THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display

[Page: H3828]  GPO's PDF
---

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) is recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.

   Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from New Jersey that the Republican plan is based upon what I have as a Member of Congress and what he has and also what the Senators have and what the President has, which is based upon free enterprise. It is a private sector prescription drug program. The program we as Republicans are providing has the same prototype. I think the contrast he makes is valid, only in that he wants the government to run this program and we want the private sector to run the prescription drug program. We do not want mandates. We do not want price controls. We want just basically the free enterprise to work.

   The committee he and I serve on, Energy and Commerce, marked up a bill last week and also the Committee on Ways and Means marked up a bill. Both of these bills have been marked up by the Republican majority. There is much in these bills to applaud. We have addressed shortfalls in payments to hospitals and incorrect formulas in reimbursing physicians. However, most significantly, the bill out of the Commerce Committee contains the long overdue addition of a prescription drug benefit for Medicare . Medicare was designed before innovative and lifesaving medications played such a prominent role in health care. Our seniors and disabled beneficiaries have waited for many years to get this final plan that we are working on and hopefully will vote on this week.

   One point I would like to raise is that while expansion of health care coverage, including a prescription drug benefit, is a goal for all of us here in the House, opinions obviously differ between myself and the gentleman from New Jersey on how to achieve it. Simply expanding and automatically funding government programs is not necessarily the most desirable route to take. I see in the CQ Daily Monitor today that one of our Democrat colleagues reasons that an $800 billion plan delivered by the government would be ``what seniors are used to, are entitled to, what is fair.'' It is three times the program the Republicans have proposed.

   I disagree and I dare say the seniors for whom he claims to be speaking may want a fresh approach, rather than another stale, rigid government program in delivering their prescription drug benefit as well. Choice and individual decision-making are hallmarks of America, and free market approaches best lead to economy, quality and freedom for all. Over my years as a Member of Congress, I have consistently worked for consumer choice in health care, and I believe we should approach this piece of legislation from exactly this point of view. Let us try to harness the free market forces that empower all of us to make our own decisions about health care instead of having the Federal Government do it for us.

   This bill would deliver a responsible, affordable, flexible prescription drug benefit to our seniors and disabled. The bill works via many favorable market-based elements. It arranges for competitive bidding among health care plans. It does not oppose innovation-stifling price caps. We have crafted a benefit plan to be financed and administered by a new Medicare benefits administration but to be delivered by the private sector. Seniors can shop around for a benefit that works best for them, just like myself and other Members of Congress can do.

   American insurance companies offer a myriad of choices in health plans, from health maintenance, HMOs, to fee-for-service, drug -benefit-only or point-of-service plans, with the most lenient alternatives for the beneficiaries. We Members of Congress have a variety of options at our disposal, from basic to gold-plated, based upon how much we want to pay. We can select what works for our family situation, our health needs and, of course, our budget. Our seniors deserve no less.

   The substitute approach the minority favors would first cost a grossly irresponsible amount of money. It would bankrupt Medicare , but also limit drug and doctor choices for seniors, force them to navigate a bloated bureaucracy and lead to price controls. From the Soviet Union to the backlogged lines for health care treatment experienced in Canada, our neighbor, history and economics have reliably borne out that price controls do not work for patients and they will dampen incentives for our pharmaceutical industry to continue producing new and innovative drugs that cure, relieve and enhance our quality of life.

   Finally, Mr. Speaker, I add that it is not only fiscally dangerous to rely on the Federal Government for all the answers, but a government one-size-fits-all approach is both philosophically arrogant and paternalistic. It deprives Medicare beneficiaries of the option to exercise the same choices that you and I do. Finally, while this bill is largely about benefits for today's Medicare beneficiaries, the cost impact of this legislation on today's taxpayers, the young people today who will be tomorrow's beneficiaries, should be noted. The Republican bill contains the most realistic, liberating approach of a prescription drug benefit for seniors today while keeping the Medicare program healthy for tomorrow's beneficiaries like my children.

   Having said that, I look forward to what will surely be a lively debate. Let us do what is best for today's Medicare beneficiaries, but at the same time keep an eye on the future of the Medicare program.

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display