I have to respond to the outrageous charges made by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle regarding the Medicare statement I delivered yesterday. I was disturbed by several remarks, especially that seniors have flatly rejected the Medicare prescription drug benefit. How is that even possible when the drug benefit doesn't even go into effect until January 1, 2006? How is that possible when many Medicare beneficiaries are participating in the Medicare Drug Discount Card and have seen savings in their drug costs up to 20 percent per drug? I do not see that as an outright rejection at all. My colleagues need to be careful about their charges, especially when they do not have the facts to back them up. I also take issue with my colleague's assertion that our prescription drug law is only a drug law in name. What does he mean by that? Let me remind the Senator from Illinois that because of this new Medicare prescription drug law, 40 million Medicare beneficiaries will have drug coverage if they want it. The bill provides generous subsidies to low-income Medicare beneficiaries who, today, cannot afford to purchase drugs.
Orrin Hatch: “I have to respond to the outrageous charges made by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle regarding the Medicare…”
On the recordOctober 9, 2004
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Defending the Medicare prescription drug benefit against criticism during a Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Orrin Hatch
Dec 12, 2018
for more than four decades, I have had the distinct privilege of serving in the United States Senate--what some have called the world's greatest deliberative body. Speaking on the Senate floor, debating legislation in committee, corralling…
Oct 1, 2018
Having a confirmed Commissioner and sustained leadership will benefit the Social Security Administration.
Sep 26, 2018
I wish to enter a few remarks into the Record regarding section 103(a) of the Music Modernization Act, which the Senate recently passed. By striking current sections 114(f)(1) and (2) of title 17 and substituting a new section 114(f)(1)…





