PRESCRIPTION DRUG AND MEDICARE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2003
Mr. SPECTER. Since Medicare was established in 1965, people are living longer and living better. Today Medicare covers more than 40 million Americans, including 35 million over the age of 65 and nearly 6 million younger adults with permanent disabilities.
Congress now has the opportunity to modernize this important Federal entity to create a 21st century Medicare Program that offers comprehensive coverage for pharmaceutical drugs and improves the Medicare delivery system.
The proposal before the Senate would make available a voluntary Medicare prescription drug plan for all seniors. If enacted, Medicare beneficiaries have access to a discount card for prescription drug purchases starting in 2004. Projected savings from cards for consumers would range between 10 to 25 percent. A $600 subsidy would be applied to the card,
offering additional assistance for low-income beneficiaries defined as 160 percent or below the Federal poverty level.
Effective January 1, 2006, a new optional Medicare prescription drug benefit would be established under Medicare Part D.
This bill has the potential to make a dramatic difference for millions of Americans living with lower incomes and chronic health care needs. Low-income Medicare beneficiaries, who make up 44 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries, would be provided with prescription drug coverage with minimal out-of-pocket costs. For these seniors, copayments would not exceed 20 percent of the cost of the drugs.
For medical services, Medicare beneficiaries will have the freedom to remain in traditional fee-for-service Medicare for drug coverage, or to enroll in Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) or Preferred Provider Organizations (PPOs), also called Med i care Ad van tage, which offers beneficiaries a wide choice of health care providers, while also coordinating health care effectively, especially for those with multiple chronic conditions. Med i care Ad van tage health plans would be required to offer at least the standard drug benefit, available through traditional fee-for-service Medicare.
The legislation which is pending has been worked on, now, for many years. I congratulate the chairman of the committee, Senator Grassley, and the ranking member, Senator Baucus, for the outstanding work which they have done. This is an extraordinarily complex subject, and it is a very complex bill.
We already know that there are many criticisms directed to this bill at various levels. Many would like to see the prescription drug program cover all of the costs without deductibles and without copays. There has been allocated in our budget plan $400 billion for prescription drug coverage. That is, obviously, a very substantial sum of money. There are a variety of formulas which could be worked out to utilize this funding. The current plan, depending upon levels of income, provides a deductible, then a copay, then what is called a donut hole where the recipient pays the entire costs of their drug coverage, and when it gets to a certain high level, it is catastrophic and there is coverage that pays almost all of it.
As I have reviewed these projections and these analyses, it is hard to say where the line ought to be drawn. It is a value judgment as to what deductibles ought to be, and for whom, and what the copays ought to be and for whom. I am seriously troubled by the so-called donut hole. But it is calculated to encourage people to take the medical care they really need, and at lower levels of income to have certain copays, which it is projected will be affordable. Then, when the costs move into the so-called catastrophic range, to have the plan pay for nearly all of the medical costs.
I think passage by the Senate would be a significant step forward. The House of Representatives, as usual, has a different planas is customary, with our bicameral legislative approach. Then the bill can be improved in conference.
The legislative process has the committee turning out a bill, and then many amendments, which generally are not known to Members in advance of brief debate and then votes. It is in the conference, after the bill is analyzed, that another fresh look is taken at the bill to produce the best legislative product in the public interest.
AMENDMENT NO. 983
I have already offered an amendment relating to end of life directives, number 983, which was adopted by unanimous consent.
Commenting on it very briefly, we find statistically that nearly 30 percent of Medicare expenditures occur during a person's last year of life. We find, beyond the last year of life, a tremendous percentage of medical costs occur in the last month, in the last few weeks, in the last week, or in the last few days.
Nobody should decide for anybody else what that person should have by way of end-of-life medical care. What care ought to be available is a very personal decision.
The living wills would give an individual an opportunity to make that judgment, to make a decision as to how much care he or she wanted near the end of his or her life and that is, to repeat, a matter highly personalized for the individual.
But if that decision was made to eliminate some of the very high costs at the very end of life, there would obviously be substantial savings to our medical system. As long as that comports with the will of the individual, that is something which ought to be considered.
The amendment directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to include in its annual "Medicare And You" handbook, to be provided to each beneficiary, a section that specifies information on advanced directives and details on living wills, durable powers of attorney for health care, and directs the Secretary of HHS, in the introductory letter to the "Medicare And You" handbook, to reference the inclusion of advanced directives.
AMENDMENT NO. 1085
I have also submitted an amendment which is pending at the desk, amendment No. 1085, which has not yet been acted upon but which I will call up at an appropriate time.
This is an amendment which would update the Medicare physician fee formula. It is a sense-of-the-Senate resolution. The projections from the Medicare payment formula called for a 4.4-percent reduction on March 1, which would have been very problematic. The fact is, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, now projects a Medicare conversion factor figure of 4.2 percent will be projected for the year 2004. This reduction threatens to destabilize an important element of the Medicare Program; namely, physician participation and willingness to accept Medicare payments. This instability is a result of the sustainable growth rate, a system of annual spending which targets physicians' services under Medicare.
