i think we have a responsibility. it is very difficult. we are not to make everybody happy. but i believe that we must work toward some bipartisan product when it comes to health care. .

>> this week, "washington journal" is taking a look at the inner workings of medicare. on wednesday, for manicured minister tom scully discussed the largest part of the program. this is one hour. a? guest: it is the biggest part of medicare. medicare is of $480 billion per year program. it covers 45 million seniors and disabled americans, people over 65, and those under 65 who are disabled. part a concerns hospitals, and patient services, and the like. you get into complications of a lot of co-payments and deductibles, but the biggest part is in nursing homes, home health agencies, hospitals, and a variety of other things. it is paid for largely by hospital insurance tax that you

and i see from our project if you are working. it is a 1.45% tax on the individual, along with your social security tax, and the same on your employer. everyone pays 2.9% to finance that. the taxes collected on the hospital side many times go back out to pay for medicare part a. host: a lot of information in that answer. let's pretty dumb. who is eligible for medicare part a? guest: the largest segment our seniors over 65. you have to have paid to be eligible und65thon -- on your 6h birthday.

but, basically, then you are in. additionally, there is a large population of people who are disabled, about 7 million. they are declared by the social security administration to be disabled. after a two-year waiting period, then you are in. that is about 16% of the population. host: why do you have to wait two years? guest: there is a resumption that if people are long term disabled and fundamentally dissemble, -- there is a presumptive the note is to show that you could go back to work, or if you have lou gehrig's disease, or certain other types like renal disease, their

qualifications to get in more quickly. host: those two? guest: als only happened a couple of years ago. it hits quickly and disabled people quickly. waiting two years is often not approve. when you have a kidney failure and have to be on kidney dialysis three times per week to survive, there are other qualifications. so, there is the acknowledgement that those two diseases lead to much quicker terminal illness. host: everybody pays 1.45% of their income to medicare? guest: if you look on your social security taxes on your paycheck, it's sayshi tax -- that is hospital tax -- it says hi tax.

the best book of working americans pay this tax, as does your employer, alter your working life. that goes to the hospital insurance trust fund. that collected about $205 billion last year through various mechanisms. it then pays out the hospital insurance benefits or to a home health agency, or such. host: who administers into? guest: by the centers for medicare and medicaid services which i ran for two years in the early 2000's. it is in transition. medicare sets the policy. it is in baltimore. the program is administered by contractors, blue cross plans. in 2003 and was involved in putting a policy where we had

contractors who are called fiscal intermediaries, which are largely blue cross plans. there used to be 26. by region there would pay out benefits. if you submitted your claim after going to the hospital, the check would come back, usually would be to a contractor. there was a judgment made largely by me and others in congress that it was too complex. b in part a have all been joined together to consolidate the 15 original contractors. the will be 15 years from now. all the payments will come through 15 plans. host: those are 15 private plans? guest: they are 15 contractors that medicare pays, largely still across plans. they are blue cross by state.

the contract with medicare to pay benefits on behalf of medicare. it has evolved over the years. for many years of mutual of omaha was a big contractor. essentially, the government uses contractors to pay them out. host: if you were 65 years old and eligible for medicare, you do not pay for it anymore, correct? if you are not working? guest: foreparts a. the net to various creeley. if you have to buy private insurance, for the average senior it is about a $11,000 per person. -- for part a. it varies greatly. so, basically once you hit 65

you are covered. generally, you'll pay about $1,100 per year for premiums for a $11,000 benefits. 90% is covered by the treasury. it includes the taxes you paid your whole life. so, the premium is about 10% of the cost. the rest of it is covered by taxes you paid during your working life. host: for the next three days we want to explore medicare. how it developed and how it is paid for and how it fits into the healthcare debate currently going on on capitol hill. we will put up the phone lines. we have divided them differently. if you are 64 or under, dial in on the first line. if you are 65 or older, dial into -0002.

then, we would like to hear from healthcare professionals on the third time. what services does medicare part a cover? guest: all inpatient hospital services. the deductible is a lifetime cap. medicare stops covering at some point. but party a has a $68 deductible which has been adjusted for inflation over the years. the first 60 days you are in the hospital, you pay the first $1,060. medicare pays the rest. if you are in for another 30 days after that, there is a copayment of $267 per day. beyond that $9, it gets more

expensive. the best book of seniors have some type of supplemental insurance. -- the best part have supplemental insurance. -- the vast part. it tends to be about $3 or $4 per month for the supplemental insurance. -- $300 or $400 per month. the next for you about is medicare advantage. it is a private medicare plan to provide different benefits that usually do not have these gaps. host: why is there a deductible , $1,000.68?

jake -- $1,0068. guest: it is not intended to cover every dollar. is more like if you hit a certain threshold it will cover these expenses. lower income people have medicaid instead. their 7 million seniors who have dual coverage. medicaid also provides supplemental coverage. so, the issue is that for people who are notpo poor, this should cover some of the cost. the idea was to make sure that the beneficiary has some sense of sharing the costs. and also to keep the cost down.

host: what is the theory behind after 60 days of big co-pay kicks in? guest: a lot of it was cost. in 1965 the program was originally projected to be $3 billion per year. this year is $470 billion. so, the issue is largely because. hospitalization is pretty high. very few seniors see the deductibles. the issue was cost. there's times the legislation was passed to cut some co-pays and deductibles for seniors. host: is the hospital fund self-funding? guest: yes, it is. it has a surplus that

theoretically goes until you bring in more revenues until about 2019. that is before you have spinning going higher than the revenue. -- before you have spending going higher than the revenue. host: alex from cq politics is also joining us. is this part of the healthcare debate taking place on capitol hill? guest: yes, they have to pay for the bill somehow. one big way they want to generate revenue is by making some spending cuts to medicare. i hesitate to call them cuts, because they're more like decreasing the rate of growth. they add up to a substantial amount of money over 10 years. it is $200 billion in the house

bill just from spending changes within part a. host: how did they make those changes? guest: by tying future adjustments and payments to medicare providers to productivity growth. this gets a little technical, but basically medicare at the moment does not take into account productivity improvements in the economy when they are updating payments for medicare providers. they will start doing that. that measure alone raises within part a about $100 billion. host: what does productivity mean? guest: slowing the rate of inflation. hospitals every year get 3%

inflation adjustment for cause. you can assume that for productivity reasons they do not need three%, but less@@@@@@ so you can imagine over a couple of years on a program that spends a couple of hundred billion dollars, if you give him a 3% increase, over 10 years to project the same amount of money. >> how to they said the rate for open heart surgery in tennessee or new york city? >> is basically the same, adjusted for geography. my whole agency, about five dozen people sit up there and make judgments based on data, what is the right amount to pay for heart bypass surgery? they do it based on hospital costs in the private sector. they will say this is what we think is the appropriate costs. it may be a good team% more in

new york than in rural upstate new york are in wyoming. paid the same with regional adjustments. host: do hospitals lose money on medicare patients? guest: hospitals generally, you can debate that. generally, there is a cost shift across the board. medicare per service -- the argument is that there is much more volume -- but generally, hospitals probably break even or marginally lose money on medicare patients. they shift the cost to the private sector. there would probably charge of private insurance company 10% more than medicare pays. most health providers lose money on medicaid, a break-even on medicare, and make money by shifting the cost to the private sector. it is one of the reasons why people in the private sector

want reform. host: so, it is not really a fee-for-service? medicare pays you a certain rate, regardless? guest: yes, i was in the first bush administration -- it seemed like a great idea at the time what i was doing. the average physician had an average rate of $34. today is about $35 after 20 years. the adjustment system ratchets down the stretch. what are you going to do? the physicians will provide more services, invest in and outside services and equipment. the system that sets prices in new it does not matter where your tenure is as a doctor. in theory by unit you are restricting in controlling

prices. but there is a lot of volume and very few ways to control. host: is there much fallout on the proposed changes on capitol hill? guest: some polling suggests that seniors are the most opposed in the country to the president's plan over all. they are clearly concerned about what congress is doing with medicare as part of this effort. i think congress faces a difficult task. they are trying to toe the line between medicare spending in medicare benefits in cutting. if that sounds like a distinction without a difference, some republicans say that it is. host: let's go to calls. we have divided on lines a little differently today. -- divided the phone lines a little differently.

