Madam Speaker, I thank the majority leader for yielding this time to discuss an extremely important issue facing the patients in this great country of ours that are going to have a very difficult time in finding a physician. Madam Speaker,…
Madam Speaker, I thank the majority leader for yielding this time to discuss an extremely important issue facing the patients in this great country of ours that are going to have a very difficult time in finding a physician.
Madam Speaker, in March of 2010, when the so-called Affordable Care Act, or PPACA, was passed into law, the purpose, of course, was to increase access to physicians for all patients across this country and also to bring down the cost of health care. Well, we're 2 years into this bill--which will become fully effective in January 2014--and what are we seeing?
Madam Speaker, the CBO reported just recently that some 7 million people have actually lost their health insurance, the health insurance provided by their employer. For those who do still have health insurance--particularly those who get it maybe not from their employer but from the individual market, a small group policy--the cost has actually increased some $2,500 a year instead of coming down, as anticipated and predicted and promised, in fact, by President Obama, but that just absolutely is not happening.
So what we're going to be talking about, Madam Speaker, is, again, what needs to be done to correct this situation. Because the thing that was never really discussed to my satisfaction when this bill was crafted was, how are you going to get the best and the brightest young men and women in this country to continue to go into the field of medicine, to become the doctors--particularly in primary care, internal medicine, and the pediatricians--to provide that care when the reimbursement system under Medicare, called the sustainable growth rate, year after year after year for the last 6 or 8 years we have actually cut the income to the providers, to the point, Madam Speaker, where they can't provide this care, they can't even break even? So this is what we're going to be talking about, this flawed sustainable growth system. It has certainly contributed to the physician shortage crisis that we see today.
Now, I have a number of slides that I want to present to my colleagues, and we'll go with some specifics on that. But I'm very pleased to be joined today in this House with the cochair of the House GOP Doctors Caucus, my good friend and fellow physician Member from Tennessee, Dr. Phil Roe, and I yield to Dr. Roe at this point.
Dr. Roe, if you would yield just for a second, I wanted to point out to my colleagues and to Dr. Roe the poster that we have before us. Because this is exactly what the good doctor is talking about right
now in regard to what's been going on since the year 2000. Dr. Roe, you may want to refer to this slide.
I yield to the gentleman.
Dr. Roe, that would be right here.
Dr. Roe, if you will yield for just a second and then I will return to you, again, I wanted to point out to our colleagues that this poster, this slide that's on the easel before us is exactly what the gentleman from Tennessee is talking about in regard to shortage of primary care physicians. And as he pointed out, primary care is a family practitioner, is a general internist--of course pediatricians provide primary care to our children. But so many of these doctors are the very ones that take the Medicare, take the Medicaid, take the SCHIP, the State Health Insurance Program for children. They see them.
And what Dr. Roe is referring to, before I yield back to him, on this poster it shows in the dark blue the areas of these States, several States, including my own of Georgia--Tennessee is not quite as bad--but in my State of Georgia, there are anywhere from 145 to 508 areas of the State of Georgia where there are an insufficient number of doctors to take care of these folks. Tennessee is a little bit better. There are only 67 to 99 areas. But all of this blue are critical areas, are they not, Dr. Roe? And I yield back to you.
I thank the gentleman, because what the gentleman from Tennessee is talking about is having an insurance card, a health insurance card--and indeed even having a Medicare card--does you very little good if you have to spend 2 hours going through the Yellow Pages trying to find some physician, primary care doctor in your area that you wouldn't have to get in your car and drive 50 miles--if you could even drive. If you don't have that access, then you don't have anything.
So here again, this bill, this massive bill was passed 2 years ago at the cost of almost $1 trillion. Unfortunately, a lot of that money was taken out of Medicare to create this new entitlement program, if you will, for younger people so that they can have health insurance. But what we've done is we've just made the crisis in the Medicare system that much more difficult.
What Dr. Roe was talking about, colleagues, is in regard to not just a shortage of the physicians, but what happens in the waiting rooms all across our country. This slide shows the number of primary care physicians per 1,000 population, the number of primary care physicians per 1,000 population.
