Chuck Grassley: “first of all, let me make very clear that we know that Medigap is very important as part of Medicare. We leave that…”

“first of all, let me make very clear that we know that Medigap is very important as part of Medicare. We leave that untouched as it relates to 1965 model Medicare. In fact, many of my Iowa constituents want to keep that. But we as a policy matter have made it a very conscious choice to prevent the sale of wraparound Medigap plans for the new Part D drug benefit. This policy makes sense considering drug plans could be different everywhere else in the United States. It is impossible to standardize Medigap policies like we did about 15 years ago so that seniors don't get ripped off. But the Congressional Budget Office tells us this new Medigap plan that is before us now will increase the cost of our bill. The cost of this amendment is $1.5 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That is because of the increased utilization that comes from having additional insurance. I share the Senator's concern with gaps in coverage. I wish we didn't have any. But we believe participating drug plans--especially drug plans delivered by PPOs--will offer benefits in a comprehensive fashion, lessening the need for expensive supplemental policies. I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment.”