[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 56 (Wednesday, May 10, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H2495-H2499]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MEDICARE PART D
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania). Under the
Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of
the majority leader.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to take this hour
designated by the Speaker, by the leadership, we refer to it as the
leadership hour, and to take an opportunity to talk about things that
are important to this majority, are important, indeed, to the American
people and that is what we are going to do during this hour.
We are going to talk about the Medicare part D prescription drug
benefit. But I want to digress for just a minute, Mr. Speaker. Our
colleagues on the other side of the aisle just spent the better part of
an hour talking about the budget. During the course of that colloquy,
we heard the word ``hypocrisy'' used a number of times. I want to
address this just for a moment, because the hypocrisy, of course, is to
suggest that the tax cuts that this administration and this Republican
majority have enacted and just today continued those tax cuts, refused
to let the other side of the aisle in this body raise taxes on the
American people.
They spent a good deal of time talking about the fact that the rich
get the biggest tax break. Well, the hypocrisy of that argument, Mr.
Speaker, is that the rich, if you call someone with an adjusted gross
income of $75,000 a year rich, then so be it. But these are the people
that are paying most of the taxes. These are the people that are paying
at the 39.6 marginal rate, the highest rate. So for them in any across-
the-board tax cut, and indeed that is exactly what this is, every
taxpayer saves money. But those that are paying the most in taxes with
an across-the-board cut, Mr. Speaker, are quite naturally on a dollar
amount, not a percentage amount but on a dollar amount, are going to
get the biggest tax break. Of course they are.
But what is that enabling them to do, the small business men and
women in this country who create probably 75 percent of the jobs? It is
to grow their businesses, because of the opportunity to rapidly
depreciate for capital improvements and bricks and mortar and putting
in a new product line in their business, to hire some of these people
who today because of their unemployment are not paying any taxes.
It is really hard, I think, and I think my colleagues understand
this, the American people understand it, it is really pretty hard to
get a tax refund when you are not paying any taxes. But indeed we do
that, too. The child tax credit, increasing them from $600 to $1,000.
Those are refundable tax credits that are going to people who indeed
are not paying any taxes.
Mr. Speaker, again, as I said at the outset, what we are talking
about tonight has got to be one of the most important things that we
have done for the American people since Medicare was first passed when
I was a freshman medical student in 1965, where there was a part A, the
hospital part; a part B, the doctor part; but no part D, the drug part.
For many years, I am going to say probably within 5 years of the
passage of that bill, people were starting to wonder why we didn't have
that benefit of prescription drugs when more and more of these wonder
drugs, whether we are talking about pharmaceuticals or antibiotics or
whether we are talking about beta blockers for heart disease and high
blood pressure and irregular heart rhythms, whether we are talking
about oral, by-mouth chemotherapy. And we realized, of course, it
wasn't just surgery, cutting something out, a diseased organ, that we
really need to put our emphasis on, it is preventive health care and
allowing people to be able to afford to get prescription drugs to lower
the blood sugar, to prevent the ravages of diabetes, such as losing
your limb or having your kidneys fail and going on renal dialysis and
maybe eventually needing a kidney transplant. Or to treat high blood
pressure, a condition which for a long time has no symptoms, absolutely
no symptoms. It is incipient. We use that word. A person could end up
in the emergency room having already had a stroke before anybody knew
that they had high blood pressure. Or talk about coronary artery
disease which most people have in adult life. And until we realized
that elevated cholesterol and certain type lipids in the blood stream
is what caused those plaques to form in those coronary arteries that
supply blood, and oxygen, of course, to the heart muscle, when we
finally realized that if we could lower cholesterol and lipids in the
body, that we could prevent heart disease, coronary artery disease,
heart attacks, and not have to resort to what we know, of course, today
as bypass surgery. It is such a compassionate thing to prevent these
diseases rather than to treat them when people are really, really in
danger of sudden death or a stroke.
That is what this is all about. That is what this Republican
leadership, President Bush, has delivered to the American people, a
promise that other Congresses have made.
{time} 2230
I can assure you that work was done on this in the past, but former
Presidents, former administrations, former Congresses just failed to
deliver.