Now, we've already gone over, we're talking about, again, general internists and family practitioners, primarily, and pediatricians for SCHIP and Medicaid. If you look at that map across the country, again, look at my State of Georgia in the deep red, and there are several States, Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, Utah, Nevada and Idaho in the West where the number of primary care physicians per 1,000 of the population is fewer than one. So less than one doctor per 1,000 people that need that care. Many other States, including Tennessee, it is somewhere between one and 1.2. Now, I don't know how you get 1.2 physicians. I don't know exactly what that provider looks like. But you know how that math is calculated. Clearly, the shortage is acute, and it's only going to get worse and worse.
With that, I want to yield to one of my good colleagues, good friends on the Energy and Commerce Committee whose father actually was the chairman of the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee for many, many years before he retired and his son took his place, and now the gentleman from Florida, Gus Bilirakis, is serving on that Health Subcommittee with me on Energy and Commerce.
I yield to Representative Bilirakis.
If the gentleman would yield, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida because what he is addressing right now goes back to the creation of this law, the Affordable Care Act, PPACA-- sometimes referred to as ObamaCare--where money was taken out of the Medicare program, the existing Medicare program, which is already strained almost to the bursting point, and the Medicare Advantage program. Probably 20 percent of Medicare recipients select that model because it gives them more bang for the buck. It gives them more coverage, and it includes things--and the gentleman from Florida knows this, and this is what he is referencing--it includes more than just an annual physical when you turn 65. It includes more than being able to go to see a doctor and have it reimbursed under Medicare when you have an episode of illness.
There is a strong emphasis on Medicare Advantage to wellness. Let's say you do go and see the doctor because of an episode of illness, and maybe several prescriptions were written. It's very important that the patient take the medication on a regular basis and not run out of medication. So under Medicare Advantage, there would be a nurse maybe in the doctor's office who within just a few days of that encounter would call the patient to make sure that he or she could afford to get those prescriptions filled and they were taking them in the right way. That's what the word ``Advantage'' was all about, Medicare Advantage, rather than just a traditional fee-for-service Medicare.
But this new law created 2 years ago, and will go into full effect in January, 2014, literately gutted that Medicare Advantage part, did it not, Representative Bilirakis? It cut that program 12 to 14 percent. I mean, it's just literally gutted. I'm talking about $130 billion was taken out of that one program.
So now seniors that were on Medicare Advantage are having to look for new doctors, look for new programs, try to again go through those Yellow Pages and find somebody that will see their momma who's been going to this other group for years and is totally satisfied.
When the President said to the American public, If you like the health insurance plan you have, don't worry, you can keep it; you will not lose it, that just wasn't true. I don't think he deliberately told an untruth, but it clearly is not true. And as I said at the outset of this hour, some 7 million people have already lost insurance provided by their employer, and many more of these people that were getting their Medicare through the Advantage program, they have lost that through no choice, Madam Speaker, of their own. They have been forced out of those programs.
I yield back to my colleague, and we will continue this colloquy.
I thank the gentleman from Florida and I thank his dad, Representative Mike Bilirakis, Madam Speaker, who served in this body for so many years with distinction. I hope that he is enjoying a happy and healthy retirement in the Sunshine State. And I hope he's able to find care, but I bet you it's not under Medicare Advantage, as his son just told us.
At this point, I would like to yield back to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe).
If the gentleman will yield for just a second, I want to weigh in on that issue of electronic medical records.
I'm normally, as the good doctor from Tennessee knows, walking around here in a sling, as I have been for the last couple of weeks. Madam Speaker, I probably should have it on right now, but I'm resting my arm on the podium.
But I just recently had rotator cuff surgery back home in Marietta, Georgia. Madam Speaker, I was blessed with a great physician who did a wonderful job and has a fabulous staff, but going through the process of doing the paperwork, I bet I filled out the exact same form four different times. That was wasting my time and that was wasting their time. Of course, what they want to make sure is that no mistakes are made. Obviously, they want to make sure they operate on the correct arm. So I understand why, and I'm sure many of you, your parents, your grandparents, and you yourselves, my colleagues, as patients have gone through all of that.
