INTRODUCTION
Senator Breaux, thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee about the challenge
facing our country as we prepare for the retirement of the baby boom generation. I want to
congratulate you on your appointment as Chairman of the National Bipartisan Commission on
the Future of Medicare. This Commission has been given an assignment of critical importance
to us all -- preserving the Medicare program for future generations. We are also looking forward
to working with Secretary Jindal in his new capacity as Executive Director of the Medicare
Commission. We can expect him to apply the considerable talents he brought to the Department
of Health and Hospitals in Louisiana to his role in the Commission.
We are facing a society unlike any that has ever been encountered in American experience -- a
society with more old people, comparatively fewer children and adolescents, and with life
expectancy for many at age 65 measured in decades. The Commission, this hearing and other
public forums have an important role to play in our planning for how to deal with these changes
to our society.
The Medicare program has a rich history. In 30 some years, Medicare has literally changed
what it means to be old or disabled and sick in America. During this time, Medicare has meant
access to health care coverage for almost 80 million Americans who would otherwise have
lacked access to any kind of health care. Medicare is coverage that cannot be lost as you get
older or sicker, or face other changes of status such as widowhood or retirement. It has relieved
some of the financial burden of health care, which is critically important for low-income elderly
persons with high medical expenses, and has given American families the assurance that they
will not have to bear the full burden of health care costs for their elderly or disabled parents or
relatives. Medicare has already doubled the number of people it serves.
While we must confront and cure the problems of the program, we must never forget that it has
enhanced our health care system and ennobled us all. As President Lyndon B. Johnson said
when he signed Medicare into law: "No longer will this nation refuse the hand of justice to those
who have given a lifetime of service and wisdom and labor to the progress of this country." My
priorities as Administrator are to continue this commitment by ensuring the implementation of
the most significant changes made to Medicare in its history, and to continue -- and sharpen --
our focus on fraud, waste, and abuse in Medicare.
Today, Medicare is serving more than 39 million beneficiaries, including about 600,000 residents
of Louisiana. The program spends more than $200 billion annually across the country. In
Louisiana, Medicare spends about $3.5 billion each year. Medicare spending on home health
services is particularly notable, with spending at more than $13,000 per person, more than double
the national average, and the highest in the nation. Medicare also provides the State's elderly and
disabled with over 1.4 million days of hospital care; 500,000 days of skilled nursing home care;
and some 18 million physician visits.
The program that provides these extensive medical benefits to the citizens of Louisiana and the
rest of the Nation has a complex financing mechanism: the Medicare program is financed by two
Trust Funds. The Hospital Insurance (or "HI") Trust Fund, which pays for hospital, nursing
home, hospice, and some home health care, is financed primarily by payroll taxes on employers
and employees. The HI tax rate is specified in law, and program financing cannot be modified to
match variations in program costs except through legislation. It is this Trust Fund that is
projected to become insolvent in the next century as spending exceeds revenues.
The Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund (or "SMI"), which pays for physician services,
outpatient care, laboratory, durable medical equipment, and some home health services, is
financed by general revenues and enrollee premiums. SMI premiums and general revenue
payments are reestablished each year to match estimated costs for the following year. SMI
income automatically matches expenditures. Thus, this Trust Fund is prevented from ever
becoming insolvent.
In 1993, when the Clinton Administration first took office, the HI Trust Fund was projected to
become insolvent in 1999. The Administration, together with the Congress, immediately took
action and extended the life of the Trust Fund by several years. This summer, the Administration
and Congress passed a sweeping reform of the Medicare program. The Balanced Budget Act is
estimated to extend the life of the Trust Fund to about 2010 and puts in place major changes that
modernize the program and make it ready for the 21st century. We did a number of important
things in the Balanced Budget Act, including:
- New Choices for Beneficiaries -- We added new choices for beneficiaries, so that they will
have many types of health plans available to them from fee-for-service Medicare and HMOs, to
PPOs, Provider Sponsored Organizations, and private indemnity plans.
- Better Information for Beneficiaries -- We established an information program for
beneficiaries so that each beneficiary will receive pamphlets telling them about their choices,
giving information about local organizations that can help them, and providing a toll-free number
to call for more information. Beneficiaries also can access the information through the Internet.
- Preventive Benefits -- We expanded preventive benefits. In the past, Medicare covered only
what were called "medically necessary services." At long last, we are adding to the list some of
the most necessary services of all -- those that find and treat small problems before they become
big ones.
- Payment Reforms -- We reformed the way we pay health plans and providers, and gave the
program modernized purchasing authorities, so that program costs per beneficiary will be
reduced to less than 4 percent average annual growth rate for Fiscal Years 1997 through 2002.
- New Anti-Fraud Tools -- We added new tools and new funding to combat fraud and abuse.
We have been working aggressively with our partners in the Administration on Aging, the Office
of the Inspector General, and the States to combat fraud. Our new and expanded authority will
allow us to get even tougher. The only way we can maintain -- much less improve and expand --
Medicare and other public programs is if we make sure that they are responsibly managed,
fiscally sound, and free from waste, fraud, and abuse.
Through Operation Restore Trust and other efforts, this Administration has already taken strong
steps to weed out waste and fraud. We assigned more federal investigators and prosecutors than
ever before to fight Medicare fraud. Since 1993, we increased fraud convictions by a record
number, saved taxpayers more than $20 billion, and returned $1 billion to the Trust Fund last
year alone.
It is also important to note that all these improvements are being made in the context of what is a
highly efficient insurance program. Medicare's administrative costs are less than 2 percent of
benefit payments, considerably below that of private insurers.