our guests are tom scully, former head of medicare and medicaid during the first bush administration. andalex wayne of cq politics.com. irma, in arlington, texas, under 65, good morning. caller: good morning, this is my first time to calledlive. my comment is that in regard to the medicarea, or b, for senior citizens, or even for the disabled -- personally, we have suffered a loss in my family. my father turned 62 and he wanted to retire at 65, but got very ill with terminal cancer. according to the positions they told us he had may be less than six months. we turned around and applied for social security and disability

benefits. they told us we had to wait six months until medicare would kick in for his disability. needless to say, what happened, my father's life depleted and he passed less than seven weeks later. of course, my mother was left with hospital bills that she could not get help with. according to the social security administration and the rules, my father did not last long enough to wait the six months to qualify for disability. it would be nice if there were a way they could find especially for the terminally ill, no matter the age, that you would not have to wait six months to qualify for any kind of benefits. host: thank you. guest: that is the whole debate about health care, try to find a

way for those people, often right before medicare, and between50-65, so for such a sad example -- there would be away. host: is this the hospital portion, is it efficiently run? guest: yes, probably. if you good to george washington hospital down the street, 60% of their payments come from either medicare or medicaid and the price is the same. in the long run, what are the incentives to be the best hospital in town if it will pay the same as the worst hospital? if the program more run efficiently, well, i do like my old agency, the do the best they can be no administrative costs are about 1.5%.

i think it is run pretty well, and contractors to a pretty good job. host: bill, a health-care professional. what kind of professional are you? caller: i am actually a bureaucrat. i wanted to think mr.scully for his service to the medicare agency. my question is, if he could explain the role of states in pain for the cost-sharing for the low income beneficiaries, and ask -- he did mention that he thought medicaid was essentially under paying hospitals, and to what extent that medicare cost-sharing by states was adequate on behalf of the low-income beneficiaries? also, i do not know if he had any comments about senator kennedy's death, or anecdotes about interactions with him? host: bill, you call yourself a

bureaucrat. what agency? caller: department of health and human services. guest: i won't say anything about senator kennedy because i will get choked up. he is a good guy. i spent a lot of time with him over the years. anyway, what do we think about the medicaid program? it was one program, but 50 programs. there are 50 different states -- excuse me, i'm sorry. but 50 states do different things. some have extensive coverage like california, new york. others like taxes do not have quite as much. at what income level are you covered depends vastly on where you live. all 50 states have different measures. some states do at a very good job of covering low-income single, and some do not do as. much

it is all subject to state politics. it is roughly 60% by the federal government, and the rest run by this. it is 50 vastly different programs. you might be a low-income beneficiary in one state and the completely covered, whereas in a different state you would not be. host: is the healthcare debate on capitol hill taking on geographical flavor? guest: yes, absolutely. there is a group of conservative democrats known as the blue dogs who have pressured democratic leaders in the house to increase medicare reimbursements for rural providers. they feel medicare payments are not generous enough there. doctors are leaving small towns, going to larger city.

that is definitely an issue. host: we're talking today about medicare parta which is the hospital insurance portion. our next call comes from maryland on the 65 and older line. caller: i have two questions. the personal question is, i have been told that i am prohibited from signing up for social security only. either i have to some of for medicare too. i have an excellent policy that my former employer has guaranteed me for life. i do not need medicare. i'm not interested in it as being my primary payer. why can't i sign up for just so- so security alone? the next question is in regard to the healthcare debate. why couldn't medicaid be tweaked to accommodate those people who can demonstrate they

either do not have the means to get insurance and certify they do not have and available at work to fill in the gap? hostguest: the second question s simply a matter of expense. you have so many millions who are uninsured. their programs similar to medicaid. and the cost is now over $400 billion per year. you certainly could do that, and many states have along with the federal government. but the issue is cost. bingham. . .

>> 99% of senior sign up for it. if you happen to be retiree, let's say you work from -- work for general motors or c-span. your employer, once you hit 65, they may give you coverage and it may look like your old coverage, but they basically wrapped it around medicare. there is probably a $5,000 benefit per year were medicare will pay first. if you had 65 years old, it will not know it, but your insurer will wrap itself around medicare. you will not realize in most cases that medicare is paying it. to get it. medicare is paying before your employer does. it should be seamless to you,

but medicare part a, congress made it mandatory. host: medicare part a 65 years old you are on it, period. guest: you are on it if you pay in. host: florida. caller: this is dr. mckayla, thanks for c-span for doing this important segment. my question is why medicare denies the american liberties to patients and how they're going to make it worse. the medicare i running out of money. if you're a patient you want to pay an extra $50 to your doctor to get seen quicker, medicare denies that right to patients. also, if you want to leave the medicare program, as jat just said, you are de-- as the gentleman just said, you are

trapped in that program and there's no competition. finally, medicare wants to institute called pay for performance that wants to pay doctors for meeting certain government cree with the medicare with the medicaid supplemental because medicare pays 53% of my costs so i lose money every time i take those patients. basically, why is medicare denying patients the benefits they expect and why won't they -- host: what is your practice? caller: i do trauma call. the system needs to change. and we cannot have more government control. it's breaking the economy. and in the end the rights will be denied fishtse and there are rationing boards being set up. host: tom scully.

guest: the more you have rational debates. i'd like to see health reform pass this yea >> he is a good friend and a great guy. we have talked about health care policy for years. nancy-ann deparle is now the white house health czar and is a very good friend of mine. people should have rational debate about policy. we have to talk about fixing things. we have not done much in the way of reform. the fact is, it is very complicated system. it is the single biggest thing are government does, bigger than the defense department. we ought to have radical discussions about how to make it

better. the history of what is called the balanced building cap, i was involved in this in 1989. before 1989, there were many patients, some low-income, many doctors were charging $100, and patients were say they were getting a bill. saying you can't pay as a doctor, if medicare pays $50 you can't charge more than 15% above that. that was part of the bill that was dealt with at the time because there was perceptions there was abuses of some providers, not just doctors, 20 years ago charging significantly more than medicare would pay and seniors were upset about it. they can't charge more than a certain amount. in private health plans, part c, if you are in a private medicare plan the rules don't

apply. if you sign up for a blue cross plan or united or cigna or aetna, 90% of seniors do, the senior population, then those rules do not apply. host: the doctor called pay for performance, what is that? guest: it's saying, paying a hospital $20,000 for a stint insertion, we're going to measure your outcome and we are going to play some plus or minus 2%. we are paying doctors plus or minus a couple percentage points. i think that's absolutely the right thing to do. i had the first pay for hospital performans. it's measuring hospitals' outcomes and doctors' outcome . it says we'll pay you plus or minus 2% or 3%. i think it's better than doing nothing in my personal view. it's like having the defense

department go out and pay trucks and pay 2% more for mercedes than we would for a ugo. on the margins i happen to believe that more private sector-driven -- my view -- works better. that's the system we have. but within the medicare system, there's a big movement which i totally support saying we ought to measure outcomes for all of the providers and the better ones get paid a little bit more and not a little bit less. host: alex wayne, any comment to what the doctor had to say? guest: i think it was more of a statement than a question. a couple callers ago mentioned medicaid and whether that could be tweaked to cover more people without insurance. the fact is that both the house and senate are looking to doing exactly that. they are looking at expansions of medicaid that would cost on the order of $450 billion over the next 10 years.