But what Dr. Roe is talking about--and I will yield back to him-- electronic records are indeed, in my opinion, the wave of the future. Honestly, I believe if we had concentrated on that 2 years ago to make sure that it was fully implemented so that duplication of testing, unnecessary procedures, maybe medications prescribed to which the patient had a dangerous allergy, you really do ultimately save lives and save money by having an electronic medical record system.
The other thing is if we had had medical liability reform. The President promised that before this ObamaCare bill of 2,700 pages was put into law, but there was nothing in there about medical liability reform.
Here again, those were two things, and I think the gentleman from Tennessee would agree with me on that.
I just wanted to interject my thoughts about electronic medical records, and I yield back to the gentleman.
The top of the green line is where we in the Congress mitigated these cuts because we can do that. That's what it says in the Constitution, that we're in charge of the purse strings. So, when there is a recommendation, as Dr. Roe is referring to, Madam Speaker, of the cuts in the pink--below the line, from 2001 to 2012, there is almost every year a 5 percent, 3 percent, 4 percent, 10 percent--then in the aggregate, that number just keeps getting bigger and bigger.
What Dr. Roe is about to explain to us is how we were heretofore able to mitigate, which is by making these changes above the line and by saying, no, we're not going to cut the doctors because we know, if we do that, they won't be there, that they won't be there for our parents and our grandparents and ourselves and our children.
Dr. Roe, what will happen in reference to this slide right here--if you look at these blue areas, these States that have the acute shortage areas, like Georgia and Florida--is that this whole map of the United States will be blue.
I thank the gentleman, and I want to continue a colloquy with him and maybe even ask a question of him. Dr. Roe, Madam Speaker, explained very clearly how that is a section of ObamaCare, a very important section of a group of 15 bureaucrats appointed by the President.
In regard to the IPAB, they basically can now say from year to year, Well, the doctors and the hospitals are going to be cut so much reimbursement. These cuts are going to occur.
We showed in the first slide how over the years Congress has been able to mitigate. Read the Constitution. We, the Members of the Congress, control the purse strings. So, fortunately, we were able to make these changes into what was suggested; but this IPAB board of 15 bureaucrats, they're not making a suggestion. They're telling us what has to be done.
The question I wanted to ask of Dr. Roe, Madam Speaker, was: when this case went before the Supreme Court, questioning the constitutionality of the law and saying that if a Governor of a State, like the Governor of Georgia, Governor Nathan Deal--an 18-year Member of this body, by the way--makes a decision not to expand Medicaid because the State can't afford it as the State's already going broke on the current Medicaid program, is it constitutional for the Federal Government to say, If you won't expand the Medicaid program, we're going to make sure that you can't participate at all and that all of your current recipients of Medicaid in the State of Georgia are out on the street?
That was a question that was asked of the Supreme Court as well as: was it constitutional to force people to engage in health care if they didn't want to, if they did not want to purchase health insurance? Now, I'm not recommending that they don't; but the question before the Supremes was: is it constitutional under the Commerce Clause to make people engage in commerce if they don't want to do it? The Supremes said, in a very pained, strained, pretzel-like decision, that that was constitutional.
Dr. Roe, do you know whether or not this question about IPAB was addressed by the Supremes: is it constitutional or not? I'm not sure. I'm thinking it wasn't addressed. Would you speak to that.
So you're saying that it's in the law, but because it hasn't been applied yet. And, in fact, indeed, as Dr. Roe pointed out, Madam Speaker, the board, the IPAB board, 15 bureaucrats, have not even--not even one of them, their salary has been set, I think they're scheduled to make $150,000 a year and probably have a car and a driver and health insurance and retirement plan, and not too bad a gig if you can get it, but not so far I don't think any have been appointed. And so that's what Dr. Roe, Madam Speaker, was referring to when he said there's not standing yet. If you went to the Supreme Court, they would say the case is not ripe. I'm standing here as a physician trying to sound like an attorney, and I'm going to get myself in a lot of trouble here in a minute, Madam Speaker, and Dr. Roe explained that very well, but I do agree with him, colleagues. I do agree with Dr. Roe that that will be challenged and certainly should be struck down. You look at the Constitution, our fifth and sixth graders probably could make that decision, and it wouldn't be a 5-4 split decision; it would be 9-0.