And so we are very proud to stand here tonight and talk about this
wonderful addition to Medicare, the part D prescription drug part. It
is optional. It is just like part B, Mr. Speaker; a person doesn't have
to sign up for it.
Yes, it is premium based. There is a monthly premium often deducted
from the Social Security check of those who can afford it. And those
who cannot afford it, it is not going to cost them anything.
The low-income seniors who qualify for the Medicare supplement on
this wonderful program, for them, they pay no deductible, they pay no
monthly premium. There is no gap in the coverage. They have
catastrophic coverage, and the only cost may be $1 for a month's supply
of a generic drug, or up to $5 for a month's supply of a brand name
drug.
There are approximately 42.7 current Medicare beneficiaries in this
country today. And, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, I want to draw your
attention to my first slide because this really shows you the success
that we have had in this 6-month opportunity, starting November 15
through upcoming, in 6 days, May 15. Of those almost 43 million
Medicare beneficiaries, most of them, because of age 65, possibly 5 or
6 million because of a disability at a younger age--look at this, Mr.
Speaker--37 million seniors now have prescription drug coverage under
Medicare part D, 37 million.
Now, we want to get this up to 40 million in the next 6 days. And
that is really why I am here tonight, to get this message out to let
those few stragglers, if you will, in regard to signing up, to do
everything we can. And we will do that back in our districts. We have
been doing it. In fact, I have been working on that, talking about
trying to get that message out for over 2 years, when we first passed
this Medicare Modernization Prescription Drug Act in November of 2003,
a very proud moment for this physician-Member, by the way, to support
such a wonderful program.
But now we have got the latest count, 37 million, and that is, I
think, a fantastic achievement in this first sign -p period.
Why is it so important? Well, seniors, if you can see on this next
slide, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, seniors are saving an average of
$1,100 a year with Medicare prescription drug coverage. Maybe more
importantly, though, that is average for the 37 million that are signed
up. But maybe more importantly, the low-income seniors are saving an
average of $3,700 a year. $3,700 a year, that is a lot of money.
Mr. Speaker, in regard to that number that I just shared with my
colleagues, $3,700 a year for those low-income seniors, and that is why
we are pushing so hard in these next 6 days.
Of the 6 million, I said 37 million have signed up out of almost 43
million. Of those 6 million that haven't, we are estimating, pretty
accurately, that close to 3 million of those are low income. They
qualify for this subsidy, and some of them, as I say, their only cost
of these lifesaving prescriptions would be a $1 copay. And so it is
very important, most important that we get
[[Page H2496]]
the word out to them in these next few days, and to get them signed up,
because this is literally a Godsend.
It is a no-brainer. And for whatever reason, maybe they have heard
some of the disingenuous, well, downright, you know, they talked about
the H word in their hour just a few minutes ago, hypocrisy from the
other side. Regrettably, I feel that that is part of the reason why the
most needy, 3 million of them, have missed the opportunity thus far,
but we are determined to get the word out to them. That is the
compassionate thing to do and we are doing it.
Proof of the pudding, Mr. Speaker. More than a million seniors have
enrolled in Medicare part D just since April. I am talking about a 2-
week period. So we are talking about almost 500,000 people have signed
up just in the last 2\1/2\ weeks. So we are getting the word out, and
thank God, our seniors are responding.
Well, how is the program working for those that may have signed up on
November 15, 2005, and immediately, January 1, 2006, started getting
their prescriptions with a prescription drug benefit? Before that, of
course, we know that the seniors, probably the only group of patients
that go to the drug store, went to the drug store and had to pay
sticker price. They weren't getting any deals, and nobody negotiated
any discount for them because of volume buying.
It was just like going to buy a new automobile and paying that price
on the windshield that we refer to as sticker price. Most people don't
have to do that. But that is what the seniors were doing. Well, really,
that is what some were doing. A lot were just too embarrassed to even
go into the drug store knowing that they couldn't afford to pay even
half that amount.
But what has happened since January 1 over this 5-month period? Well,
90, and I want to call my colleagues' attention to this next slide. I
know the printing is a little small, but look closely because these
numbers are very telling. Ninety-one percent of seniors say their plan
is convenient to use at their pharmacy.
