Shortchanging the Nation's Senior Citizens

Mr. President, just last month we celebrated Older American's month, a time to reflect on the contribution of older Americans to our society -- to their families, their communities, and their nation.  For many seniors, these "golden years" are the most valuable time in their lives, a time when they may no longer have the day-to-day aggravations of work, and can concentrate their time and efforts on something else -- grandchildren, lifelong passions, learning new skills, acquiring knowledge, or participating in creative endeavors.

But that is not the case for many seniors.  In too many instances, seniors who have worked and saved a lifetime find that today's cost of living far exceeds the level they can afford.   Despite planning and frugality, today's costs simply have exceeded the means of many older Americans, and they find that the visions of the secure life they had expected post-retirement are now more a nightmare than a dream.

A big part of the problem is the value that our society places on the elderly -- it is much too low! 

Age discrimination is all too prevalent in the workplace.  Long-held stereotypes -- that seniors are slow, forgetful, less competent than their younger counterparts -- limit opportunities for older workers and prevent businesses from benefitting from well-honed talents.  Those stereotypical images are just plain wrong.   To be 65 today is not like it was when I was young.  The idea of pushing seniors out the door to make room for younger workers is, itself, antiquated.  I grew up during the Great Depression, when you had to work hard just to get a job and then work harder to keep it.   People of my generation, coming from that experience, developed a work ethic which can inspire young people today. Seniors in the workforce can be a positive, inspiring force.  Moreover, better health care and healthier lifestyles have extended life spans and led to a senior population with vigor and vitality.

But when the health of seniors does decline, this nation does an embarrassingly poor job of dealing with their needs.  Child care has become a booming industry in this nation.  Millions are spent on bigger, brighter, better child care centers -- lively places, filled with happy activities and stimulation.  I support all of that.  But when the elderly need daily care, too often they are relegated to dim, overcrowded centers, places that serve as little more than warehouses that provide busy work for the hands, and little to fill the heart and soul.   

Inestimable numbers of scam artists focus on the elderly.   The offices of Attorneys General across the nation are besieged with complaints from seniors who were prey for some con artists and ended up losing their life savings.  

Newspapers carry stories about CEO's of big, once-profitable companies who are awarded big bonuses, while the pensions of loyal retirees are squeezed. 

When this is how we treat our seniors, something is wrong with America.

Seniors should rejoice in their long lives, in their collected experiences, and in their accomplishments.  But in America today, magazines showcase images of young, vibrant models.  Movies and television shows feature youthful actors and actresses.    No one wants to be "old" anymore.   It has become a tarnished word.   

Senior citizens today are generally not appreciated as either experienced "elders" or possessors of special wisdom.  Older people are respected only to the extent that they remain capable of working, exercising, and taking care of themselves.  In American culture, increasing age seems to portend decreasing value as a human being.  It should be just the opposite.

How did the American culture develop such blatant disregard and disrespect for the elderly?  Well, however we got to such a point, we are definitely here.  Seniors need to rise up and make their voices heard or else they will be forgotten, especially when it comes to policy formation that directly affects them, such as the Medicare legislation before us today.  The Senate is in the midst of an important debate on a major restructuring of Medicare -- a debate that will shape the health care choices of millions of our nation's seniors for years to come.

The Medicare program is in desperate need of renovation to meet the needs of today's seniors living in a new era with dramatic advancements in the delivery of health care. Medicare was designed to provide health care benefits to the most vulnerable segments of the population, the elderly and the disabled.

When I voted, back in 1965, to establish the Medicare program, pharmaceutical treatments, then more of footnote in health care, were not nearly as commonly available as they are now.  Today, they are a primary form of medical care and often substitute for more costly treatments like hospitalization and surgery.

Today, 40 million Americans rely on Medicare to help provide for their medical needs.

With more than one-third of all Medicare beneficiaries lacking insurance coverage for the cost of needed medications, finding affordable prescription drug coverage is a critical issue for our nation's seniors.  Prescription drugs are an essential tool for treating and preventing many acute and chronic conditions, but Medicare fails to cover them on an outpatient basis.  Too many seniors and disabled persons in this country, especially those living on fixed incomes, are forced to choose each month between paying for food and shelter, or buying the essential medicines that their doctors have prescribed.