they would cover practically everybody right around the poverty level using medicaid. and that would be a big change from now because right now medicaid eligibility varies from state to state as tom discussed a little bit, i think, and it averages about only 68% of poverty nationwide. so democrats see a medicaid expansion a major piece of their health overhaul efforts. host: tom scully, we've been referring to this as hospital insurance. what does part a cover again? guest: it covers nursing homes. you have to be in the hospital first and then go to a nursing home, medicare covers the first 180 days. if you have a hip replacement or knee replacement and go to a nursing home it covers that. and rehab hospitals if you have a hip replacement and goes to a rehabilitation hospital it covers that. key term hospitals for long-term illnesses. host: so skilled care? guest: it doesn't cover

long-term care. if you need to go to a nursing home, lower acute hospital, it covers that. but after 100 days it doesn't cover it. it covers hospice care and after you come out of the hospital and the nursing care and also homebound. you have to be homebound. inability to leave the house. it covers home care for another 100 days with certain other provisions. nursing homes, hospice, home care and the acute care hospitals. host: that's all part of part a? guest: all part of part a. host: debbie who is under 65 from mobile, alabama. debbie, please go ahead. caller: yes. mr. scully, i'd like to ask you a question. i'm fortunate to be a young woman, 54, that i've had to get on disability. and i'm having to wait 24 months before i can get on my medicare. and i couldn't figure that out either, but i had called and discussed it with the social

security office and they explained the issues with me. so i'm hoping in march i'll get my medicare. but i need -- i wanted to ask you something else. you talk about it takes corners working -- 10 credits, what do you have to get the -- to get your medicare or whatever it is? guest: you may have a spouse that qualifies as well, more complex, but you have to pay the taxes during a lifetime for 10 quarters. if you paid your 1.45% and the employer pays theirs for 10 quarters which is obviously 2 1/2 years during your lifetime then automatically when you are 65 you are eligible for medicare and you are already signed up. if you paid for that period of time, there are other qualifers, you can actually buy into the program but you're automatically in if you paid taxes for 10 quarters.

host: if you work full time for 2 1/2 years? guest: if you work for 2 1/2 years you're in. caller: i am a 75-year-old retired mathematician. i call up a lot because there are lots of myths associated with health care. i call up every 30 days. i am going to talk about the myth of cost sharing. i know you people get attached to myths so i hope mr. scully will keep an open mind. if i say anything you don't understand please interrupt me and ask a question. ok, your claim is that since medicare doesn't pay enough, hospitals have to charge private insurers more money to make up for the loss than the medicare payments . now, if this were true it would have to be on a hospital by hospital basis. it doesn't do hospital b with all the medicare patients any good if hospital a charges private insurers more money. and this is true that private insurers do pay hospitals with differently sums of money for

the same treatment. so if there were cost sharing hospitals with a large volume of medicare and medicaid patients would have to be paid and have to charge more to the private insurers. but medpac has looked into this and there is absolutely no correlation between the volume of medicare and medicaid patients and the amount the hospitals charge private insurers. some hospitals have a lot of medicare patients and they get paid less than private -- by private insurers than other hospitals with almost no medicare patients get paid by private insurers. cost sharing like others -- like malpractice is a myth and it's a myth that spread by the private insurance companies because they don't want us to consider the real problems in health care which is mostly caused by private for-profit insurance. i hope you understand this argument. did you understand it? guest: sure.

i'm saying that medpac and -- it's the medicare payment assessment commission which is the advisory commission to congress. it's an advisory group of medicare experts, health care experts around the country, doctors, hospitals, administrators who make policies about enhancing that and making it a much stronger role. host: who appoints it? guest: the government accountability office. technically what happens the chairman of the ways and means committee, which runs medicare in the house, and the chairman of the finance committee, makes recommendations and largely congress suggests strongly to the government accountability office, the government accountability office who to pick. they do a good job. a lot of discussions. senator rockefeller, good friend of mine, has suggested enhancing it. you can debate that for three days as well. but they make most of the -- if you are a staffer on the hill and looking to write a medicare

hill the first part is the medpac recommendations. that's the starting point for where these bills starts on the hill and it's a good start. host: how many people serve on it? guest: 20. i think there's roughly 18 or 20. host: all right. go on with your answer. guest: the point is there are many studies. you can certainly make the argument that different hospitals, but there's very little doubt, there are many studies out there that show on average medicare pays, depending which study you want to pick, 6%, 8%, 10% less. there's a huge program in the medicare practice. i think it's now doctor 25 billion a year. -- $25 billion a year. if you're a hospital that takes care of a disproportionately number of medicare patients and

medicaid patients, you get supplement payments . the point is you take care of a large chunk, if insure boston and you get more seniors than the hospitals down the street you get a more supplemental payment for medicare to take care of that. and medicaid in every state has a disproportionate share of hospital payments . that's something up to $40 billion in medicare payments . if you take care of more medicare and medicaid patients than the guy down the street you get paid more. i would argue that substantively there's not much question that there's some cost shift to the private sector. host: alex wayne, is cost sharing the debate on capitol hill? guest: kind of. cost shifting is an interesting issue. i don't think anybody has a good handle of the extent to which the problem and how it balances out. what my understanding of it is that cost shifting often

depends on who has more weight in a given market. if you have a big hospital group and a lot of insurers, the hospital has generally more influence to dictate prices to the insurers. conversely, if you have a big insurance plan in a state that controls a big piece in the market and a lot of maybe smaller hospitals take a rural state, like alabama or mississippi, in that case the insurer can dictate price to the hospital. medicare kind of gets caught in the middle of this kind of battle between insurers and hospitals over how -- who's going to pay for what and how much they're going to pay, i think. host: how big is the lobbying activity on behalf of hospitals and nursing homes during this health care debate? guest: well, there are two very large hospital associations in town. they are both heavily involved in this debate. they've already kind o struck

a deal with members of the senate finance committee and the white house to contribute some savings to the costs of the overhaul. and so right now -- excuse me -- hospitals are supporting the overhaul or at least they aren't making much noise about opposing it so far. host: well, tom scully, you're former head of the federation of american hospitals. guest: i was the president of one of them for six years in the 1990's. host: what's the strategy for the hospital associations to support, as alex wayne said, the current health care debate? guest: money moving around for hospitals. than anybody else. andhey probably have more political support than anybody else because every town has a hospital in it and people are fond of their hospital. the real issue is you have 47 million uninsured people. so the average hospital has anywhere 8% to 12% that walk in the door have no insurance coverage. and as you mentioned, medicaid

frequently underpays their costs. i won't debate about that. medicaid almost never costs in any state. they have to cost shift. you have 8% to 12% of your patients that are uninsured, you're cost shifting the other patients. you're getting a lot of losses. if there is a coverage that covers everybody, that's a great win for them. everybody comes in with an insurance card. that's the right thing to do. you can average hospitals are excited about their bad debt being from 10% to 12% to 2% because nobody is talking about covering illegal aliens. there will always be some portion of people that aren't covered. if you are he a hospital that's a big wind fall for you. there is about $50 billion a year that is out there to pay for hospitals to help them -- help the costs. they get significant payments for medicare and medicaid to pay for this uninsured population, sort of a back door

subsidy. subsidy. if you have people that walks the real issue is, if you are going have everyone walking in with an insurance card or a medicare card, should you give back some of the subsidies? what the hospitals are trying to work out is to keep the subsidies until it shows up on the insurance card. in theory, they will have everyone covered, and as the existing subsidies go away, that is their concern. hospitals would very much like to see universal coverage. they do not have to cover people coming in the door the who do not have coverage. it is a tall, multibillion- dollar cost shift issue for the hospitals. least. there are certain places where you can transfer places out. by law it's the emergency room -- i won't get into the details -- you have to take the patient

and treat them and stabilize them at least. it's a significant cost to hospitals, normally in urban areas. most people don't understand that. hospitals have a good argument. on the other hand, hospitals would love, just to give you the other side, they would love to have 47 million people all covered and not giving up their existing subsidies. how quickly do you get back the existing subsidies while if you get the universal coverage which i think certainly financially it would take a decade for a phase in this. host: lerla is a health care professional. what do you do? caller: i practice primary care. host: you're a doctor? caller: yes. host: go ahead. caller: i am calling because i am a supporter for medicare for all. however, there is some inherent and unfairness in medicare, as you've just spoken about, the cost shifting. especially as far as physicians are concerned.