And I want to thank our pharmacists, too, by the way, especially our
independent pharmacists because a lot of times it is just them and
maybe a clerk up front, and yet they are spending the time to explain;
and I know it is at significant cost to their bottom line. And I think
that they are to be commended because they have helped make this
program a success, and we are committed to continuing to work with
them.
I know, Mr. Speaker, in my district, I have met just within the last
10 days with some good personal friends who are independent
pharmacists, and they are bringing some concerns to us. There is still
some heartburn on their part, and I understand that, and we are going
to continue to work with them because of the great work that they have
done for us.
Going back to the slide, 90 percent say that they know how their plan
works and they know how to use it. Eighty-five percent say their plan
covers all the medicines they need. And nearly 80 percent are happy
with the amount of coverage they have, and this is so important, they
would recommend their plan to others.
I don't want to miss this opportunity to say, my colleagues, and I am
sure on both sides of the aisle, you have had similar experiences. My
mom, God bless my mom. I am thinking about her of course a lot this
week because of Mother's Day coming up on Sunday. But the greatest
Mother's Day gift that I gave to her, Mom is 88 years old, I don't
think she would mind me telling that because she looks like she is 68,
and if it wasn't for a couple of gimpy knees, she would still be out on
the golf course.
But I sat down with Mom a couple of months ago and we went through
this. It was a little bit time consuming, maybe a little bit more
confusing than I thought or she thought it would be. But she is saving
about $1,200 a year now. And this is what we are talking about, real,
real savings.
Mom's very happy with the program. She picked her own drug store,
very close by her home in Aiken, South Carolina, and she didn't have to
change a thing and is very pleased with the program.
Listen to what some of the senior organizations are saying about this
program today. And, Mr. Speaker, I remember during the debate, and of
course we got accused of passing this bill in the dark of night; I
would say to my colleagues in regard to that, we started the debate
late in the afternoon and we were determined to get our work done, so
we ended up on final passage, yes, in the dark of night. But had we
started our debate in the dark of night, we would have passed this bill
in the bright sunshine of the afternoon. That is just the way the clock
works.
I look at my job, Mr. Speaker, as a 24/7 job, and I am not a clock-
watcher, just like I wasn't when I practiced medicine and delivered
babies before coming to this body. People were always coming to me
saying, don't all babies come in the middle of the night? And I said,
well, no. But it seems that way because the patient either comes in in
the middle of the night and ends up delivering in the daytime or comes
in in the daytime and ends up delivering in the middle of the night.
We delivered this baby in the middle of the night, but a beautiful,
beautiful baby it was and is.
And the other side criticized that great senior organization known as
the AARP, of which I have been a member for, started at age 50, I won't
tell you how many years. I don't want to tell my age because my wife
says that will tell her age.
But they were so mad, so mad that this organization, AARP, with 37
million seniors as part of that group, had the audacity to support a
Republican bill.
Look what the AARP says today, Mr. Speaker. With the Medicare drug
program, more older Americans than ever before have access to
affordable prescription drugs.
The focus right now needs to be on helping people, not playing
politics. Discouraging enrollment is a disservice to the millions who
could be saving money on prescription drug bills. That's a quote from
the president and CEO of the AARP, Bill Novelli. And I know Mr.
Novelli, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle know him and know
that he doesn't play politics. He is just stating the facts. No
hypocrisy here, Mr. Speaker.
Well, I am not a regular reader of the New York Times, maybe the
Washington Times. The New York Times is not known as a bastion of
conservatism. But listen to what they say: ``The Medicare drug
benefit's success depends heavily on getting lots of healthy people to
sign up so that their premiums can help subsidize medicine for the
chronically ill. The May 15 deadline should serve as a useful product
to force fence-sitters to make a decision.'' Now, that is a New York
Times editorial, April 3, 2006.
Mr. Speaker, when we were debating, we had this resolution, Nancy
Johnson, the distinguished chairwoman of the Health Subcommittee of
Ways and Means, put forward a resolution this evening encouraging all
Members of this body to work hard over this next week to get people
signed up. But the other side continues to try to put up a fence to be
obstructionist to say, you know, don't sign up, and criticizing us for
encouraging them to sign up, saying that we are cruel, that we are
going to enact a penalty if they don't.
Well, Mr. Speaker, the fact is, a lot of people, good people, good
seniors are just like this senior. They have a tendency to
procrastinate.
