Medicare Improvement for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 - Motion to Proceed
Floor Speech
MEDICARE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - July 09, 2008)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I wish to review some facts.
At the end of last year, we agreed to a short-term Medicare extension so that we could complete work on a bipartisan Medicare package this year that would fill out the 2 years that we previously had planned to do it. We were very close to a deal then and needed time to finish that work, so that is why we did the short-term extension. Both sides agreed that we would work quickly to get a bill that could be signed into law. Unfortunately, that effort has been intentionally derailed by the majority's desire to play politics with Medicare.
The fact is that the majority has twice walked away from good-faith, bipartisan negotiations. The fact is that we had been working for months before the rug was pulled. The fact is that we had actually completed that bipartisan deal 2 weeks ago yesterday, about 11 o'clock in the morning. It was a deal that would be signed into law--in other words, not be vetoed by the President of the United States. But the other side thought they saw a political advantage, and they have taken that into consideration. So they scuttled the deal in favor of a bill that would, in fact, be vetoed by the President of the United States, and that is where we are again right now. Now they have spent the last 2 weeks engaged in an effort to scare seniors and providers, and the worst thing yet is that it has been aided and abetted by the American Medical Association.
The bill is riddled with problems and missed opportunities. First and foremost, the bill we are going to be voting on would do serious harm to Medicare drug benefits on which millions of seniors have come to depend. It would tie the hands of Medicare Part D plans, resulting in higher drug prices and higher premiums for seniors.
Let me quote from a communication I received today from the Medicare Office of the Actuary. Their conclusion is that it would ``very likely result in additional Federal spending for the Part D program.'' Also, outside analysts have likewise concluded that this provision has the potential to undermine the long-term financial sustainability of the Medicare drug benefit.
This provision, which is tucked away in a seemingly harmless provision intended to clarify what classes of drugs might be protected under Part D, is a perfect example of why we work best in this body when we work together and when we do it in a bipartisan way. When we work together, we catch these little landmines tucked away in House-passed bills that could do real harm to a program seniors rely on for their drug coverage.
Instead of writing a bipartisan bill, the majority twice walked away from the table, and now we are in a position of ``take it or leave it.'' The process here today does a disservice to the purpose of the Senate, but more than that, it does a disservice to seniors, to doctors, and everyone who depends on Medicare.
There is a deal to be reached here. We could vote on a deal today that includes many of the policies in the underlying bill but fixes glaring problems. We could vote today on a bill that would provide a 1.1-percent update for physicians. We could vote on a bill today that would not be vetoed.
To my colleagues today, I say we should vote no on this motion so we can get back to something the President will sign and get it done and get it done quickly.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source