Finder tool on the Web site, 
www.medicare.gov, or again 1-800 Medicare, have your prescriptions 
ready so you know what you are taking and the dosage you are taking, 
and they will help you with that.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Inglis of South Carolina). The gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Brown) has 4 minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) has \1/2\ minute remaining, and the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) has \1/2\ minute remaining.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow what Dr. Burgess says, but GAO 
says 60 percent of the calls to 1-800 Medicare they have given out 
wrong information, and I wish our government would get organized before 
they penalize seniors for not being organized.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Madison, 
Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin), who has worked hard to make this bill written 
by the drug companies a better bill, a better law.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, it has really been clear from day one that 
the Medicare part D prescription drug program was planned with the best 
interests of drug companies and insurance companies but not seniors in 
mind.
  This plan was wrongfully conceived, and then poorly implemented so 
that seniors had to struggle to understand a confusing mass of plans, 
prices and protocols.
  As we approach the deadline by which seniors must enroll in a plan or 
be faced forever more with a financial penalty, it is obvious that we 
need a new prescription for progress.
  Just last week, a GAO report found that the information about the 
part D benefit provided by CMS through the hotline and handbooks and 
their Web site was full of errors. We should not penalize seniors for a 
poorly designed program which was poorly implemented.
  Mr. Speaker, we must change this deadline now and allow seniors 
adequate time to study their options and choose the drug plan that best 
fits their needs. Instead of passing this meaningless resolution, we 
should pass legislation to extend the deadline and truly help seniors.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, may I ask my friend their plans?
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have 30 seconds 
remaining, and I would have the right to close. I would reserve it with 
no other speakers that I intend to use.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. I have 30 seconds remaining. I will be 
the last speaker before you.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I would like to be the next to last speaker under 
the rules. So whichever of you wants to go.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, my friends on the other side 
are confused. First of all, they know that most of the seniors that 
they speak of have been automatically enrolled through Medicaid. But 
they also know that only 55 percent know that the deadline is May 15 
and only 53 percent know the lifetime penalty.
  Mr. Speaker, I have tried to make lemonade out of lemons. For the 
last 2 months, I have had those enrollment meetings, and in those 
meetings I have found the confusion and as well the 1-800 number does 
not work.
  Mr. Speaker, I will have a meeting on May 15, the morning of May 15. 
I will open up the opportunity for seniors to enroll on the spot. But 
the contractor that has been hired by HHS only has three computers for 
my constituents to use, drawing on the City of Houston.
  So what I say is do not waste time on this resolution that I do 
support, extend the deadline and end the penalty, and do not pressure 
senior citizens with frail health conditions. Do not pressure low 
income seniors. This is not the opportunity to pressure seniors. This 
is an opportunity to provide for the Medicare prescription of all 
seniors eligible to enroll.
  Mr. Speaker, I would ask, extend the deadline past May 15 and end the 
lifetime penalty for our seniors. They deserve our respect and 
appreciation.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, let me just correct a few facts on this record, because 
for those watching this debate I want them to understand two things. 
First of all, all low income seniors can continue to enroll without 
penalty. That is just a fact. No low income senior has an enrollment 
deadline.
  Secondly, this GAO report that was referred to earlier, it actually 
says that CMS's help line accurately and completely answered callers' 
questions two-thirds of the time. They go on to say that CMS provided 
accurate and complete responses to calls about beneficiaries' 
eligibility for help 90 percent of the time.
  So we have worked hard. We have done well. Seniors are signing up and 
saving money.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I would correct my friend from Connecticut. Not all low 
income seniors can enroll without penalty, only some low income seniors 
can enroll without penalty. I hear her bragging that two-thirds of the 
time, two-

[[Page H2479]]

thirds of the time you call 1-800 Medicare you get correct information.
  That means one-third of the time you do not. So we are not penalizing 
the administration for not being able to get this law up and running 
correctly. Nobody has lost their job over that. But we are going to 
penalize seniors who have not made up their mind because of this 
confusing law, because they were getting wrong information from the 1-
800 Medicare number that we talk about on the floor.
  We are going to charge seniors as much as a 7 percent penalty for the 
rest of their lives if they do not get this together by November.
  Mr. Speaker, a Republican pharmacist in my district said to me, he 
said, ``President Bush might as well have handed a blank legal pad to 
the drug industry and said write this new Medicare law.''
  Congress and the President wrote a confusing plan at the behest of 
the HMOs and the drug companies, and then Congress and the President 
are saying that seniors should have to pay a penalty, seniors in 
Cincinnati and Dayton and Columbus and Toledo and Mansfield and 
Chillicothe and all over my State and all over Connecticut and all over 
Georgia and all over Minnesota have to pay a penalty because the drug 
industry and the HMOs and those lobbyists in Washington got this 
Congress to write a law like that. That hardly seems fair.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just ask my friends on the other side of the 
aisle, please ask President Bush to extend this deadline so seniors do 
not have to pay a penalty for this very confusing new drug law.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, this has indeed been an interesting debate. Here we are 
having people who did not vote for the bill who for 40 years controlled 
this House and kept saying to seniors, we are going to provide you with 
a drug benefit and never delivered.
  The Republicans delivered. They did not like the bill. They still do 
not like the bill. Now they say they do not want a deadline, but the 
bill that they drafted had a March 1 cutoff with penalties following 
that.
  Ours is more generous than that. The purpose of today's debate is to 
simply remind seniors, this is a voluntary program. If you want to sign 
up you should do so before May 15.
  The confusion, yes, there is confusion because there are a lot of 
choices out there. Our friends on the other side of the aisle said this 
will not work and nobody will have any choices. The truth of the matter 
is, there probably are maybe too many choices, but it is better to have 
choices than none at all.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, rather than bringing legislation to the 
House floor that would actually help senior citizens get the 
prescription drugs they need and address some of the problems that they 
are having with the new drug benefit, the Republican leadership has 
brought forward an ``advertisement'' in the form of a meaningless 
resolution that does nothing, absolutely nothing, to make it easier for 
seniors to enroll in the prescription drug plan.
  Instead, they are encouraging our constituents to beat an artificial 
deadline and enroll in these plans without having accurate information 
to prevent them from enrolling in a plan that does not meet their 
needs.
  The independent Government watchdog agency, the Government 
Accountability Office, recently reported that a good deal of the 
information that Medicare is providing on this new drug benefit is 
wrong or incomprehensible to the average beneficiary. For example, 
Medicare representatives gave an incorrect answer 60 percent of the 
time when they were asked to help a beneficiary find the lowest-cost 
plan to enroll in.
  These findings also point to larger problems. Because of inaccurate, 
complicated, or confusing information, seniors have not been given a 
fair shake. Why is the House not addressing these matters?
  We should be here today voting on a bill to extend the May 15 
deadline and helping seniors avoid an unfair and unnecessary penalty. 
Instead, we have a meaningless resolution encouraging seniors to do 
exactly what they have been doing, which is to evaluate their options. 
I encourage that--so I will support the resolution. But we should be 
doing much more to help seniors.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) that the House suspend the rules and 
agree to the resolution, H. Res. 802.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will 
be postponed.

                          ____________________