{time} 2245
If it was not for the April 15 deadline, I would never get my tax
return in. Even with that, if there is an opportunity to extend it
without significant penalty, I am going to take that opportunity. I
have done that probably every year for the last 10 or so, waiting until
absolutely until the last minute when really I had the facts, I had the
information, and I needed to go ahead and get that done. But I just
kind of put it off until the last minute. That is why we have a
deadline. It is not to be cruel or to be coercing or forcing anybody to
do anything.
But, clearly, we anticipate that because of that deadline, and kind
of a wake-up call to people, that 1.6 million more will sign up between
now and next Monday. That is what that is all about. The New York Times
certainly understands that. I can't understand why our colleagues on
the other side of the aisle who probably, most of whom read that
newspaper every day, it is
[[Page H2497]]
kind of maybe sort of biblical for them. They can't understand that, or
maybe they missed that particular article.
Listen to what the St. Petersburg Times said. Here is good news.
Without exception, every senior I saw on the way out of the Gulfport
Senior Center, that is in St. Petersburg, was happy or relieved.
Carolyn Toliver, Dallas Texas Area on Aging. Carolyn Toliver, the
benefits counseling coordinator at the Dallas Area Agency on Aging says
she is not phased by the prospect of a last-minute surge. She even
admits to wishing for one. I hope we are overrun, she said. This is a
generous benefit. I don't want anyone to miss out on it.
Here, again, from the New York Times editorial pages, it says many
seniors are clearly saving money on drugs purchases. I quote,
complaints and call waiting times are diminishing and many previously
uninsured patients are clearly saving money on drug purchases. That was
in The New York Times, an article entitled Medicare Drug Challenges. It
was an editorial, actually, on April 3rd of this year.
Mr. Speaker, the news indeed, is good despite, again, a lot of
negativism on the other side. There were a number of things that were
suggested when the opposition for this program was so strong. But
today, as I pointed out at the outset, 37 million have signed up.
Listen to this breakdown, because this is important too; 8.9 million
enrolled in the stand-alone prescription drug plan, almost 9 million,
5.9 million are enrolled some Medicare Advantage. That is the program
that used to be Medicare+Choice, but because of Medicare modernization,
Mr. Speaker, it is much, much improved. Almost 6 million of the so-
called dual eligibles, those people that because of their low-income
and age were eligible not only for Medicare but Medicaid.
Almost 7 million retirees are enrolled in a Medicare retiree subsidy.
That is a supplemental plan that includes prescription drug coverage.
There are still people that had the option, and I think is real
important for us to remember that nobody is forced into Medicare part
D. If they have got something that is just as good if not better, then
we have encouraged them to stay in those programs. They are.
Then, of course, there are 3.5 million that are covered under Federal
retiree coverage, 1.9 million are could have had under TRICARE, 1.6
million are covered through the Federal employee health benefit plan,
and then 5.8 million Medicare beneficiaries have some alternative
source of what we referred to as credible prescription drug coverage.
Some examples of that, Mr. Speaker, would be like Veterans Affairs,
people are getting their medication. They are 65, they are on Medicare,
they are eligible, part A and part B. But as far as the prescription
drug part, they are utilizing the Veterans Administration. There are
about 3.2 million that are using the VA. There are probably at least
100,000 that are getting their prescriptions through the Indian Health
Service.
There are maybe another half a million who are still working at age
65 and older, and they have a health insurance program that includes
prescription drugs. Even though they are eligible for Medicare, they
opt for those programs.
If those programs, we call them credible programs, if they are just
as good or better than the part D, and then something happens to one of
those plans, maybe the premium is raised, maybe the copay is raised.
Maybe the things that are covered are lessened. The coverage is not as
good. Then a senior, and this is important information, this question
is asked almost every time I have a town hall meeting, then if they
want to switch into Medicare part D, that can be done, Mr. Speaker,
without any penalty, without any penalty whatsoever. That kind of
brings me to a point that I think is very important to make.
Our friends on the other side keep saying that we are going to enact
a 7 percent Medicare tax. That is the 1 percent per month additional
premium that seniors have to pay if they miss the deadline. They say
that we are imposing that tax, that Medicare tax, on those who can
least afford it.
