Washington D.C.- Congressman Sherrod Brown (D-OH) issued the following statement at a hearing on proposals for a Medicare prescription drug benefit.

Brown is the Senior Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee.

“Mr. Chairman, I understand the title of this hearing is ‘Creating a Medicare prescription drug benefit:  Assessing Efforts to Help America’s Low-income Seniors.’ I have read the testimony of our witnesses, and there clearly are lessons to be learned from these programs.

“Michael Hillerby’s testimony, for example, discusses how Nevada addressed risk selection and other obstacles to maximize participation in the program. Notably, Nevada’s program evolved from two plans -- which proved confusing for beneficiaries -- to a single plan. Nevada also found that the cost sharing burden needed to be modest to attract enrollees and prevent risk selection.

“Finally, based on written testimony on the Nevada plan submitted by State Assemblywoman Barbara Buckley, the  decision to use a private insurer rather than directly administer the program has increased the state’s costs significantly.

“Milliman and Robertson estimated that the state could operate Senior Rx for $53.95 per member per month.  The state is paying a private insurer $81 per member per month to deliver the same benefits.
A single plan, which could be administered at a lower cost by the government, and with modest cost sharing. I don’t know about you, but to me that sounds a lot like Medicare Part B.  It’s something to think about.

“Congress should also take note of state efforts to achieve lower prices for prescription drugs. When it comes to making the prescription drug market more competitive, the states have been forced to do the heavy lifting on behalf of low income seniors and all Americans.

“States are suing the drug industry for anti-competitive behavior and lobbying Congress about the Greater Access to Affordable Pharmaceuticals (GAAP) Act. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) and I introduced  GAAP to close legal loopholes drug companies use to keep generics off the market.

“Timely access to generic drugs can save consumers and third party payers literally billions of dollars. But just as the states cannot shoulder our responsibility when it comes to prescription drug coverage, they cannot do our work for us when it comes to prescription drug competition.

“Drug companies are exploiting federal laws to block timely access to generics.  It’s going to take federal action to stop them. If Congress wants to provide meaningful assistance to the states without diverting finite resources away from a drug benefit for all seniors, we should take action on the GAAP bill.  Note I said all seniors.

“The title of this hearing could also be interpreted to mean we are looking for guidance on federally financed stop-gap measures like those in the President’s budget.

“I won’t be party to that.

“Low-income assistance, whether it takes the form of Medicaid, state drug assistance programs or a discount card, is a symptom of the problem, not a temporary or permanent solution to it.

“Of those seniors who lack drug coverage, 70% are above 150% of poverty. 70%. Do you think these seniors are crying wolf when they say they need prescription drug coverage?

“Should we wait until prescription drug expenses push them into poverty before taking action?

“I refuse to minimize -- much less ignore -- the plight of these seniors.

“And I won’t cater to the notion that we “can’t” add a drug benefit to Medicare quickly, so we “must” start with low income assistance.

“That’s a manufactured problem.   We could add drug coverage to the Medicare benefits package and do it soon. The ‘inevitable’ delays are actually discretionary on the part of the Administration and Congress.

“The President and Congress do not have to tether prescription drug coverage to Medicare privatization.

“We don’t have to force seniors into private drug plans, as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have proposed. Nor should we condition seniors’ access to prescription drug coverage on their willingness to accept wholesale changes in the Medicare program, which is the position the President has taken.

“The President and Congress could prioritize Medicare prescription drug coverage ahead of additional tax cuts - we have that choice.

“This body could, and should, discard the ulterior motives, put its money where its mouth is, and add prescription drug coverage to the Medicare benefits package,” Brown said.