Louise Slaughter: “But rather the opposite, a call to leave seniors to the mercies of the private sector and the free market, rather than…”

“But rather the opposite, a call to leave seniors to the mercies of the private sector and the free market, rather than guarantee them livable, affordable health care. My constituents and others around the Nation are reeling from public programs that have been turned over to the so-called free market. Utility rates, cable rates, you name it, the free market has ensured exorbitant prices with diminished service. Pensions and retirement security have taken a similar beating. Moreover, the timing of this proposal could not be worse. The proposal places the program in the private sector at a time when private insurers have dropped Medicare+Choice beneficiaries by the thousands. Private insurers will inevitably alter plans and move in and out of markets, leading to unpredictability for our seniors. A given drug might be covered one month, but not the next. Premiums could double from year to year without warning. The rule before us is one of the most heavy-handed procedures to come out of the Committee on Rules, and given the last few weeks, that is saying something. Amendment after amendment was blocked from floor consideration. My colleague, the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Thurman), and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen) had a remarkably sensible idea of requiring that prescription drug plans negotiate with pharmaceuticals for lower prescription drug prices, a necessity before we put a Federal program on top of them.”