On the recordJuly 23, 2002
Let me quote from the letter to Senator Hagel: Our members are counting on the Senate to pass a meaningful drug benefit that is available and affordable to all beneficiaries. AARP goes on to say that while they appreciate the intent of S. 2736--this is their quote--they are . . . concerned that by offering this scaled-back proposal today, you would effectively derail bipartisan discussion and compromise on more meaningful, comprehensive approaches. That is exactly the problem. I think when seniors from one end of this country to the other hear the exact specifics of the Hagel plan, they are going to be shocked. I think they even probably think that the most generous of the plans--the Graham-Miller-Kennedy plan--doesn't go far enough in terms of help that they need. To hear this one--and I will get into some of the details--I think they would say: Gee whiz, what the heck did they do? If we went home and said we passed a prescription drug benefit and passed the Hagel-Ensign bill, most of our constituents would say--correctly--no, you didn't, and don't you claim that you did because you are not helping the vast majority of people who desperately need the help. I will go on with the AARP letter. They are worried about the catastrophic nature of the Hagel-Ensign bill. Quoting them: While AARP has not opposed income-relating premiums, income-relating the Medicare benefit changes the nature of the problem. This would set up an extremely dangerous precedent in Medicare.…
Source
govinfo.gov