we've had a very small increase in our reimbursement over the 29 years that i've been practicing. and we get no supplement if we are in urban areas where we're more likely to see more medicare patients and more medicaid patients. i think that our health care system needs a complete overhaul. the insurance companies have also discounted their services in line with medicare. and so the cost shifting has become their bottom line profit because of that adjustment and their payments to physicians. so i'd like for mr. scully to talk about the unfairness that medicare has caused because it does not pay the provider adequately as a private -- as the private insurers follow suit. and there is no clear redress

for physicians because of this. host: now, is she talking about part b more than part a? guest: all physician payments, even if you are in the hospital, they get paid by part b. when we talk about part a and you get a hip replacement, the hospital gets paid. the physician that comes in that gets the surgery, they're paid by part b. whole different schedule. the physician is paid separately on a whole different fee schedule out of part b. host: and, doctor, i promise you we will talk about cost shifting, that issue tomorrow on this program at about the same time we are going to be talking about part b which is kind of a medical insurance, i guess. is that a fairway of describing part b? guest: yeah. part b is basically physician payments, other professional services, other cairo practers,

at the die terrorists. if you go and have surgery at an outpatient hospital, that's part b. guest: if there is a heart surgery being done anywhere in the country, is it the same amount of money that's paid by medicare to that hospital for the services? guest: adjusted for geography. if you happen to be a hospital in new york with a high level of uninsured, you may get a supplemental payments . the payment is adjusted for geographic differences, and then there are some supplemental payments . essentially the price is the same. host: carolyn in kileen, texas, go ahead. caller: i'm retired and about 63, i'll be 65 in maybe a little over a year and right now i pay blue cross blue shield with $155 premium and then i pay $3,400 above and beyond that for whatever i need for the year.

when i turn 65, what supplemental insurance will i need besides part b so i don't have to pay so much out of pocket? guest: well, that's a complex question. if you go to the traditional medicare program which 80% of americans are, you are going to pay $98 a month and you'll get part a and part b. in addition to that, you can choose part d, which is the medicare drug benefit. and the premium there can go anywhere from $15 to $60 for supplemental drug benefits. you're still going to have significant gaps in coverage and you're probably going to want to buy private medicare gap insurance. you can go to the website. aarp has probably the largest. it's so you don't have large

co-payments, probably from $150 to $300. you are going to have a significant savings over what you're paying now because the reality is you are going to have essentially $9,000 to $10,000 subsidized medicare benefit. so your costs will go down significantly. another option is look for medicare advantage point which is a private insurance plan. none of these medicare rules apply. the government says here is $11,000, blue cross of texas or humana, call us next year and frequently what you'll find, and we'll get on this on friday, probably your costs will be lowest in that program for a variety of reasons. we can explain on friday. you need to look at that if you're relatively lower and worried about your cost. you will have to go into a network of providers. very likely you'll get more benefits at a lower cost but your choice of physicians and hospitals and other providers will be limited.

you're basically in an h.m.o. host: alex wayne, once again, medicare part a, the hospital insurance part, what's its role in the health care debate on capitol hill right now? guest: right now democrats are looking at it as a source of revenue, essentially, for paying for the health overhaul effort. they'd like to reduce the growth rate, the rate in spending, i'd say about $120 billion over the next 10 years. they're trying to avoid those cuts resulting in cuts in benefits. and right now they seem to be toeing that line pretty successfully. aarp so far has not voiced any opposition to the medicare changes proposed, at least in the house version of legislation. host: with all the town meetings going on in august on health care, what are members of congress hearing? guest: well -- host: regarding part a and the

medicare issue? guest: sure, i went to one last night and ploo of the opponents were -- looked to me were seniors. so seniors are worried about what congress is doing because opponents of overhaul are portraying the medicare changes as cuts in benefits. and so democrats kind of face the challenge and fighting back against that messaging and trying to reassure seniors that the changes they're making to medicare, it's a huge program with lots of money that the democratic argument is that they can make this program more efficient without really affecting services and benefits. host: how much waste, fraud and abuse is there in medicare that could be cut? guest: there's a lot. when you have a -- and there's a lot more waste, fraud and abuse in south florida than there is in north dakota. it depends on where you are. look, it's a big program. there are a lot of providers out there. there's always a couple billion

dollars a year in a $484 billion program that you could save from waste, fraud and abuse. you should always limit waste, fraud and abuse and hammer providers that are scamming the taxpayers and the trust funds but you can't fix the health care system by going to waste, fraud and abuse. in health care debate, which i am a big fan of, you know, a moderated form of, is all about fixing the commercial insurance system for people under 65. medicare is to slow the growth of medicare and finance it. you can get into the debate of hospitals, honestly have proportionately and historically, relatively small cuts they are talking about. hospitals have great political support in congress. congressman rangel in the house is the major players. very close to the hospitals. senator bacus, very close t the hospitals in montana. cuts in nursing homes and health agencies. on a proportionately basis.

i don't want you to get into debate here, for the point of seniors, benefits are not changing. paying nursing home less for their posthospital stay, ising that go to affect your care? they're trying to slow the growth rate saying, if we are going to cover 47 million people the money has got to come from some place. ising that going to affect benefits -- is that going to affect benefits? it could. host: what's a d.r.g. guest: diagnosis related group. host: what is it and how is it part of medicare part a? comboip there was reform in the early 1980's. if you were a hospital you sent in your costs for everything, the nurses, the laundry list,

medicare paid your cost. it led to rampant inflation. congress said we're going to figure out what the cost of a heart bypass operation is, everything, and we are going to tell the hospital in philadelphia that your total costs are $50,000 on average. call us later. so the average hospital stay is 10 days, you make it work. it's one payment per diagnosis. when you go in the hospital, you get the code, that's all the hospital gets. if you stay in the hospital and have problems, they get supplementals. if you go for the heart bypass and the length of stay is seven days and average cost is $50,000, you get out in four days, they get $50,000 which is one of the reason why they want people out quicker. if you are longer you'll get more. the hospital gets on average -- and it encourages better behavior. hospitals get paid one bulk

amount and it draws better behavior. it's clearly worked much better and the hospitals were finally opposed to it at first and now likes it. host: 65 and older, go ahead. we are going to put you on hold, kathryn. you know the rules, you have to turn down your volume on your tv. joe, 65 and older, please go ahead. joe. caller: yes. hello. i just got out of the hospital last night with a major, almost died in the hospital, and i asked the administration office here what three or four months ago and was deemed totally disabled. now they say i owe 20% of a $240,000 bill. how can that possibly be? host: this is on medicare, right? caller: yes. i was deemed totally disabled. i had medicaid and said i could

not have both. host: 20%? guest: your hospital deductible, assuming you were in the hospital more than the maximum number of days, 60 days, your deductible for the hospital is by definition $1,068. if you had serious surgery or major complications, medicare part d, which is physician services, does have a 20% co-payment. as i mentioned, 89% of seniors don't generally see it because they have a supplemental service. they have a 20% co-payment. if you had a significant illness with many doctors visiting you, could you have a 20% co-payment in theory? yes. if you are on medical, which is medicaid in california, and you're qualified for that, sounds like another complicated issue in that case, that should cover the bulk of it. but your hospital, the hospital cannot charge you more than