Now, here again, the H word that I referred to earlier, this time is
not hypocrisy, this time it is honesty and lack of. Because the fact is
that there will be no penalty for anyone, those almost 3 million that
we think are low income and have not signed up yet, we are going to
continue to look for them. We are going to continue to talk to them in
every way we can, print out, print media, television spots, town hall
meetings by Members, hopefully on both sides of the aisle, to get them
signed up beyond May 15, if they miss a deadline with absolutely no
penalty.
There will be a penalty for those others who are blessed with more
assets, more resources, more income, who failed to sign up for whatever
reason. But I guess the majority of those just would be simple
procrastination. They will have to pay that penalty.
So we are doing, I think, and that 37 million represents 87 percent
of Medicare beneficiaries we think will get to 90 percent by Monday.
For the first year of a program, and, indeed, the first of 6-month
opportunity to sign up, that ain't too shabby.
I think that as these that don't sign up that miss the deadline,
realize, and, of course, they are not going to be able to get into the
program until the next sign up period, which is November 15 of this
year through December 31. Even though they are going to be faced with a
7 percent additional premium, they are going to come in.
I think we are going to be approaching the high 90s, just like the
optional program part B that covers doctor care and outpatient surgery
and outpatient testing. That is such a good program that, of course,
was enacted in 1965. A lot of people back then said, oh, that is too
confusing. I am not sure I want to do that.
Well, you look, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues today, when people turn
65, there is no question because they have the history of the success
of part B. The same thing is going to happen with part D.
We are making great progress, and my own State of Georgia, I would be
remiss if I didn't give a little statistic on that. But we, in the
State of Georgia, overall, are approaching a 90 percent signup rate. We
have total people in Georgia now with prescription drug coverage on the
Medicaid, 785,000 and growing.
Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take a few minutes and talk about some of
the things that we have heard during the debate on this program. One of
the things that keeps coming up is this issue of drug reimportation, of
being able to buy medications either over the Internet, mail order from
another country, particularly Canada, or to actually, if you live on
the northern border to actually go across the border and buy
prescription drugs and get them a lot cheaper than they were in this
country.
Before we came forward in November of 2003 with this program, that is
what people were having to do. The seniors literally were being forced
to do something that was not approved by the secretary of HHS, the
Secretary under President Clinton, the Secretary under George H. W.
Bush, because there was some concern about safety, about packaging and
contamination and bioterrorism.
But, nevertheless, people were doing that, taking a chance and buying
those medications because they were saving. But listen to what's
happened since this program started January 1st of this year. This is
from an article in a newspaper in Minnesota, which is one of those
border States by the way.
While enrollment in the Medicare drug benefit rose by 9 percent,
sales of low-cost Canadian drugs last month fell by 52 percent.
Why do you think that happened, my fellow colleagues? It happened
because all of a sudden seniors were realizing now they were able to
get their medication from their corner druggist right down the street
at almost as low, maybe even as low or lower than what they were paying
in going across the border and buying prescription drugs and taking a
risk with their health.
So while I was concerned, and I think that if this program was not
working, that I would tend to agree with some of my colleagues who want
to say, well, it ought to be legal to buy drugs from Canada. I think
that we have negated the need for that with this program. That is what
I hope we would accomplish. Indeed we have.
There was just another thing, Mr. Speaker, that I want to talk about
too,
[[Page H2498]]
that is the pharmaceutical drug discount program. Our pharmaceutical
industry is a profitable industry. They get lambasted a lot by the
other side of the aisle, about making too much profits and that sort of
thing.
But I don't ever hear them commending the pharmaceutical industry
because of the compassion that they have shown with their prescription
drug discount program, not just for low-income seniors, but for low-
income everybody. They literally are giving away prescription drugs to
people who meet certain criteria. Maybe they are not eligible for
Medicaid in the State in which they live because they make a little bit
too much, or maybe they have a few too many assets.
But the pharmaceutical companies, and each one's programs, is a
little bit different. But, you know, let's say somebody is on Lipitor
or on Pravachol or on Prevocet or on one of these expensive
medications. They are literally getting those drugs for free.
{time} 2300
Some people that signed up for the Medicare part D have been
concerned because if they reach the donut hole and have to pay a lot
out of their pocket, they feel like maybe they are in a program that is
costing them more money because they had to come off of those
pharmaceutical prescription drug discount programs.
