Press Conference on Traditional Medicare Coverage for Women

June 17, 2003 Tuesday

HEADLINE: PRESS CONFERENCE ON TRADITIONAL MEDICARE COVERAGE FOR WOMEN
 

SEN. CANTWELL: Thank you, Senator Stabenow. And I also want to give my thanks to you for your perseverance and hard work on this issue, and for your amendment, which I think is critically important to this legislation.

When Congress first created Medicare, it designed the program to, as I quote, "make the best of modern medicine more readily available to the aged." End quote. We are not making the best of modern medicine available when millions of seniors can't afford access to the prescription drugs that they need. This is especially important, as my colleagues have said, to older women, who find that their health care demands may take them longer in years.

Medicare is not typically thought of as a women's program, but it does have a disproportional effect. Almost six in 10 of those on Medicare at age 65 are women, and by age 85, women outnumber men in the program by more than 2 to 1. In Washington state, 58 percent of Medicare beneficiaries are women. And women on Medicare spend 20 percent more on prescription drugs than their male counterparts because women live longer and typically have more chronic illnesses. In fact, in 2003, female Medicare beneficiaries spent a total of $2,418 on prescription drugs; nearly $1,100 of that was out-of-pocket expenses. But their male counterparts spent much less.

There is a clear need for a prescription drug benefit. We've heard that here, and we join our colleagues in that. But seniors do not want their prescription drug benefit run through an HMO or a private insurance company. A study that was done in June 2002, by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Kennedy School of Government, found that 67 percent of American people believe that we should expand Medicare to pay for part of prescription drugs. But when asked, only 26 percent said we should help seniors pay by private insurance to pay for their prescription drug costs.

So, 67 percent wanted Medicare -- (chuckles) -- 26 percent said, okay, you can have a private insurer.

So, Congress needs to take a reasoned and rational approach to integrating a new prescription drug benefit into Medicare, and that's why I will be supporting the Stabenow amendment. As women and senators, we must pay special attention to this because of the needs of women in the Medicare program. And I have many conversations with seniors in my state and constituents, and they tell me that they want a prescription drug benefit that is simple but comprehensive and based on the very best medical technology. And most important, they want that system run through Medicare. And that's what we're going to be continuing to fight for.

I wonder if my colleagues will indulge me for a minute to just say I followed the president's remarks this morning in Virginia at a workforce training summit at community colleges and was surprised to hear the president's comments on workforce and how important it was, given that the president's budget—own budget request was a 12 percent cut from the 2002 level. And he mentioned the One-Stop Shop program, the program that he pretty much is decimating in his budget proposal -- (chuckles) -- and leaves a big question mark whether we will fund those affected programs. I was successful in getting a budget amendment on the budget resolution to keep the 2002 level, something that we fought hard for, and were joined by Senators Snowe and Collins to keep that.

So, if the president has gotten new religion on workforce, glad to hear it. I hope he'll guarantee, as we come to the appropriations bill, money for workforce. Otherwise, I invite him to Washington state to help us deal with our 7.4 percent unemployment and understand how critical the workforce issues really are to this country.

One other point. (Chuckles.) I will be offering an amendment to this legislation on PBMs, to make sure that benefit managers of prescription drugs are more forthcoming with their accounting and their records, and to make more transparent the profits that they get so that consumers understand where the costs in prescription drug benefits are going.

Thank you.