Our nation's seniors are losing their patience, and they are losing their dignity.  They are fed up with fast-rising drug costs that they cannot afford.  Seniors should not have to travel in bus loads to Canada and Mexico just to obtain the medications their doctors prescribe.  What does it say about this country and its values when we fail to take care of our elderly citizens whose lifetime of work and sacrifice helped to endow this country with the greatness it now enjoys?

Mr. President, I fear that the legislation before us today is a glaring example of how this nation shortchanges our seniors.  We are not taking care of our seniors as they wrestle with the most serious issue in their lives.  We are offering a partial fix to assuage senior anger.  This bill fails to go far enough to meet the needs of our nation's seniors.  I am concerned that this measure would force Medicare beneficiaries to rely on a private, untried, untested, drug-only insurance market for their prescription drug coverage, rather than the traditional Medicare program that they know and trust.  We split drug benefit off from Medicare?

I am concerned that this Administration and some members of Congress plan to phase out the traditional Medicare program as an option for new beneficiaries in the future.  Some have asserted that this legislation is merely a Trojan horse designed to get rid of Medicare.  I sincerely hope that this is not the case, but there is something awfully suspicious about this particular horse.

I am worried that we may be endorsing the slow suicide of one of the most popular and effective government programs in history.  I have been down this tortured road before during my 50 year tenure in Congress.  My constituents and others around the nation are reeling from public programs that have been turned over to the so-called free market.  Utility rates, cable rates, airline rates, you name it, the free market has ensured exorbitant prices with diminished service, especially for rural areas.  Pensions and retirement security have taken a similar beating.  

The Medicare program was originally created because the private sector did not offer affordable and reliable health insurance to the elderly and the disabled.  Health care has certainly changed in the past 38 years, but what has not changed is the fact that the private market does not want to insure people who are old or disabled or likely to need care. 

Mr. President, what is the rationale for inventing some new hocus pocus type of plan that exposes seniors to the whims of private insurance companies which may be more interested in profits than providing comprehensive drug benefits?

Mr. President, this legislation, as currently designed, does not even provide sufficient prescription drug coverage.  It would cover less than a quarter of Medicare beneficiaries' estimated drug costs over the next ten years, and the complicated coverage formula has a large 'doughnut' hole providing zero coverage just when seniors might need it most.

This legislation also includes copayments, premiums, and deductibles that may be unaffordable for many low- and middle-income seniors.  The $35-per-month premium, the 50 percent co-pay, the $275 annual deductible, and the $5,800 stop-loss amount that we have heard so much about are only suggested amounts and certainly not a guarantee.  A closer look at the fine print of this legislation reveals that private insurers could choose to charge seniors double or even triple these amounts.

Let's face it, the kind of prescription drug benefit that we have repeatedly promised our nation's seniors and that they have now rightly expect would cost at least $800 billion over the next decade.  Yet, the Administration and Congressional Republicans have only allocated $400 billion for the next ten years for a Medicare prescription drug benefit.  And during this same period, drug costs for senior citizens alone, according to the Congressional Budget Office, are expected to total almost $2 trillion.

One of the primary reasons this legislation contains such glaring deficiencies in the drug benefits being offered to seniors is not difficult to understand -- this Administration and Congress have chosen to make tax cuts a higher priority than prescription drugs for seniors.  Since the federal treasury has already been raided, there is not enough money to adequately cover prescription drugs.  Seniors ought to be outraged.   I am a senior, and I represent a state with a lot of seniors, and I am outraged!

What is the rationale for waiting until 2006 -- conveniently right after the next election cycle -- to implement this legislation?  What are we so afraid of?  We had Medicare up and running less than twelve months after creating it from scratch in 1965.  So why can't we do it now?  Mr. President, it seems that this Congress is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of our nation's seniors -- hoping to claim victory and keep seniors in the dark until they become painfully aware of the fine print of this legislation upon a visit to their local pharmacist in 2006.

Mr. President, this legislation, as it stands, does not provide the real, guaranteed, defined benefit that our seniors desperately need and does little to address the high cost of prescription drugs.  I had hoped we could improve this legislation through the amendment process, but that does not appear to be the will of this Senate in our mad dash to final passage before the Recess.  We should do better for our seniors.   We owe them much