$1,068. physicians and other related part b services, have a 20% co-payment. and many of the costs coming out of the hospital are physician-related. host: our last call for tom scully and alex wayne comes from under 65. caller: i have a question about death bed care. i've had two parents here in m.d. anderson hospital in houston and they had cancer and when they were terminally ill in a hopeless death bed situation their care was very aggressive. and the costs were just enormous. and i don't -- i didn't understand how the government would allow hospitals to extend the death experience and rack up big charges and pay those charges and it was very inhumane. i've talked to the many people whose parents at the time of

their demise have been aggressively treated. and i think there's some advantage taking here of the government payments . guest: well, this is a raging debate in the health reform debate that gets out of blown out of proportion which is the end of life -- you know, a lot of costs are -- many people have family members who are sick. obviously senator kennedy family's -- kennedy's family succumbed to cancer. on the other hand, i think a lot of people believe about the hospice benefits. if a doctor diagnosis you if a doctor diagnosis you within six months of care, can care which you can essentially acknowledge that you are terminally ill and have much more aggressive and

comprehensive home health services and other support services to take care of you. many people choose that. there will be more education about that. some people when you are terminally ill and think hospice care is the way to go. there is a lot of bombs throwing back and forth within the last month, people want to ration care and take away your end of life choice. i think the less screaming and yelling and the rational discussion of these issues, when should somebody get the last $50,000 treatment in the last week of life, that's a choice you have to make. these are all -- these are some of the biggest costs to the medicare program. certainly i think a rational policy debate about it rather than a political debate is meaty. guest: i think they would default to providing as aggressive a treatment as possible unless the patient has what's known as an advanced directive in place dictating what kind of care they want in their last days. and lawmakers are paying attention to this issue.

there is -- right now there's a provision in the house version of the legislation that would pay doctors and medicare for counseling their patients on making -- writing advanced directives or living also. that provision -- living wills. that's come under a lot of criticism. i think it's been -- inaccurately described by some of the opponents. this is where the term death panels comes from and that sort of talk. the provision wouldn't require anyone to write an advanced directive and it doesn't -- it is not based on whether somebody decides they want less aggressive treatment at the end of their life or not. it's simply -- it's simply designed to encourage people to have these conversations with their doctor so they don't wind up in the situation that the caller just described. host: alex wayne of cqpolitics.com, tom scully,

former head of the centers of the medicare and medicaid and former president of the american hospitals. what do you do today? >> i spend half my time in new york wan investment -- with an investme >> the washington journal series on medicaid continues tomorrow. tomorrow will be medicare part b. on friday, the series concludes with a look at medicare part c, the supplemental insurance program. washington journal is live each morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. >> up next on c-span, president

obama, vice president biden, and senate majority leader harry reid comment on the death of senator ted kennedy. after that, we will show you senator kennedy's speeches at the 1980 democratic convention. later, congressman gerry connolly hold a town hall meeting in springfield, virginia. >> as washington and the nation continues to focus on health care, sunday on c-span, we will talk about dealing with the swine flu virus with dr. thomas friedman, director of the centers for disease control on newsmakers. then there will be a look inside the u.s. hospitals. cohen said the supreme court to see those -- go inside the

supreme court to see those rarely seen places. the supreme court is home to the nation's highest court. senator ted kennedy served nine times, serving 47 years in the senate. senator kennedy served on seven major committees, armed services, and the judiciary committee. in 1980, senator kennedy unsuccessfully challenged president carter for the presidential -- for the democratic presidential nomination. president obama spoke about ted kennedy this morning from martha's vineyard where he is

vacationing this week. i wanted to say a few words this morning about the passing of an extraordinary leader, senator edward kennedy. over the past several years i have had the honor to call teddy a colleague, a counselor, and a friend. and even though we have known this day was coming for some time now, we awaited it with no small amount of dread. since teddy's diagnosis last year we have seen the courage with which he battled his illness. and while these months have no doubt been difficult for him, they have also let him hear from people in every corner of our nation and from around the world just how much he meant to all of us. his fight has given us the opportunity we were denied when his brothers john and robert were taken from us -- the blessing of time to say "thank you" and "goodbye." the outpouring of love, gratitude, and fond memories to

which we have all borne witness is a testament to the way this singular figure in american history touched so many lives. his ideas and ideals are stamped on scores of laws and reflected in millions of lives. in seniors who know new dignity, in families that know new opportunity, in children who know education's promise, and in all who can pursue their dream in an america that is more equal and more just, including myself. the kennedy name is synonymous with the democratic party, and at times ted was the target of partisan campaign attacks. but in the united states senate i can think of no one who has engendered greater respect or affection from members on both sides of the aisle. his seriousness of purpose was perpetually matched by humility, warmth, and good cheer. he could passionately battle

others and do so peerlessly on the senate floor for the causes that he held dear, and yet still maintain warm friendships across party lines. that is one reason he became not only one of the greatest senators of our time, but one of the most accomplished americans ever to serve our democracy. his extraordinary life on this earth has come to an end. the extraordinary good that he did lives on. for his family he was a guardian. for america he was the defender of a dream. i spoke earlier this morning to senator kennedy's beloved wife vicki who was to the end such a wonderful source of encouragement and strength. our thoughts and prayers are with her, his children kara, edward, and patrick, and step- children curran and caroline, the entire kennedy family, decades' worth of staff, the people of massachusetts, and all americans who, like us,

loved ted kennedy. >> vice president joe biden also talked about senator kennedy today. he was at an energy department event. this is about 10 minutes. >> mr. secretary, thank you and your staff for the privilege of being here today on what was to be a joyous occasion and having to talk about energy independence. you said the president made a wise choice. the wisest choice he made was to rescue to be the secretary of the department of energy -- was to ask you to be the secretary of the department of energy.

you have taken on a roll that is going to be determining the success of the next three and a half years, whether or not we make a genuine dent, a genuine progress, toward energy policy. it can help lead america into the world of the 21st century. some suggest that we're trying to do too much. my responses is there any possibility of america leading the world into the 21st century without radically altering energy policy? it is impossible. in the president's cabinet, there is a nobel laureate and the man who assembled a staff that can corral the bureaucracy

-- and we'll deal with bureaucracies, we are all part of it -- in a way that we have not seen in a while. the clean cities program is one of the programs that we have. as if teddy work here, i think it would be inappropriate for me to dwell too much on the initiative that we are announcing today and not speak to my friend. my wife jill and my sons and daughters, they all knew teddy. he was someone special for each of them in their lives.

they're truly distressed by his passing. our hearts go out to teddy jr. and patrick and cara and vicki, with whom i spoke this morning, and the whole kennedy family. you know, at teddy spent a lifetime working for a more fair and just america. for 36 years, i had the privilege of going to work every day and literally, not figuratively, sitting next to him. and being a witness to history every single day that the senate was in session. i sat with him on the senate floor. i sat with him on the judiciary committee, is it the next to him. and i sat with him in the caucuses.

every day i was with him -- and this is going to sound strange -- but he fortified my faith in the possibilities of what this country could do. he and i were talking after his diagnosis. i said, you know, i think you're the only other person that i have met, like me, is more optimistic, more enthusiastic, more idealistic, and sees more possibilities after 36 years. you would think that there would be the peak of their idealism. but i genuinely feel more optimistic about the prospects for my country today than i did in any time of my life. it was infectious when you were with him. you could see it, those of you who knew him and those of you who did not know him.

