Mr. Speaker, let me first of all point out that our plan very clearly says right on its face that no older American who is currently receiving Medicare health care benefits will be forced out of the traditional fee-for-service program. It does provide other options for health care, and the gentleman from New Jersey mentioned a couple, managed care, and medical savings accounts. We think those are both progressive ideas, designed to build more flexibility into the program, ultimately give more choice to Medicare recipients and frankly to empower them to be more involved with decisions having to do with their own personal health care. Let me point out that, second, a fact that the gentleman kind of skipped over. Let me back up for just a moment. Let me also stipulate that our plan requires that any savings from reducing the rate of growth in Medicare expenditures must stay in the Medicare Program. As a consequence, the Congressional Budget Office says that our program will extend the life or the solvency of the hospital insurance trust fund to the year 2008, which is 3 years more than the President's proposal. So, yes, we are bolder because we are trying to think not just of the needs of today's seniors but the needs of the next generation of Medicare recipients as well.
Frank Riggs: “Mr. Speaker, let me first of all point out that our plan very clearly says right on its face that no older American who…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a Medicare reform plan and its implications for older Americans and future recipients.
Share
More from Frank Riggs
I do want the opportunity to respond, since the previous speaker in the well I think just referred to me as being ``mean-spirited'' and ``bigoted.'' I guess the proper thing to do is to consider the source. But I also want to respond by…
The ruling effectively ended racial preferences in admissions to the University of Texas. So, what do university leaders do now, according to two articles, the San Antonio Express News and another Texas newspaper furnished to me by our…
I am very comfortable with language that would say that a court order, Federal court order would take precedence over State and local law with respect to bilingual education or State local policy. But, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support an…
But as I understand what the gentleman is saying, if there is a legitimate legal or policy dispute in the eyes of a local school district and ultimately its governing board and its top administrators, and if that dispute is between Federal…