Well, the Inspector General had confused the pharmaceutical companies
a little bit, and there was some concern about these programs and if
they could legally continue. I want to tell you that Members of this
body, I think really on both sides of the aisle, went to CMS, talked
with the Inspector General and said, you know, that is not right. We
need to let these companies continue to do that.
Listen to what the result of that effort was, Mr. Speaker: Drug
makers can continue assistance programs for seniors. HHS secretary Mike
Leavitt: ``This is excellent news. In a legal opinion that could help
many thousands of Medicare beneficiaries, drug manufacturers were told
Tuesday,'' that was a couple of week ago, Mr. Speaker, ``that they can
continue giving free medicine to poor people even if they are enrolled
for the new drug benefit.''
Each year, large drug companies routinely give millions of free
prescriptions to the poor. However, most of the drug companies had said
that they would discontinue this practice for senior citizens now that
they could get coverage through Medicare.
We have reversed that. As Secretary Leavitt said, and I will give a
quote here, ``this is excellent news for the many people with Medicare
who have relied on these valuable patient assistance programs.''
The bottom line is a senior now can enjoy both the advantage of being
on a Medicare part D prescription drug program and also the benefit
when they get to the point where they otherwise would have to pay the
full price at somewhat of a discount out of their own pocket, then the
pharmaceutical companies can come in and fill that gap. A great
program.
Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take some time to talk about individual
cases. I think a lot of times my colleagues, we talk and tell facts and
try to make our points, but I don't think anything does that better
than what we refer to as anecdotal evidence. In other words, real live
situations, people that give their testimonial.
Listen to some of these. Mae Thacker of Kingston, Georgia, that is in
the Eleventh District, my district in Bartow County, northwest of
Atlanta, May was paying $781 a month for her medications. That is a lot
of money. She had heard Medicare part D wouldn't save her any money and
wasn't worth her time.
That is sad, because that is the kind of rhetoric that far too many
seniors have been hearing over the last couple of years.
But its detractors were wrong. Mae learned about the program and she
enrolled. She enrolled. And, guess what? With Medicare part D, Mae
Thacker now pays only $178 a month. $781 a month with no Medicare part
D; $178 a month with it. Total savings, my colleagues, $600 a month.
That means I think that Mae Thacker can now pay her utility bill, buy
her groceries, have a roof over her head and afford to get those
prescription drugs that can save her life.
Here is another. This is an e-mail that I received again from the
Eleventh District of Georgia. Jerry O'Brien, Cobb County, my home
county for the last 30 years. Here is what Jerry says. ``I went to
Medicare.gov, www.medicare.gov, and I found a comparison of various
programs. I chose one for my wife at a premium of $70 a month, but no
deductible.
The deductible, I think everybody knows, cannot be more than $250 a
month for Medicare to approve that as a prescription drug plan. It
can't be more than $250 a month, but it can be less. Jerry found one by
going to the website that had no deductible and a $70 a month premium.
Jerry goes on to say, ``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 the premiums.'' So the first
prescriptions they saved $140.
``I realize the program got off to a shaky start, but as far as I am
concerned, it is now working well.'' Jerry O'Brien, Cobb County,
Georgia.
Let's go out to Colorado, about as far as you can get in this country
from Georgia, heading out west. Lyda, Lyda B lives in Colorado Springs,
Colorado. Lyda had no prescription drug coverage and she was paying
$1,200 a year for her medications. She found out she was eligible for
extra help as a low income senior.
Remember we talked about those, and really that has been the major
emphasis of my discussion tonight, about how important it is to get to
those 3 million here in the next 6 days. We are going to get close. We
are going to get close.
She found out she was eligible for the extra help, and, thank
goodness, Lyda enrolled in a plan for her, not only no deductible, but
no monthly premium. There is a premium, but Medicare pays for that
because she qualifies because of low income and low assets.
With Medicare Part D, Lyda now pays only $3 per prescription, saving
her hundreds of dollars a month. Just think about that. $3 a
prescription. A prescription would be a month's supply. If she were on
one drug, then she is paying $36 a year. If she were on two, it would
be $72 a year. If it were three, it would be just over $100. Compared
to $1,200? A great deal for Lyda. Thank God she has taken advantage of
it.
