Rx for Congress: Take a Deep Breath

As Deadline Nears, Opposition to Medicare "Reform" Grows

October 14, 2003
Members of Congress may be feeling like amateur woodsmen, the ones who saw off the limb they are clinging to for support, as they try to grope their way through the thicket of obstacles to enacting a Medicare prescription drug benefit bill by Oct. 17, the White House-imposed deadline.

Not long ago, a prescription benefit was seen as a sure-fire remedy that would confer can't-lose status on its backers. But now the measure is under attack from both ends of the political spectrum -- both from those who say it costs too much and those who say it does too little and weakens existing benefits.

Sen. Clinton

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) assailed the bills Friday, saying they would actually raise costs for millions of New Yorkers and result in poorer coverage for many of them. She said she would oppose any bill that's not more generous than the ones already passed.

Mrs. Clinton was one of just 11 Democrats who voted against the Medicare drug benefit bill that the Senate passed in June.

"Either version, the Senate or the House, would represent a net loss for most retirees," Mrs. Clinton said at a news conference Friday.

Medicare Rights Center

The Medicare Rights Center, a national consumer service organization, informed Congress that four proposals being considered by the Medicare conference committee would make the bill “worse than nothing” and would require the group to urge defeat of Medicare overhaul legislation.

• Turning Medicare into a voucher program beginning in 2010. Under this scheme, traditional Medicare would be saddled with the high cost of treating the sickest people, and private plans would preferentially enroll healthier people. People who stay in traditional Medicare would see their premiums soar and may be forced to join an HMO that does not cover, or is unable to provide them with, the care they need.
• Imposing a cap on Medicare spending. A Congressional cap on Medicare’s expenditures would only shift additional costs onto seniors and people with disabilities who are already struggling to afford, and too often foregoing, critical health care services.
• Denying low-income people with Medicare and Medicaid access to the new Medicare drug benefit. Medicaid is designed to enhance Medicare benefits for individuals with low incomes, not replace these benefits. With states cash-strapped and Medicaid populations growing, many of the most vulnerable elderly will end up with inadequate prescription drug coverage if forced to rely on Medicaid exclusively for their drugs, while people with Medicare only will enjoy better benefits.
• Relying on private plans exclusively to offer the drug benefit. Insurers have never been willing or able to offer good affordable drug coverage. Without offering the benefit directly through the government, millions of people will have no access to coverage.

“We work with people who go without needed medications each day, and we therefore feel quite deeply that a flawed drug benefit is better than no drug benefit,” said Robert M. Hayes, president of the Medicare Rights Center.

“However, if any of these four provisions are included in the conference committee’s report, we believe that people with Medicare will be better served with no bill at all. We would ask members of Congress to oppose such a bill by all available means.”

Labor Organizations

Labor organizations have increasingly found both versions unacceptable and warned they may oppose whatever the conference committee comes up with. The Alliance for Retired Americans sponsored rallies throughout the country last week targeting House and Senate members who support the Medicare prescription drug bills.

"The time for action is now," says Alliance President George J. Kourpias. "We cannot wait any longer. This 'National Day of Action' will show our elected officials that seniors are united on this issue."

"We must make them understand that seniors will not accept any legislation that privatizes the traditional fee-for-service Medicare program or fails to control the costs of prescription drugs nor will they stand by and see their existing employer-provided benefits cut or eliminated."

"Neither bill as now drafted is acceptable and if Members of Congress insist on enacting an inferior final bill, seniors will have no recourse but to 'recall' them in 2004," said Ruben Burks, Alliance Secretary-Treasurer.

Heritage Foundation

A study published on the Heritage Foundation Web site predicts that more than four million Medicare beneficiaries who currently receive employer-sponsored retiree drug benefits would lose some or all of that coverage under a Medicare prescription drug benefit.

Study author Ken Thorpe of Emory University, a former Clinton administration health adviser, said that an estimated one-third of Medicare beneficiaries with retiree drug benefits would lose that coverage. However, Ken Johnson, a spokesperson for Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.), one of the Medicare conferees, said Thorpe's numbers "are unrealistically high."