This sense-of-the-Senate amendment would provide that the conferees on Medicare reform and prescription drug legislation should include in the conference agreement a provision to establish a minimum percentage update in physician fees for the next 2 years, and should consider adding provisions which would mitigate the swings in payment, such as establishing multiyear adjustments to recoup the variance and creating tolerance corridors for variations around the updated target trend.
AMENDMENT NO. 1118
I have also submitted an amendment designated as amendment No. 1118, which provides for a lifestyle modification program demonstration. This is projected on the factor that heart disease kills some 500,000 Americans each year. The costs of coronary disease currently relate to an expenditure of some $58 billion annually. There has been a test program of the Medicare lifestyle modification program operating in some 12 States which has been demonstrated to reduce the need for coronary procedures by 88 percent. This program could reduce cardiovascular expenditures by as much as $36 billion annually.
Lifestyle choices such as diet and exercise affect heart disease and heart disease outcomes by 50 percent or greater. This program has also been applied to men with prostate cancer, who have shown significant improvements in prostate cancer markers using a similar approach in lifestyle modifications. My amendment expresses the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should carry out the lifestyle modification program demonstration at the national level and then provide it on a permanent basis, and include as many Medicare beneficiaries as would like to participate in the project on a voluntary basis.
I have submitted one additional amendment, which is No. 1128 and which relates to State pharmaceutical assistance programs for the elderly and disabled. Currently, 18 States have comprehensive pharmacy assistance programs which provide prescription drug coverage for more than 1.1 million older and disabled Americans.
In my own State, Pennsylvania's Pharmaceutical Assistance Contract for the Elderly, known as PACE, established in 1984 provides prescription drug coverage to 230,000 Medicare beneficiaries, the vast majority of whom have incomes below 160 percent of the Federal poverty level. This enrollment is comprised largely of 70- and 80-year-old widows who have
multiple diseases and limited educational background who have been enrolled in the PACE program for more than a decade.
There is a serious concern that if there is not a coordinated program, people will not be informed as to how to move from PACE to another program. This affects not only Pennsylvania but, as I stated, 17 other States.
The pending bill does not provide for coordination of benefits between State pharmaceutical programs and private insurers. Without a coordination of benefits for State plans to facilitate enrollment in private plans, many of these State program beneficiaries will be unable to assess the new Medicare drug benefit.
This amendment provides for coordination of benefits between States and private insurance companies and facilitates the enrollment of State pharmacy assistance beneficiaries in the private plans. Without this amendment, the majority of seniors enrolled in their State pharmacy programs will not be able to effectively access private plans.
I note the presence of other Senators who are seeking recognition. I attempted to be brief in my general statement about the bill and also in my descriptions of these four amendments, one of which has already been adopted.
I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of my remarks, there be printed in the RECORD a summary of the end-of-life directive amendment, a summary of the updating of the Medicare physician fee formula, a summary of the lifestyle modification program, and a summary of the State pharmaceutical assistance programs for the elderly and disabled, and also printed in the RECORD at this point the amendments themselves.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
SUMMARY ON THE END OF LIFE DIRECTIVE AMENDMENT
The purpose of this amendment is to make it easier for individuals to make their own choices regarding their treatment when nearing the end of their life.
A health care advance directive is a document where a beneficiary gives instructions about their health care if, in the future, that beneficiary cannot speak for him or herself. The beneficiary can give someone they name ("agent" or "proxy") the power to make health care decisions on their behalf. They may also give instructions about the kind of health care they do or do not want.
In a traditional Living Will, a beneficiary would state their wishes about life-sustaining medical treatments if he or she is terminally ill. In a Health Care Power of Attorney, one appoints someone else to make medical treatment decisions for the beneficiary if they cannot make them on their own.
Unlike most Living Wills, a Health Care Advance Directive is not limited to cases of terminal illness. If the beneficiary cannot make or communicate decisions because of a temporary or permanent illness or injury, a Health Care Advance Directive helps them keep control over important health care decisions.
Observers have long noted that individuals incur the majority of health care costs in the last few months of life. Nearly 30 percent of Medicare expenditures occur during a person's last year of life.
Your amendment directs the Secretary of HHS to include in its annual "Medicare and You" handbook, which is provided to each beneficiary, a section that provides information on advanced directives and details on living wills and durable power of attorney for health care; and directs the Secretary of HHS, in the introductory letter to the "Medicare and You" handbook, to reference the inclusion of advanced directives information.
SUMMARY ON THE AMENDMENT TO UPDATE THE MEDICARE PHYSICIAN FEE FORMULA
Earlier this year, Congress passed legislation as part of the Fiscal Year 2003 Omnibus Appropriations bill (H.J. Res. 2) that avoided an impending 4.4 percent cut in the Medicare conversion factor. Although this change resulted in a welcomed 1.6 percent increase in the Medicare conversion factor for 2003, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) preliminary Medicare conversion factor figure predicts a 4.2 percent reduction for 2004.
