[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 8]
[House]
[Page 11091]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    PRESCRIPTION DRUG DISCOUNT CARDS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, today is the first day America's 
seniors and disabled Americans can use the new prescription drug 
discount cards created by last year's Republican Medicare law. The 
discount card program has not exactly been a smashing success. 
Nationwide, less than half a million seniors actually chose to enroll 
in the drug discount card program out of 40 million.
  Little surprise, really, since seniors in my State of Ohio and 
throughout the country have found it confusing, have found it 
overwhelmingly bureaucratic, and have found it unreliable. With good 
reason. Under traditional Medicare, all benefits are accessible through 
just one card, but under this Rube-Goldberg, new Republican program, 
seniors have to choose literally from a whole deck of cards.
  In my State, there are as many as 53 different cards available. One 
might cover blood pressure medicines but not heart medicine. Another 
might cover arthritis medicine but not diabetes medicine. Worse yet, 
the card costs $30, and it must be kept for a whole year, but the 
discounts published in the brochure given out might be out of date even 
before an individual gets to the drugstore.
  The Republican bill lets the drug companies change coverage and 
discounts as often as once a week without notifying the cardholder, 
who, as I say, has to keep the card for 12 months. That is not 
Medicare. Medicare, real traditional Medicare is simple, reliable and 
universal, not this confusing privatized Medicare that the Republicans 
have foisted on the American public.
  The new program is having such problems that even one of its most 
widely accepted provisions is having trouble signing people up. The new 
law provides annual subsidies of up to $600 on drug purchases for some 
low-income seniors. But that provision is not reaching its targeted 
audience. Secretary Thompson says he is somewhat concerned that low-
income seniors are not signing up.
  A lot of us here in the House are concerned, too; and we have offered 
a solution. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Stark), the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Waxman), and I have introduced a bill that will automatically enroll 
all eligible seniors in the new law's low-income subsidies program. 
Like Medicare itself, our proposal is simple, it is universal, and it 
is reliable.

                              {time}  1945

  But instead of actually fixing the program as they could, fixing the 
problem, the Bush administration has decided to spend more tax dollars 
on advertising. The Republican Medicare bill has always been more about 
image than substance. This bill written by and for the drug companies, 
written by and for the insurance companies, this Medicare privatization 
bill written by and for the HMOs has made America's seniors even more 
confused, and it simply is not working.
  When HHS auditors said the Republican bill would cost $134 billion 
more than the White House said, the Bush administration suppressed the 
estimate and gagged the auditor. When the initial reaction from seniors 
was less than enthusiastic, the Bush administration announced plans to 
spend $80 million of taxpayer dollars to educate America's seniors on 
why the bill is not really as bad as seniors think it is.
  When news coverage of the program was not favorable enough, the Bush 
administration, undaunted, spent more money on advertising. They rolled 
out their own news stories complete with fake anchor, phony interview 
and bogus reporter. It is not about substance; it is about image.
  Let us do it right. The House Republican leadership should take up 
the Dingell bill this week which will help low-income seniors get 
access to the $600 benefit. They should take up the Dingell bill this 
week, we could pass it and get it over to the other body in plenty of 
time to have it on the President's desk by next week. Just once, 
instead of our government always coming down on the side of the drug 
industry and on the side of the insurance companies, some of the 
President's biggest contributors, instead of the government always 
coming down on the side of the drug companies and the insurance 
companies and the HMOs, Congress just this once could do the right 
thing.

                          ____________________