you could see it in the nature of his room debate and the nature of his embrace and the nature how he, every single day, attacked these problems. he was never a defeatist. he never was petty. he never was petty. he was never small. in the process of his doing, he made everybody he worked with bigger, both his adversaries as well as his allies. do you not find remarkable, one of the most partisan liberal men in the last century serving in the senate -- could so many

of his foes embrace him? he knew -- they know that he made them bigger, made them graceful by the way he conducted himself. he changed the circumstances of tens of millions of americans in the literal sense, literally. he literally changed the circumstances. he'd changed also another aspect that i observed about him. he changed not only the physical circumstance. he changed at how they look at themselves and how they looked at one another. that is a remarkable contribution for any man or woman to make. and for the hundreds, if not thousands, of us who got to know him personally, he altered our

lives as well. through the grace of god and an accident of history, i was privileged to be one of those people. every important event of my life, every single one, he was there. he was there to encourage, to counsel, to be apathetic, and lift up. in 1972, as a 90 -- as ia 29- year-old kid, who had never voted nationally for a democrat, i received 85% of the vote for that district or something to that effect.

i literally would not be standing here if it were not for teddy kennedy, not figuratively. it is not hyperbole, literally. he stood with me when my wife and daughter were killed in an accident. he was on the phone with me literally every day in the hospital when mind children -- when my children were attempting to survive. you know, it is not just me that he effected like that. hundreds upon hundreds of people -- i was talking with

vicki this morning. she said, he was ready to go, do. but we were now ready to let him go. he has left a great lawyer in your public life and -- he has left a great void in our public life. people like me came to rely on him. he was kind of like an anchor. and, unlike many important people in my 38 years that i've had the privilege of knowing, the unique thing about going to the was that it was never about him. it was always about you. it was never about him. those people that i admire, the

great women and men, at the end of the day, it becomes down to being about them. with teddy, it was never about him. well, today, we lost a truly remarkable man. to paraphrase shakespeare, i do not think we shall never see his like again. but i think that the legacy he left is not just the landmark legislation that he passed but in how he helped people look at themselves and look at one another. i apologize for us not being able to go in deeper on the energy bill. but for me, it seems inappropriate today. i am sure that there will be much more said about my friend and your friend.

he changed the political landscape for nearly half a century. i just hope that we say flatly -- i just hope that -- we say bluntly that we remember what he did, but i hope we remember how he helped people look at themselves and one another. that will be the fundamental, a truly unifying legacy of teddy kennedy's life. mr. secretary, you and your staff are doing an incredible job. i look forward to coming back at a happier moment when you are announcing the consequential progress of putting this back into position.

thank you all very, very much. [applause] >> senate majority leader harry reid also commented on the death of senator ted kennedy. this took place at the university of nevada on wednesday. this video is courtesy of kvzut in las vegas. >> i spoke to vicki kennedy this morning. as we all know, ted died this morning the kennedy family -- ted died this morning. the kennedy family and the senate family are saddened. our sought -- our thoughts are with vicki kennedy, his

children, and the entire kennedy clan. it was one of the highlights of my life to be able to work in the united states senate with ted kennedy. he was such a friend. he had -- he served -- he had a model public service. his family called and turned to their uncle ted for comfort. for so many times, we have turned to teddy kennedy for comfort. we can all remember how he walked solemnly to greet the first letter -- the first lady at arlington national cemetery. i will never forget how his deep love for his brother, bobby, helped him somehow summoned the strength to deliver that eulogy, hal, as patriarch, -- hal, as

pitcher, -- how, as patriarch, he agreed with us and john john -- he grieved with us and john dojohn. he helped so many live better lives. as a student at the utah state university, i founded the first democrat club. i got a letter from president- elect kennedy, between the time that he had been elected and before he was inaugurated. he sent me this letter and i have saved all of these years. you can come into my office and

see the letter. very often, ted kennedy would come into my office and see that letter. he was proud of his brother and he was glad to see that letter. i appreciate the opportunity to go from the young camedemocratso what he stands for, caring for others, equality, and progress. ted kennedy's legacy stands with the rest patriotic servant in congress. because of ted kennedy, more young children could afford to be healthy. more young adults could afford to be students. more of our older citizens and our poor citizens could get the care they needed and live longer and fuller lives. more minorities, women, and immigrants receive the rights

that our founding fathers promised us. this man of wealth fought for those less privileged. because of ted kennedy, more americans are proud of our country. ted kennedy's america is one in which we can all see justice and enjoy equality and no freedom. ted kennedy's life was driven by his love of his family who loved him, his belief in the country that believed in him. ted kennedy's life was one in which the founding fathers fought and for which his brothers died. the liberal lions mighty roar we will always remember. i will be happy to take a few questions. >> can you tell us something may be that we do not know?

>> a lot of people had the tendency that he was a bully and that he would charge forward. it was just the opposite. he was a man who believed in compromise. ted kennedy is the epitome of what a legislator should do. he was really a strong liberal progressive. but all of this legislation does not have the mark of a liberal on it. he was willing to make deals for the american people. >> [unintelligible] >> ted love to come to nevada. the kennedys looked nevada. his brother came here during its heyday. his brother -- one of my proud accomplishments was helping save

pyramid lake. john kennedy was fighting for that with his brother decades before i got involved in it. he was a popular man. he came here. in my early years, running for office, people would say that reid is a kennedy liberal. i guess that was a way to put me down. ted would be the last to say that. he always drew big crowds. he always came here for his fundraising. he felt very good about nevada. i thought about this this morning. no one stepped out of their shoes to help me more than ted kennedy. yucca mountain is it. people followed ted kennedy's

lead. he knew this was important to me. he believed it was good for the country. he helped me a lot. i never batted aand eye. any other questions? thank you very much. >> a motorcade will transport senator kennedy from hyannis port to boston. there will be a memorial service on friday evening. on saturday, his funeral mass will be held at the our lady of perpetual help basilica. he will be laid to rest next to his brother's robert and john

kennedy. now, from highlights of the political career of senator ted kennedy, and these are two of his speeches. first, we have the 1980 speech. the year, he unsuccessfully challenged president carter for the democratic presidential nomination. after that, we will show you the speech at the 2008 convention in denver.

>> thank you very much. ♪ [chanting] ♪ >> thank you very much.

thank you very much for your very eloquent introduction. [unintelligible] i think you for your eloquent introduction. well, things worked out a little different from the way i thought, but let me tell you, i still love new york. [applause] my fellow democrats and my fellow americans, i have come here tonight not to argue as a candidate but to affirm a cause. i'm asking you--i am

asking you to renew the commitment of the democratic party to economic justice. [applause] i am asking you to renew our commitment to a fair and lasting prosperity that can put america back to work. this is the cause that brought me into the campaign and that sustained me for nine months across 100,000 miles in 40 different states. we had our losses, but the pain of our defeats is far, far less than the pain of the people that i

have met. we have learned that it is important to take issues seriously, but never to take ourselves too seriously. [applause] the serious issue before us tonight is the cause for which the democratic party has stood in its finest hours, the cause that keeps our party young and makes it, in the second century of its age, the largest political party in this republic and the longest lasting political party on this planet. our cause has been, since the

days of thomas jefferson, the cause of the common man and the common woman. [applause] our commitment has been, since the days of andrew jackson, to all those he called "the humble members of society--the farmers, mechanics, and laborers." on this foundation we have defined our values, refined our policies and refreshed our faith. now i take the unusual step of carrying the cause and the commitment of my campaign personally to our national convention. i speak out of a deep sense of urgency about the anguish and anxiety i have seen across america. i speak out of a deep belief in the ideals of the democratic party, and in the potential of

that party and of a president to make a difference. and i speak out of a deep trust in our capacity to proceed with boldness and a common vision that will feel and heal the suffering of our time and the divisions of our party. the economic plank of this platform on its face concerns only material things, but it is also a moral issue that i raise tonight. it has taken many forms over many years. in this campaign and in this country that we seek to lead, the challenge in 1980 is to give our voice and our vote for these fundamental democratic principles.

