Patrick Kennedy: “I was among those who voted against it when it came to the floor last time, and I want to correct something that my…”

“I was among those who voted against it when it came to the floor last time, and I want to correct something that my colleague was talking about in terms of leaving it up to the States. Maybe it was good for North Dakota, and I am sure my colleague, when he was an insurance commissioner, looked out for the consumers, but I can tell you the problem with having 50 different select plans, 50 different select plans regulated by 50 different States. It means that seniors in one State, like in my State of Rhode Island, if they have their Medicare Select MediGap plan and they go over to Massachusetts, it is a different plan. That, to me, does not sound like the proper approach to take to this when we are talking about needing comprehensive savings. In addition, I just want to talk a little bit about this so-called increased choice. Under the guise of giving seniors increased choice, Congress is about to pass legislation that will in fact box them in. Yes, one more plan will now be available, but it is a narrow one and it is difficult, leaving many seniors in a potentially very risky situation. More choice do not simply mean better choices. For seniors who are considering the Medicare select policy, keep one thing in mind: This plan could be hazardous to your health. When Medicare select came before us the last time, I supported an alternative that addressed the serious flaws in Medicare select.”