Search
|
CONGRESS MUST GET PRESCRIPTION DRUG PLAN RIGHT FOR COLORADO'S SENIORS
Saturday July 19, 2003FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 19, 2003
Contact: Josh Freed
(202) 225-4431
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Representative Diana DeGette (CO-1) released the following prepared statement on her July 19, 2003 town hall meeting with Colorado seniors to discuss the Prescription Drug plan now being considered by Congress:
“Most, if not all, of you are aware of the recent passage of Medicare prescription drug bills in both the House and the Senate. This is an extremely important event in the history of health insurance, and it is therefore essential that we, Members of Congress, get it right. But I don’t think that we have.
Seniors annually spend an estimated $1.8 trillion on prescription drugs. The legislation recently passed by the House and the Senate is limited to $400 billion over 10 years. It is clear that this benefit is woefully under-funded. This prescription drug benefit will be neither comprehensive nor high quality. I want to spend a few minutes talking about three major problems:
· There is a large gap in the coverage provided. This is the “donut hole”- which means that seniors must pay 100% of their prescription drug costs, when their expenditures reach $2,000. Even though they continue to pay a monthly premium during this time, they will pay for all of their drug costs until they reach $3,500.
· The Republican plan does not provide a guaranteed benefit because it relies on private plans. This means that some seniors in our state won’t have any access to a Medicare prescription drug benefit.
· Special help for low-income seniors is missing. Low-income seniors will face large costs, and not get the extra help that they need.
Besides an inadequate benefit, the House legislation, which I voted against, will essentially privatize Medicare. This means that the Medicare program, as we know it, will have to compete against other health plans, starting in 2010.
I believe that privatizing Medicare would be a huge disaster, and this unfair competitive system will significantly increase premiums for beneficiaries that choose the traditional Medicare program. This system will not operate on a level playing field. Healthier seniors will have lower costs and better benefits while sicker seniors will have to pay more and get less. Therefore, some have said that the real intention is to eliminate the traditional Medicare program all together. I believe that this is unacceptable.
The Medicare program has wide support from seniors. In fact, a recent study found that Medicare outperforms private sector plans in terms of patients' satisfaction with quality of care, access to care, and overall insurance ratings.
I believe that we must build upon this success and provide seniors with a defined benefit for drugs, just like the benefit they currently receive for other services. That means that all seniors are guaranteed the treatment and care that they need.
I also believe that we must provide security for vulnerable seniors, the poor and the sick. These groups of seniors need protections built into the system - so that they can receive the same high quality care as other less vulnerable seniors.
Finally, I strongly support a prescription drug benefit that seniors can rely on and easily use. This will provide both security and access, two elements that I believe are essential for a public program. This means that the cost-sharing requirements must be easily understood, without complicated formulas or hidden costs. And I believe that seniors should have guaranteed access to a physician, no matter where they live.
For all these reasons, I am very concerned about the Medicare prescription drug benefit that Congress is currently considering. That is why I have convened this town hall meeting today, so that we can hear from Colorado groups and also from all of you. It’s essential that we have this communication. I hope that we will learn from each other and make some progress to improve this benefit.”
###
July 19, 2003
Contact: Josh Freed
(202) 225-4431
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Representative Diana DeGette (CO-1) released the following prepared statement on her July 19, 2003 town hall meeting with Colorado seniors to discuss the Prescription Drug plan now being considered by Congress:
“Most, if not all, of you are aware of the recent passage of Medicare prescription drug bills in both the House and the Senate. This is an extremely important event in the history of health insurance, and it is therefore essential that we, Members of Congress, get it right. But I don’t think that we have.
Seniors annually spend an estimated $1.8 trillion on prescription drugs. The legislation recently passed by the House and the Senate is limited to $400 billion over 10 years. It is clear that this benefit is woefully under-funded. This prescription drug benefit will be neither comprehensive nor high quality. I want to spend a few minutes talking about three major problems:
· There is a large gap in the coverage provided. This is the “donut hole”- which means that seniors must pay 100% of their prescription drug costs, when their expenditures reach $2,000. Even though they continue to pay a monthly premium during this time, they will pay for all of their drug costs until they reach $3,500.
· The Republican plan does not provide a guaranteed benefit because it relies on private plans. This means that some seniors in our state won’t have any access to a Medicare prescription drug benefit.
· Special help for low-income seniors is missing. Low-income seniors will face large costs, and not get the extra help that they need.
Besides an inadequate benefit, the House legislation, which I voted against, will essentially privatize Medicare. This means that the Medicare program, as we know it, will have to compete against other health plans, starting in 2010.
I believe that privatizing Medicare would be a huge disaster, and this unfair competitive system will significantly increase premiums for beneficiaries that choose the traditional Medicare program. This system will not operate on a level playing field. Healthier seniors will have lower costs and better benefits while sicker seniors will have to pay more and get less. Therefore, some have said that the real intention is to eliminate the traditional Medicare program all together. I believe that this is unacceptable.
The Medicare program has wide support from seniors. In fact, a recent study found that Medicare outperforms private sector plans in terms of patients' satisfaction with quality of care, access to care, and overall insurance ratings.
I believe that we must build upon this success and provide seniors with a defined benefit for drugs, just like the benefit they currently receive for other services. That means that all seniors are guaranteed the treatment and care that they need.
I also believe that we must provide security for vulnerable seniors, the poor and the sick. These groups of seniors need protections built into the system - so that they can receive the same high quality care as other less vulnerable seniors.
Finally, I strongly support a prescription drug benefit that seniors can rely on and easily use. This will provide both security and access, two elements that I believe are essential for a public program. This means that the cost-sharing requirements must be easily understood, without complicated formulas or hidden costs. And I believe that seniors should have guaranteed access to a physician, no matter where they live.
For all these reasons, I am very concerned about the Medicare prescription drug benefit that Congress is currently considering. That is why I have convened this town hall meeting today, so that we can hear from Colorado groups and also from all of you. It’s essential that we have this communication. I hope that we will learn from each other and make some progress to improve this benefit.”
###