[applause] let us pledge that we will never misuse unemployment, high interest rates, and human misery as false weapons against inflation. [applause] let us pledge that employment will be the first priority of our economic policy. let us pledge that there will be security for all those who are now at work, and let us pledge that there will be jobs for all who are out of work; and we will not compromise on the issue of jobs.

[applause] these are not simplistic pledges. simply put, they are the heart of our tradition, and they have been the soul of our party across the generations. it is the glory and the greatness of our tradition to speak for those who have no voice, to remember those who are forgotten, to respond to the frustrations and fulfill the aspirations of all americans seeking a better life in a better land. we dare not forsake that tradition. we cannot let the great purposes of the democratic party become the bygone passages of history. [applause]

we must not permit the republicans to seize and run on the slogans of prosperity. we heard the orators at their convention all trying to talk like democrats. they proved that even republican nominees can quote franklin roosevelt to their own purpose. [applause] the grand old party thinks it has found a great new trick, but 40 years ago an earlier generation of republicans attempted the same trick. and franklin roosevelt himself replied, "most republican leaders have bitterly fought and blocked the forward surge of average men and women in their pursuit of happiness. let us not be deluded that overnight

those leaders have suddenly become the friends of average men and women." [applause] "you know," he continued, "very few of us are that gullible." and four years later when the republicans tried that trick again, franklin roosevelt asked "can the old guard pass itself off as the new deal? i think not. we have all seen many marvelous stunts in the circus, but no performing elephant could turn a handspring without falling flat on its back." [applause]

the 1980 republican convention was awash with crocodile tears for our economic distress, but it is by their long record and not their recent words that you shall know them. the same republicans who are talking about the crisis of unemployment have nominated a man who once said, and i quote, "unemployment insurance is a prepaid vacation plan for freeloaders." and that nominee is no friend of labor. [applause] the same republicans who are talking about the problems of

the inner cities have nominated a man who said, and i quote, "i have included in my morning and evening prayers every day the prayer that the federal government not bail out new york." and that nominee is no friend of this city and our great urban centers across this nation. [applause] the same republicans who are talking about security for the elderly have nominated a man who said just four years ago that "participation in social security should be made voluntary." and that nominee is no friend of the senior citizens of this nation. [applause]

the same republicans who are talking about preserving the environment have nominated a man who last year made the preposterous statement, and i quote, "eighty percent of our air pollution comes from plants and trees." [laughter] and that nominee is no friend of the environment. [applause] and the same republicans who are invoking franklin roosevelt have nominated a man who said in 1976, and these are his exact words, "fascism was really the basis of the new deal." and that nominee whose name is ronald reagan has no right to

quote franklin delano roosevelt. [applause] the great adventures which our opponents offer is a voyage into the past. progress is our heritage, not theirs. what is right for us as democrats is also the right way for democrats to win. the commitment i seek is not to

outworn views but to old values that will never wear out. programs may sometimes become obsolete, but the ideal of fairness always endures. circumstances may change, but the work of compassion must continue. it is surely correct that we cannot solve problems by throwing money at them, but it is also correct that we dare not throw out our national problems onto a scrap heap of inattention and indifference. the poor may be out of political fashion, but they are not without human needs. the middle class may be angry, but they have not lost the dream that all americans can advance together. [applause] the demand of our people in 1980 is not for smaller

government or bigger government but for better government. some say that government is always bad and that spending for basic social programs is the root of our economic evils. but we reply: the present inflation and recession cost our economy $200 billion a year. we reply: inflation and unemployment are the biggest spenders of all. [applause] the task of leadership in 1980 is not to parade scapegoats or to seek refuge in reaction, but to match our power to the possibilities of progress. while others talked of free enterprise, it was the democratic party that acted and we ended excessive regulation in the airline and trucking industry and we restored competition to the marketplace.

and i take some satisfaction that this deregulation was legislation that i sponsored and passed in the congress of the united states. as democrats we recognize that each generation of americans has a rendezvous with a different reality. the answers of one generation become the questions of the next generation. but there is a guiding star in the american firmament. it is as old as the revolutionary belief that all people are created equal, and as clear as the contemporary condition of liberty city and the south bronx. again and again democratic leaders have followed that star and they have given new meaning to the old values of liberty and justice for all. [applause] we are the party. we are the party of the new freedom, the

new deal and the new frontier. we have always been the party of hope. so this year let us offer new hope, new hope to an america uncertain about the present, but unsurpassed in its potential for the future. to all those who are idle in the cities and industries of america let us provide new hope for the dignity of useful work. democrats have always believed that a basic civil right of all americans is their right to earn their own way. the party of the people must always be the party of full employment. to all those who doubt the future of our economy, let us provide new hope for the reindustrialization of america. and let our vision

reach beyond the next election or the next year to a new generation of prosperity. if we could rebuild germany and japan after world war ii, then surely we can reindustrialize our own nation and revive our inner cities in the 1980s. [applause] to all those who work hard for a living wage let us provide new hope that the price of their employment shall not be an unsafe workplace and a death at an earlier age. [applause] to all those who inhabit our land from california to the new york island, from the redwood forest to the gulfstream waters, let us provide new hope

that prosperity shall not be purchased by poisoning the air, the rivers and the natural resources that are the greatest gift of this continent. [applause] we must insist that our children and our grandchildren shall inherit a land which they can truly call america the beautiful. [applause] to all those who see the worth of their work and their savings taken by inflation, let us offer new hope for a stable economy. we must meet the pressures of the present by invoking the full power of government to master increasing prices. in candor, we must say that the federal budget can be balanced only by policies that bring us to a balanced prosperity of full employment and price

restraint. [applause] and to all those overburdened by an unfair tax structure, let us provide new hope for real tax reform. instead of shutting down classrooms, let us shut off tax shelters. [applause] instead of cutting out school lunches, let us cut off tax subsidies for expensive business lunches that are nothing more than food stamps for the rich. [applause] the tax cut of our republican opponents takes the name of tax reform in vain. it is a

wonderfully republican idea that would redistribute income in the wrong direction. it is good news for any of you with incomes over $200,000 a year. for the few of you, it offers a pot of gold worth $14,000. but the republican tax cut is bad news for the middle income families. for the many of you, they plan a pittance of $200 a year, and that is not what the democratic party means when we say tax reform. [applause] the vast majority of americans cannot afford this panacea from a republican nominee who has denounced the progressive income tax as the invention of karl marx. i am afraid he has

confused karl marx with theodore roosevelt--that obscure republican president who sought and fought for a tax system based on ability to pay. theodore roosevelt was not karl marx, and the republican tax scheme is not tax reform. [applause] finally, we cannot have a fair prosperity in isolation from a fair society. so i will continue to stand for a national health insurance. [applause]

we must not surrender to the relentless medical inflation that can bankrupt almost anyone and that may soon break the budgets of government at every level. let us insist on real control over what doctors and hospitals can charge, and let us resolve that the state of a family's health shall never depend on the size of a family's wealth. [applause] the president, the vice president, the members of congress have a medical plan that meets their needs in full, and whenever senators and representatives catch a little cold, the capitol physician will see them immediately, treat them promptly, fill a

prescription on the spot. we do not get a bill even if we ask for it, and when do you think was the last time a member of congress asked for a bill from the federal government? [applause] i say again, as i have before, if health insurance is good enough for the president, the vice president and the congress of the united states, then it is good enough for you and every family in america. [applause]

