```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 76 (Tuesday, May 9, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6301-S6302]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          PROTECTING MEDICARE

  Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, yesterday before the Senate Finance 
Committee I spoke about the importance of the Medicare Program to 
Montanans. I would like to take this opportunity to share those 
comments with the entire Senate.
  There being no objection, the comments were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

       Mr. Chairman, here in Washington, people often lose the 
     forest for the trees. I'm afraid we may be doing just that on 
     Medicare. So I hope we can begin by remembering what life was 
     like for older Americans before Medicare.
       The fact is, before we created Medicare, our senior 
     citizens lived in fear.
       Everyone over sixty knew that private insurance was shaky 
     and expensive at best, and would cost them more every year.
       And a serious illness--or even a common ailment that 
     required treatment but did not threaten life--was not only a 
     health problem, but something that could reduce a whole 
     family to poverty.
       Today, Medicare has removed that fear from our lives. Those 
     of us with short memories have forgotten it ever existed. But 
     let me tell you about some people who don't.
       Two weeks ago I spent some time at the Seniors Center in 
     Great Falls, Montana. The people at the center know exactly 
     what Medicare and Social Security mean to their lives.
       It means a little financial security. Some faith that 
     illnesses will be treated and that families won't be wiped 
     out by the cost. A hundred and twenty-five thousand Montanans 
     are eligible for Medicare, and each one of them knows exactly 
     what Medicare means.
       Listen to Margaret and Frank Jackson of Billings, who wrote 
     me last week:
       ``Social Security and Medicare are not only necessary, they 
     are absolutely essential to our survival in Montana. Higher 
     costs such as higher property tax, increase in school levies, 
     fuel in a cold climate, and medicine take a toll. There is 
     just too much month at the end of our money. Needless to say, 
     additional cuts would put a burden on us.''
       Or Joyce Hert, also from Billings:
       ``I am 58 years old and for the past 18 years have had 
     chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, emphysema, 
     Renaud's Disease, degenerative arthritis and a disease of the 
     connective tissue. . . . My medication costs approximately 
     $677
      a month* * *. Please don't turn your back on those of us who 
     need Social Security and Medicare.''
       The leadership now proposes something like $250 billion in 
     Medicare cuts. It is staggering. It is a reduction of nearly 
     a quarter in Medicare services by the year 2002. And to add 
     insult to injury, the House would do it in part to pay for 
     tax cuts for Americans who are already very wealthy. Some in 
     the Senate want to do the same.
       What would it mean if this happens?
       Montana Medicare beneficiaries would pay up to $800 more a 
     year out of their own savings. These are people who live on 
     fixed incomes, and eight hundred bucks is an awfully big 
     bite.
       We would see thousands of operations and hospital stays put 
     off.
       Thousands of people would decide to go without home health 
     care.
       And, as the federal government cut reimbursement, more 
     rural hospitals would be pushed to the edge, forced to choose 
     between serving their patients and remaining solvent. Some 
     Montana hospitals get 60% of their 
      [[Page S6302]]  revenue from Medicare. This plan would hit 
     them like a wrecking ball.
       Now, it may well be that we need to make changes in the 
     Medicare program. We must be realistic.
       The answer is not, however, to simply approach Medicare 
     reform as a budget cutting exercise. Because we are talking 
     about preserving essential health services for 125,000 senior 
     citizens in Montana and thirty million seniors across 
     America.
       We are talking about good, middle class Americans like the 
     Jacksons.
       And above all, we must not use Medicare as a piggy bank. 
     Don't take money that buys health care for senior citizens 
     and use it for a tax break for rich individuals and big 
     corporations. That is disgraceful.
       Perhaps some changes lie ahead. But if they do, they should 
     be made for the single purpose of keeping Medicare services 
     for senior citizens and people with disabilities. It is an 
     issue of good faith on the part of the government, and basic, 
     essential health services for Americans.
     

                          ____________________
```