It is clear that this scheduled 4.2 percent reduction in the physician reimbursement formula threatens to destabilize an important element of the Medicare program, namely physician participation and willingness to accept Medicare patients.
The primary source of this instability is the sustainable growth rate (SGR), a system of annual spending targets for physicians' services under Medicare.
The sustainable growh rate (SGR) system has a number of defects that result in unrealistically low spending targets, such as the use of the increase in the gross domestic product (GDP) as a proxy for increases in the volume and intensity of services provided by physicians, no tolerance for variance between growth in Medicare beneficiary health care costs and our Nation's GDP, and a requirement for the immediate recoupment of the difference.
Both administrative and legislative action are needed to return stability to the Medicare physician payment system.
In its March 2003 report, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) stated that if "Congress does not change current law, then payments may not be adequate in 2003 and a compensating adjustment in payments would be necessary in 2004."
With 17 percent of its population eligible for Medicare, the Pennsylvania Medical Society has calculated that Pennsylvania's physicians have already suffered a $128.6 million loss, or $4,074 per physician, as a result of the 2002 Medicare payment reduction. If not corrected, the flawed formula will cost Pennsylvania physicians another $553 million or $17,396 per physician for the period 2003-2005.
Your amendment expresses the sense of the Senate that the conferees on Medicare reform and prescription drug legislation should include in the conference agreement a provision to establish a minimum percentage update in physician fees for the next 2 years and should consider adding provisions that would mitigate the swings in payment, such as establishing multi-year adjustments to recoup the variance and creating "tolerance" corridors for variations around the update target trend.
SUMMARY OF THE AMENDMENT ON THE LIFESTYLE MODIFICATION PROGRAM
Heart disease kills more than 500,000 Americans per year. The number and costs of interventions for the treatment of coronary disease are rising and currently cost the health care system $58 billion annually.
The Medicare Lifestyle Modification Program (also known as the Dean Ornish Program for Reversing Heart Disease) has been operating throughout 12 states and has been demonstrated to reduce the need for coronary procedures by 88 percent per year.
The Medicare Lifestyle Modification Program is less expensive to deliver than interventional cardiac procedures and could reduce cardiovascular expenditures by $36 billion annually.
Lifestyle choices such as diet and exercise effect heart disease and heart disease outcomes by 50 percent or greater.
Intensive lifestyle interventions which include teams of nurses, doctors, exercise physiologists, registered dieticians, and behavioral health clinicians have been demonstrated to reduce heart disease risk factors and enhance heart disease outcomes dramatically.
The National Institutes of Health estimates that 17 million Americans have diabetes and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that the number of Americans who have a diagnosis of diabetes increased 61 percent in the last decade and is expected to more than double by 2050.
Lifestyle modification programs are superior to medication therapy for treating diabetes. Individuals with diabetes are now considered to have coronary disease at the date of diagnosis of their diabetic state.
The Medicare Lifestyle Modification Program has been an effective lifestyle program for the reversal and treatment of heart disease.
Men with prostate cancer have shown significant improvement in prostate cancer markers using a similar approach in lifestyle modification. These lifestyle changes are therefore likely to affect other chronic disease states, in addition to heart disease.
Your amendment expresses the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should carry out the Lifestyle Modification Program Demonstration at the national level on a permanent basis and include as many medicare beneficiaries as would like to participate in the project on a voluntary basis.
SUMMARY OF THE AMENDMENT ON STATE PHARMACEUTICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR THE ELDERLY AND DISABLED
Currently, 18 states have comprehensive pharmacy assistance programs that provide prescription drug coverage to more
than 1.1 million older and disabled residents.
The majority of these beneficiaries receive life saving medications to treat high blood pressure, heart disease, arthritis, diabetes, and eye disease.
Pennsylvania's Pharmaceutical Assistance Contract for the Elderly (PACE), established in 1984, provides prescription drug coverage to 230,000 Medicare beneficiaries, the vast majority of whom have incomes below 160% of the federal poverty level. This enrollment is comprised largely of 70 and 80-year-old widows who have multiple disease states, and less than a tenth grade education, and have been enrolled in PACE for more than a decade.
Currently, the pending bill the Senate does not provide for 'coordination of benefits', between state pharmaceutical programs and private insurers. Without a coordination of benefit mandate and a role for the state plans to facilitate enrollment in private plans, many of these state program beneficiaries will not be able to access the new Medicare drug benefit.
This amendment provides for the coordination of benefits between states and private insurance companies, and facilitates the enrollment of state pharmacy assistance beneficiaries into private plans, without this amendment the majority of the seniors enrolled in their state pharmacy programs will not be able to effectively access private plans.
Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.