I thank the gentleman, Madam Speaker. And as he talked about his mom, I stand here thinking about my own mom, who's 95 years old. Her body is getting a little frail, but Mom's mind is perfect. Perfect, Madam Speaker. She has enjoyed the benefit of Medicare and Social Security for many years. Many years. So these legacy programs are hugely important. They're hugely important to our side of the aisle.
Madam Speaker and my colleagues, all of this Mediscare stuff, and things that you get all of this rhetoric about, they don't care about seniors and they're going to push somebody's grandmother over the cliff in a wheelchair, that's just a bunch of bull. I think every Member of this body and every Member of Congress cares about seniors and cares about these programs.
But I also, Madam Speaker, have 13 grandchildren. I have 13 grandchildren, and I want this Medicare program to be there for them some day, just like it has been there for Mom all these years.
So as we talk about these issues, we would do nothing to harm current recipients of Medicare and Social Security. We used the term, the phrase I guess you'd say, ``hold harmless.'' Hold harmless. Any changes that we would make, whether it is the payment system to our doctors and our hospitals for providing the care, it would not take away any benefit. It would not cause our current seniors to have to pay a higher premium or copay or deductible. All we're doing is trying to come up with something that would save the program for them, but, most importantly, for these youngsters that are coming behind us, the next two generations. So that's what we're all about.
My colleague, if he has some more comments, I would like to refer back to him, the gentleman from Tennessee.
I thank the gentleman.
Madam Speaker, as we get near the closing of the hour, I wanted to just mention several things. Dr. Roe has alluded to these, talking about the Medicare Advantage and what a beneficial program that was. Unfortunately, it's now been gutted, literally gutted, cut at least 12 percent, $130 billion, to create this whole new program that we call PPACA, or ObamaCare.
Medicare Part D, Madam Speaker, the gentleman from Tennessee is talking about the prescription drug part of Medicare that we did my first year, when I first came here in 2003, the Medicare Modernization and Prescription Drug Act.
Seniors, for many, many years, have wanted to be able to get their prescription drugs covered by Medicare but they couldn't. And of course, when you have to go to the drugstore and get five prescriptions filled, and most of them, brand name, not generic, some generic, maybe, but these brand name drugs are so expensive. And so we finally did this for our seniors.
Now, we spent what--I don't know, maybe $750 billion--creating that program, and we got criticized for it because it wasn't paid for. We didn't offset by cutting spending somewhere else. And I think maybe that criticism, under the current system, is legitimate.
But really, when you think about it, if you scored dynamically, and you realize that if people, seniors, all of a sudden could take their blood pressure medicine and not have to worry about a stroke, could take their diabetes medicine and not have to worry about eventually having renal failure from diabetes or an amputation, in the long run, what I'm saying, Madam Speaker, is this program, Medicare Part D, Medicare Advantage, electronic medical records, if we scored things in the right way, dynamically, at the end of the day, 10 years, 20 years, whatever, we're going to save money because people are not going to have coronary bypass surgery, they're not going to have to have these amputations, they're not going to end up the rest of their lives in a nursing home because they've had a catastrophic stroke that has left them totally incapacitated.
I'm going to yield back to the gentleman from Tennessee to close us out.
I thank my colleague.
And Madam Speaker, I thank you, and I thank the leadership of the Republican Party for allowing us to bring this information to our colleagues in a bipartisan way.
We are all about solving these problems. We talked basically about the sustainable growth formula, the way we pay doctors for a volume of care.
Clearly, we're going to have to go to paying for quality of care. We don't have time to get into all the details of that today, but in the next Special Order hour that the Doctors' Caucus leads, we'll get into more details about what we're going to recommend to our committees, to our leadership, to both sides of the aisle in regard to solving this program.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.