PRESCRIPTION DRUG AND MEDICARE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2003
AMENDMENT NO. 1087 WITHDRAWN
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, this afternoon I will speak to amendment 1087. That amendment was pulled up last night by the manager of the bill, Senator Grassley. I believe that amendment is at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. The amendment has been called up and is pending.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, it is my intent within a few moments to withdraw this amendment, but I thought I should speak to it tonight because I am disappointed at this time that we could not get the scoring from CBO we felt would produce a revenue-neutral bill, or a cost-neutral bill, going into the final hours of this debate.
This is an amendment that produces in this legislation, and hopefully to take up in conference, a consumer-driven health care plan under the new MedicareAdvantage program all of us are talking about at this moment. The Senator from New Hampshire gave a very impassioned speech from the depths of his heart, frustrated that this bill does not balance out and provide enough of the incentives in the market that will offset and create the kind of competitive forces being designed for Medicare with the extension of prescription drugs in it offers.
For a few moments tonight, I did want to speak about that and explain it. As we get into conference with the House, the House has a consumer-driven health care concept within their legislation that is critical. It is something we ought to address.
First, the amendment before the Senate is designed to dovetail with and not disturb the overall MedicareAdvantage competitive dynamic. As a complement to MedicareAdvantage, consumer-driven health care plans would be subject to the same competitive rules as preferred provider organizations.
Second, I emphasize this amendment is carefully crafted. We thought it would ensure budget neutrality. But CBO says tonight, no, and I am not going to be too critical of them; we pushed them very hard in the last good number of days to quickly analyze and bring forth estimates. I think they are simply swamped. We will continue to work with them. We believe what we are offering is budget neutral.
Additionally, the Finance Committee chairman, the majority leader, and the White House have expressed the kind of support for these concepts in amendments. I appreciate it. As everyone begins to examine this structure, they become increasingly enthusiastic that this could become a component of the MedicareAdvantage Program.
For the benefit of my colleagues, let me describe for a moment the key features of this amendment. The amendment establishes a new category of competition within Medicare Advantage designed to encourage participation by consumer-driven health plans. These plans would be subject to the same requirements of PPOs in MedicareAdvantage, including prescription drug benefits and risk adjustment parameters.
Consumer-driven health care is one of the fastest growing innovations emerging in the employer health insurance market. Already 1.5 million Americans are estimated to be in consumer-driven health care in the summer of 2002, and that number is now growing very rapidly.
What is the consumer-driven health care? It harnesses market forces in ways similar to medical savings accounts. However, there are some differences between medical savings accounts and consumer-driven health care plans. For example, enrollees in consumer-driven health care do not have to make contributions to the account. In the private sector, the employer or in my amendment if it were to pass, Medicare makes the contribution to the personal care account. There would be no tax consequence for the senior under this amendment. In other words, it would not be viewed as income. Some in Congress might be familiar with the account because the American Postal Workers Union of the AFL-CIO consumer-driven health care plan is now available. It is in that bundle of choices that Federal employees have today to choose from. More and more employees are signing up for this concept.
This is what the union Web site states: We believe that people who have more control over how their health care dollars are spent are more satisfied consumers and the APWU health plan consumer-driven option is designed to give that kind of control.
It is the very thing the Senator from New Hampshire was talking about. It is what we ought to be striving for to balance off the differences and to create the competitive forces within the MedicareAdvantage program.
Benefits make sense in consumer-driven health care plans. I draw your attention to my chart. My amendment is designed to encourage market flexibility. The information on this chart is one example of what consumer-driven health care plans can provide. Web site education and decision support is one example. In other words, you can go to the Web site, look at it, make choices and decisions based on the best available information. 100-percent preventive care coveragethe very kind of thing we want in modern medicine today. Preventive benefits keep healthy people healthy instead of making the repairs after the human body breaks down.
There are no more barriers to necessary care, including annual physicals, mammograms, and preventive services. All are
within this kind of health care plan. All are available today offered by the postal workers.
Patient control of personal care accounts for routine health care services are also included. Unused funds in these accounts then roll over into the next year.
High deductibles, that is true insurance, to protect against financial ruin in an acute health care crisis, in other words, catastrophic coverage.
A limit on annual out-of-pocket spending is an especially important feature. Traditional Medicare does not have an out-of-pocket limit and drives many seniors into bankruptcy. In other words, it limits financial risk when it kicks in at a certain point.
It includes care coordination, disease management, and provider network discounts. Consumer-driven health care gives control of health care back to patients. That is why more and more are enrolling in it. We know today, many who work in the health care area with our seniors know they look at the details of their spending; they look at the billing; they know more about their health care and what is being charged than most people realize. Patients and their physicians, ultimately, with this kind of insurance, join in partnerships to seek the finest care at the most reasonable costs.
Consumer-driven care is especially suited for patients who like to be personally involved in their health care decisions. More and more Americans who can use the necessary information want that kind of personal involvement.
Consumer-driven care eliminates wasteful Medicare spending, it increases patient awareness of health care costs, and encourages prudent purchasing of health care services. Any unspent funds in the personal care account would be returned to the Medicare trust fund upon the death or the disenrollment. That is a key factor. Federal dollars go into the trust fund and, if there are dollars remaining, they flow back into the trust fund of Medicare upon disenrollment or the death of the
This amendment would be an important addition to the bill. I wish we could get it into the bill tonight. But it would be unfair to the manager of the bill at this time because it cannot get scored. I would not want to drive the cost up of the already-fixed segment of the MedicareAdvantage side. Already, it is less competitive than we would like it to be. I don't want to add to that disadvantage.
We believe ultimately that this will be a budget-neutral program. At that time, it will be the right thing to offer as part of the dynamics that we want to see in a modern health care delivery system and in an improved Medicare with a prescription drug program.
I thank my colleagues for listening. We will return with this when it is a final product. It may well make it into the conference between the House and the Senate. We will be working with our colleagues in the House because they have already provided that kind of a provision within the legislation which they are currently debating and voting upon.
With that, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw amendment No. 1086.