Mr. Speaker, here is another. I don't have but about 15 minutes left,
but I probably could spend 2 hours sharing these testimonials. Fern
from Peabody, Massachusetts, she was paying $2,100 a year for
medications. With Medicare Part D, Fern now pays only $660 a year. She
says the savings are worth the time, and the enrollment process was not
confusing or complicated.
There is lots of help. The health insurance assistance programs in
all 50 States, they are called different things, I think it is Georgia
Cares in the State of Georgia, but this organization, plus all these
senior organizations that volunteer their time at senior centers, maybe
at your local library, the pharmacist in the drugstores, particularly
the chain drugstores, CVS, Walgreens, Eckards, they have something
called Medicare Tuesdays, Medicare Part D Tuesdays, where a pharmacist,
instead of being behind a counter, there is one behind the counter
filling prescriptions, but there is another one dedicated all day long
to just sitting there and welcoming seniors to come in and let them
explain the program to them and give them some options and help them
get through the little confusion to get signed up.
These are just a few of the stories. I particularly wanted to, Mr.
Speaker, talk about a lady in Polk County, one of my favorite counties
in my district. Lola Squires of Polk County was paying $1,016 a month
for her medications. As a widow on a fixed income, she often had to
choose between buying food and buying medicine. With Medicare Part D,
Lola now pays only $27 a month and her savings are almost $1,000 a
month, $989.
Well, the whole point is the initial enrollment period ends May 15,
Monday. Again, we want to say to those 5\1/2\, 6 million not signed up,
sign up now to avoid the premium increase penalties. There will be no,
and I repeat, no premium increase penalties on the low income. It is
important that I say that over and over again, because the other
[[Page H2499]]
side is suggesting just the opposite, and it is flat out not true.
The way to do it, www.medicare.gov, or just pick up the telephone and
dial 1-800-Medicare. Log on or call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for
personalized assistance with Medicare Part D. The amount of personnel
has been beefed up tremendously in this last 6 weeks so when you dial
that number the wait time probably is not going to be more than 45
seconds.
We are making the effort, and we will continue to make the effort,
because it is the right and compassionate thing to do, Mr. Speaker.
I would just like to say in conclusion, we fuss and fight a lot
around here, my colleagues. We all know that. Sometimes we embellish a
little bit the arguments we make. And sometimes, very usually in a very
honest way, we have differences of opinion on legislation and
amendments and how you can make a bill a little bit better. We try to
always not let the perfect get in the way and destroy the good. And
that is the typical process.
But in something like this, I think that even though when we passed
this bill, so-called in the wee hours of the night in November of 2003,
there was bipartisan support. There was a lot of rhetoric back and
forth, but in the final analysis there was bipartisan support.
It is time for the losing side, if you will, to get over that, to put
that behind them, and not to continue to be obstructionists in a
program that is a God-send for so many of our seniors and an absolute
no-brainer as to whether or not they should sign up.
Back then, 2 years ago, you saw Members come to the well and
symbolically tear up their AARP card because that organization had the
nerve to support a Republican program, or to take that prescription
drug discount card, that transitional program, remember my colleagues,
where low income seniors got a $600 credit towards the purchase of each
of those drugs, for 2 years, $1,200 real money before we got this
program up and running January 6? Our colleagues on the other side of
the aisle were saying, tear up those cards.
Well, that is all history. That is all water over the dam,
regrettable. But it is definitely time for us to say to our colleagues,
put that behind you. It is an election year. We know that. We can fight
and fuss over other things. We can try to create wedge issues and play
``gotcha'' and make the other side look bad, and hope we can on our
side keep the majority and on your side gain it. That is fine. That is
fair. That is what this process is all about.
But in a program like this, where we are talking about needy seniors,
let's don't play politics with it at all. Let's do the right thing, and
the right thing is to get out there, Members, on both sides of the
aisle. When you come home late tomorrow night or early Friday morning,
have a town hall meeting on Friday, maybe one on Saturday and one on
Monday, and tell the seniors, even if you don't think this program is
what it should have been and you could have presented a better program,
let them know that there is a good benefit here and they need to sign
up for it.
____________________