I thank my friend and colleague from New York. I just wanted to amplify the point you just made, Mr. Tonko. Last week the Kaiser Family Foundation issued a report. This isn't coming from any committee in Congress. This is an independent…
I thank my friend and colleague from New York. I just wanted to amplify the point you just made, Mr. Tonko. Last week the Kaiser Family Foundation issued a report. This isn't coming from any committee in Congress. This is an independent analysis. It said that the average family of four in the United States is currently spending over $13,000 a year for health care coverage. If we do nothing, by 2018, in only 9 years, that $13,000 a year will be $30,000 a year, pushing health care affordability beyond the reach of millions of American families if we do nothing.
There are real costs to inaction when it comes to health care.
I would say to my friend from New York, Madam Speaker, that I think this whole issue of the distortions health care causes on the labor market really impede and constitute a significant barrier to the fostering of innovation and entrepreneurship in the United States because, as our friend from Maine just indicated, millions of Americans have to make decisions about where they will work and at what they will work, not because they think that's necessarily what they're going to be best at or not because they're willing to take a chance with a startup company, understanding it might fail but, on the other hand, it might be the next Microsoft, but because they can't afford to because they have a preexisting condition.
Forty-five percent of us who have health care insurance have a previous existing condition, and you may have a spouse or a child with a previous existing condition on that policy. And if you move to a smaller risk pool or, God forbid, no risk pool at all because that small startup or that small company can no longer afford health care coverage, you risk the catastrophic illness you just talked about, Mr. Tonko, which drives families into bankruptcy.
In my district, which is a relatively affluent district compared to many others, we had 1,430 families last year in the 11th Congressional District of Virginia who filed for bankruptcy because of health care costs. And no American family should have to face that kind of ``Sophie's choice'' over health care in America.
Absolutely.
In my district, I've started something called ``house calls.'' In fact, CNN followed me around one day actually at it, saying, you know, it's not that often a Member of Congress makes house calls, but this one did.
What I did was sit around a kitchen table at a home with some neighbors in this particular neighborhood in my district and listened to stories. And while, obviously, there exists lots of considerable and legitimate fear and angst about what might constitute health care reform, what might be in a bill or not that we heard this summer, we also know there was also an awful lot of orchestrated noise to try to prevent the legitimate debate on health care sometimes and maybe to drown out these stories of average Americans and what they go through at the hands of the health care insurers.
So I'm picking up on what Ms. Pingree said, but I am talking about those who have insurance, and yet time after time what I find when I go back to my district is stories, often horror stories, but certainly stories about capricious, arbitrary decision making.
We heard a lot of rhetoric this summer about I don't want a lot of government bureaucrats standing between me and my doctor and deciding on my medical care, and I think all three of us would agree with that. We don't want that either. There is a bureaucrat, however, if you're insured in America, standing between you, often, and your medical care, and that's not a government bureaucrat. It's an insurance bureaucrat sitting in a cubicle somewhere, looking for ways to shave costs irrespective of the medical requirements you may have, and sometimes and all too often irrespective of what the recommendation of your doctor may be in terms of best treatment or testing or both. Time and again, we hear sad story after sad story of lack of coverage, capping the amount of coverage, refusal to allow testing or procedures, often for very arbitrary reasons.
One of the things I hope, and I know that a number of the versions of health care reform legislation contain, is that we will actually address that. We will rein that in. We will protect health care consumers in America from that kind of capricious behavior by insurers whose only motivation isn't your health or your best interest; it is profit.
There's nothing wrong with profit, but profit ought not to be the driving motivation in the most important part of our daily lives: our good health and well-being. And it seems to me we ought to be putting America's health before the insurers' profit motive.
You know, Mr. Tonko, a lot of folks who have health care coverage have to look at what is the trajectory moving out in the next few years.
Let me give you an example of a couple I met in one of my house calls. This is a gentleman with a Ph.D. His livelihood is to tutor high school students in our school system who need extra help trying to make their way in the academic career, but he's considered a contract employee and, therefore, has to get his own health insurance. He has no benefits.
Seven years ago health insurance coverage for him and his family of four cost $4,000 a year. Absolutely manageable, easily fit into his budget. Seven
years later, no change in his health profile, it now costs $18,000 a year for that same family of four, and that includes no dental, no vision, and no drug coverage. He now has to look at the next few years of whether he has to drop that health insurance policy because he can no longer afford it because now it involves real tradeoffs economically.
This is not somebody who is abjectly poor; this is the middle class actually looking at terrible choices they never thought they would have to make regarding health care.
Adding to what you just said, Mr. Tonko, if we do nothing over the next 10 years, the cost to small business for health care in America will climb to $2.4 trillion. And that means that 38 percent that currently provide health care coverage will drop to something like 30 percent or below.
It is unacceptable. Of course, an awful lot of fear was engendered by misinformation spread over the summer about what would and would not happen to Medicare. No current Medicare benefits will be in any way negatively affected by any of the legislation that we are looking at. As a matter of fact, those benefits will be enhanced by the closing of the doughnut hole that you just referred to, Mr. Tonko. That is the hole that doesn't cover the price of prescription drugs at a certain expense range for senior citizens, meaning that their out-of-pocket cost for prescription drugs goes through the roof. They often have to make very difficult choices between food and drugs at the end of the month. We want to close that doughnut hole.
You know, in addition, if you actually enumerated the benefit enhancement for our seniors, Medicare stays not only intact; it gets better. We close the doughnut hole, making it easier for seniors to be able to afford and to access the prescription medications that they need.
We eliminate copayments for routine, preventive medical care, including screenings, saving seniors hundreds of dollars a year.
We improve and increase reimbursement payments to doctors who serve Medicare patients, which is a complaint we often hear from our senior citizens, that because of reimbursement rates being inadequate, doctors put a cap on how many Medicare patients they will see. And in some cases they get out of business all together. Obviously, that is not a good thing for our senior population.
This bill addresses all three of those reforms, making Medicare benefits more generous to our senior citizens, protecting the benefit base they have got, and augmenting it. Unfortunately, some of the misinformation spread in the summer would suggest otherwise, creating needless fear and stress in our senior population which relies so heavily on an efficient and effective Medicare system.
Absolutely. I think the numbers you just cited for New York State actually are higher than the national average, and there are regional disparities here in terms of the growth of cost. But what we do know, based on the Kaiser Family Foundation study is that the average increase in insurance premiums over the last decade was 138 percent, far outstripping the rate of inflation and far outstripping, as you point out, the growth in wages and income. As a matter of fact, that was negative.
So there is no lodestone to measure what is happening in health care; but we do know that it is fast outstripping the ability of people's income to support, and it is far and away above the rate of any inflation index, and it is going to be pushing itself beyond the index of affordability in the not-so-distant future if we don't do something in the way of health care reform.
I need to leave the floor, but I want to thank my colleague for his leadership and for providing us a forum for a civil discussion about such an important topic.
It is not sustainable. I thank my colleague.