A Long-Term Problem
Although the Balanced Budget Act eliminated the HI Trust Fund problem in the short run, we
still are facing insolvency down the road due to imminent demographic changes. [Chart 1]
In the very near future, a substantial portion of our population will be elderly. The proportion
will rise from about 13 percent in 2010 to almost 20 percent of the population in 2030. [Chart 2]
The steady improvement in life expectancy, coupled with a decline in birth rates, will result in
major increases in the number of older persons relative to those of working age. Currently, about
four workers paying HI taxes support each HI enrollee, a ratio which will begin to decline rapidly
early in the next century. By the middle of the next century, only about two workers will support
each enrollee. [Chart 3]
In addition, because of continuing improvements in life expectancy, the ratio
does not return to current levels once the subsequent "baby bust" generation reaches retirement
age.
It should be pointed out, however, that while the size of the 65-and-over population relative to
those aged 20-64 is expected to increase, the size and associated costs of the child and adolescent
population will be relatively lower in the future. Of course we need to recognize that public
expenditures on children are considerably lower than for aged persons, and the financing for such
expenditures is very different. However, it would be a mistake to focus on the public finance
implications of the growing elderly population without also recognizing the concomitant
reduction in the proportion of children and adolescents.
Nonetheless, the major underlying problem facing us is that in the future this country's growing
elderly population will consume health care services that will need to be financed in some way.
If their costs are not met by Medicare, then it will fall upon the individuals themselves, their
families, States, or employers to bear the cost of care. Even today, Medicare only pays about
half of the health care costs of the elderly. [Chart 4]
It is important to note that although the economic status of the elderly as a group has improved
over the past thirty years, many elderly individuals continue to have lower incomes than the
non-elderly, and because of their lower incomes and higher health care needs, they already spend
a significant portion of their income on health care. [Chart 5]
Thus, we face a growing elderly population, many of whom will not be well-off. Their primary
source of health care coverage will be through a program that today covers only one-half of an
elderly person's health care costs, since Medicare does not cover long-term nursing home stays,
outpatient prescription drugs, and has no catastrophic cap on beneficiary liability. This means
that in facing this challenge, we have to look at it far differently than we might have in the past.
I believe that there are two key principles that should guide us.
Medicare and the Larger Society
First, Medicare is a large part of a complex health care system, and a major component of the
overall economy. We cannot plan changes to the program in isolation. The issues related to
Medicare's role in planning for the retirement of the baby boom generation need to be discussed
and understood in a very broad context. We need to take into account policies and issues related
to labor supply, personal savings, economic growth, and Social Security. The format of today's
hearing bringing together representatives of Social Security, Medicare, and the Administration
on Aging is consistent with this more expansive view.
Medicare cannot be viewed in isolation from the other structures that support America's seniors.
A diversified approach to meeting the health care and retirement income needs of the aged is
critical to preparing for the future. The magnitude of the needs, and the importance of ensuring
that they are met, suggests the continued desirability of the traditional American approach of a
balanced, diversified collection of social insurance programs, private group insurance and
pension plans, and individual savings efforts what some have referred to as the "three legs of the
stool" that support the elderly in their retirement years.
The future demographic trends have significant implications for more than just entitlement
programs. They are intrinsically related to the nation's economic well being. Sufficiently robust
economic growth can help in providing the resources to meet future retirement and health care
needs while securing the living standard of the non-aged.
A Broad Agenda
In approaching the challenge of meeting the health care needs of future elders, the second
principle to guide us is that the agenda from which we choose should be as broad as possible.
We need to be open to a whole range of options, and not approach this from a limited
perspective. While preserving the basic architecture of Medicare, we must recognize the need to
take action to ensure its continued strength. We need to explore a wide variety of areas such as
eligibility, financing, benefit design, and work force related issues. The complexity of the
problem deserves our most creative thinking, not constrained by traditional frameworks.
We look forward to working with the Commission to help identify the problems and potential
solutions. Some of the fundamental questions that will need to be addressed include:
- What benefits should Medicare offer?
In the budget agreement, we took a step forward by expanding the benefit package to cover
important services like flu shots and mammography. As the population ages and the number of
retirees increases, the mix of services that Medicare beneficiaries may need will also change,
affecting the rates of chronic and long-term care.
- How will we control the cost of the Medicare program?
Specifically, we will need to scrutinize how Medicare's per capita costs are influenced by
inefficiencies in the program, and the overall cost growth of health care. How can we better
track and predict potential changes in technology, disability rates, and other factors affecting
these per capita costs?
- Should we raise the age of eligibility for Medicare?
The Commission needs to look beyond the aging of the population to other societal changes,
such as the length of time people work, and the numbers of uninsured workers in the population,
which leads us to the next question:
- How will we finance these costs?
Once again, we will need to take a very broad look at our options. For example, do we have the
proper mix of premiums, cost-sharing, payroll, and general revenue? Other questions may
involve the amount enrollees contribute to the program, the split between Part A and Part B, and
the future resources of our State and Federal governments. We also need to remember that not
all seniors enjoy the same financial status; we need to pay particular attention to vulnerable
segments of the
elderly, especially beneficiaries with the lowest incomes.
Some of the answers to these questions may be controversial, and many are still evolving. And,
they will be best answered by the Commission, whose mandate is clear -- to educate both the
public and the policy makers.
CONCLUSION
In the 1950s and 1960s, our country had to find a way to house and educate the "baby boom"
generation. In the 1970s and 1980s we had to integrate this generation into the labor force. In
the next century, we will have to support them in their old age and provide for their health care.
As we confront the challenge, difficult choices will have to be made. Recently, an important first
step was made with the passage of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, extending the life of the
Trust Fund.
The Congress also established The National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare as
the next important phase of our effort. I look forward to working with the Commission in
meeting the challenge.
