Judd Gregg: “I have attempted not to respond to the Senator from Ohio because he appears to be stuck in the period of 1960, when…”

“I have attempted not to respond to the Senator from Ohio because he appears to be stuck in the period of 1960, when, apparently, our position was defined by somebody who was here in 1960. I wasn't here in 1960. I probably won't be here in 2025. In fact, I am absolutely sure I won't be. But that is going to be when this Medicare system goes broke. What I am concerned about is my children, America's children, and their children being able to afford this system when I retire and the rest of my generation retires and makes it basically unaffordable. The proposals the President has put forward are an attempt to make the system solvent, or at least more solvent. It doesn't bring it into solvency, and there are reasons for that. The Senator from North Dakota makes a good point: Rural hospitals are not reimbursed correctly under the formula. But that is not the issue which is being raised by the Cornyn amendment. That issue, actually, will be addressed by the Grassley amendment, which I understand is going to be offered to get the reimbursement straight. What is very obvious is that there is an inflated reimbursement rate occurring within Medicare of about 1.2 percent due to technology advancements and due to savings through efficiencies, which is inuring to the benefit of the system at the expense of the long-term life structure of the system. It is reasonable to take half that benefit-- half that benefit--and apply it to make sure the system has more solvency to it.”