Phil Gingrey: “And as I said, premiums, Madam Speaker, a third lower than expected. Even the cost, the overall cost, we got some…”

“And as I said, premiums, Madam Speaker, a third lower than expected. Even the cost, the overall cost, we got some conflicting numbers back towards the end of 2003 when we were debating and finally passing this bill. The first number, of course, was it was going to cost $450 billion over 10 years extra Medicare spending. Then the number went up to $750 billion. We now know that the cost is going to be lower than those numbers, and probably a lot lower because as we crunch these numbers, the Congressional Budget Office or the Office of Management and Budget, they do what we call static scoring. And as my colleagues earlier were talking about, and I think Dr. Burgess in particular, Madam Speaker, no credit is given for the fact that when our seniors, my mom and others, can afford to take these prescription drugs and lower that blood pressure, lower that cholesterol, lower that blood sugar, then they are not going to need the expensive benefits of Part A and Part B, whether it is a long stay in the hospital or in the intensive care unit, even more expensive; or on the operating table, having a leg amputated; coronaries; bypass; or maybe even in a worse situation of high blood pressure, having a stroke and spending the rest of their lives in a nursing home covered by Medicare or maybe Medicaid. Who wants that if they can avoid it by spending less money on Part D and preventing this from happening in the first place?…”