there were some who said we should be silent about our differences on issues during this convention, but the heritage of the democratic party has been a history of democracy. we fight hard because we care deeply about our principles and purposes. we did not flee this struggle. we welcome the contrast with the empty and expedient spectacle last month in detroit where no nomination was contested, no question was debated, and no one dared to raise any doubt or dissent. [applause] democrats can be proud that we chose a different course and a different platform. we can be proud that our party stands for investment in safe energy instead of a nuclear future

that may threaten the future itself. [applause] we must not permit the neighborhoods of america to be permanently shadowed by the fear of another three mile island. [applause] we can be proud that our party stands for a fair housing law to unlock the doors of discrimination once and for all. the american house will be divided against itself so long as there is prejudice against any american buying or renting a home. [applause] and we can be proud that our party stands plainly and publicly and persistently for the ratification of the equal rights amendment. [applause]

women hold their rightful place at our convention, and women must have their rightful place in the constitution of the united states. on this issue we will not yield, we will not equivocate, we will not rationalize, explain or excuse. we will stand for e.r.a. and for the recognition at long last that our nation was made up of founding mothers as well as founding fathers. [applause] a fair prosperity and a just society are within our vision

and our grasp, and we do not have every answer. there are questions not yet asked, waiting for us in the recesses of the future, but of this much we can be certain because it is the lesson of all our history: together a president and the people can make a difference. i have found that faith still alive wherever i have traveled across this land. so let us reject the counsel of retreat and the call to reaction. let us go forward in the knowledge that history only helps those who help themselves. there will be setbacks and sacrifices in the years ahead but i am convinced that we as a people are ready to give something back to our country in return for all it has given to us. [applause]

let this be our commitment: whatever sacrifices must be made will be shared and shared fairly. and let this be our confidence: at the end of our journey and always before us shines that ideal of liberty and justice for all. [applause] in closing, let me say a few words to all those that i have met and to all those who have supported me, at this convention and across the country. there were hard hours on our journey, and often we sailed against the wind. but always we kept our rudder true, and there were so many of you who stayed the course and shared our hope. you gave your help, but even more, you gave your

hearts. because of you, this has been a happy campaign. you welcomed joan, me and our family into your homes and neighborhoods, your churches, your campuses, your union halls. when i think back of all the miles and all the months and all the memories, i think of you. i recall the poet's words, and i say: what golden friends i have. .

i have listened to the grandmother and no longer has a phone to call their grandchildren because she gave it up to pay the rent on her apartment. i have listened to young workers and families of the the chance to own a home. i see in the factories installed assembly lines. i have seen far too many idle men and women desperate to work. i have seen too many committees working families desperate to protect the values of their wages from inflation. i have also since the earnings for the new hope among the people in every state where i am firm. i have held in their handshake. i saw it in their faces. i shall never forget the mothers who carry children. i shall always remember the

elderly who have lived in an america of high purpose and to believe that it can all happen again. tonight in their name, i have come here to speak for them. for their sake i ask you to stand with them. on their behalf, i ask you to reaffirm the timelwa truth. -- the timeless truth. i congratulate him on his victory. i am confident that the democratic party will reunite on the basis of democratic principles and that together we will march forward to a democratic victory.

someday and long after this convention, long after the signs and the band stops playing, may it be said of our campaign that we found our face again. made be said of us in the worded tennyson,and has special for me now, "i am a part of all that i have done. too much is taken, much abides. that which we are, we are, one equal temper of zero carts, strong-willed to seek to find

and not to yield." for me a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end. for all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on. because indoors. the hope still lives. the green at shaw never die. -- shall never die. >> ladies and gentlemen, said where edward kennedy.

-- senator edward kennedy. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> thank you. thank you very much. you of lot to. -- thank you a lot. [applause] >> thank you, thank you. [applause] >> thank you, thank you.

thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you. thank you, thank you, caroline. my fellow democrats, my fellow americans, is so wonderful to be here. [applause] and nothing is going to keep me away from this special gathering tonight. [applause]

i have come here tonight to stand with you, to change america, to restore its future, to rise to our best ideals, and to elect barack obama, president of the united states. [applause] as i look ahead, i am strengthen by family and friendship. so many of you have been with me in the happiest days and the hardest days. together, we have known success and seen setbacks, victory and defeat, but we have never lost our belief that we are all

called to a better country and a newark world's -- newer world, and i pledge to you will be there next january on the floor of the united states senate. [applause] >thank you. for me, this is a season of hope, new hope for a justice and

prosperity, for the many, not just a few. new hope, and this is because of my life. new hope that we will break -- this is in the cause of my life. you hope will break the gridlock, and every american, north, south, east, west, young, old, will have decent quality health care as a fundamental right and not a privilege. [applause] we can meet these challenges with barack obama. yes, we can, and finally, yes, we will. [applause] barack obama will close the book on the old politics of race,

agenda, and group against group, and straight against hgay. [applause] and barack obama will be a commander in chief who understands that young americans in uniform must never be committed to a mistake, but always to something worthy of their bravery he. [applause] we are told that barack obama believes too much in an america of high principle and boulder and denver, but when john kennedy -- and boulder and

denver -- bold endeavor, but when john kennedy wanted to go to the moon, he did not say it is too hard. we will not try. he rose to the challenge. today an american flag still parks the surface of the moon. [applause] yes, we are all americans. this is what we do. we reached the moon. we scale the heights. i know it. i have seen it. i have lived it, and we can do it again. [applause] there is a new wave of change

all around us, and if we set our compass through, we will reach our destination, not merely a victory for our party, but a renewal for our nation, and this november, the tor will be passed again to a new generation of americans, so with barack obama and for you and for me, our country will be committed to his cause. the work begins a new. the hope rises again, and the dream lives on. [applause] ♪ [applause]

♪ [applause] [applause] [applause]

♪ [applause] [applause] ♪ next this saturday, we have the boston globe reporter that put

together the book "last lion, "of the biography of senator ted kennedy. >> on c-span, congressman to jeffrey connelly holds a town hall and sprinkle, va. vader, comment on the death of senator ted kennedy from president obama, vice-president by then, and harry reid. -- vice-president joe biden, and harry reid. >> tomorrow morning come in with a medicare part b, with bruce vladeck. will look back to the

presidential race with dan balz and haynes johnson. what did >> in 1959, soviet mant for the u.s. but the he recounts that trip -- took a tour of the u.s.. he recounts that trip. >> now healthcare town hall meeting with the virginia democrat gerry connolly. he is a freshman congressman represents the 11th district outside of washington, d.c. he met with constituents at a senior center in springfield, va .

>> i do want to welcome everybody here today. i certainly want to welcome congressman connolly. this is a very exciting time. we find ourselves as the community right in the middle of some of these discussions. part of the political process -- it is an exciting place to be. i have no doubt that today will be a model for how to do one of these, to have one of these discussions and have a town hall meeting the others will try to duplicate produce the sea before your stability and courtesy to each other as we do this today. we are going to have some great presentations. at the end we will have plenty of time for questions and answers. we will have a microphone if you like to ask a question.

do ask that to keep your questions to 30 seconds. we want to have time for everybody. i want to introduce george burke. >> a lot -- what a crowd. the health care reform is an important issue that affects every american. we know it is particularly important to all you gathered here today. there are a lot of missed being circulated. there are also legitimate concerns. we want to try to address your concerns today and your questions. we thank all of you who chose to come here today. we apologize to those who cannot get into too physical limitations. as the open, congressman connolly will deliver brief

remarks. then i will hand over the microphone to the congressman. we will field your questions for the next hour -- 1.5 hour- two hours. there are two microphones. if you prefer to be seated, and steve elliott will have a roving microphone. please, raise your hand raise you. we hope you will limit your questions to 30 seconds so that as many residents as possible have the opportunity to ask questions. well we understand it we have guests here in the room today, we would ask that you refrain from asking any questions of the panel and an least hold those questions until virtually everybody has an opportunity to ask the theirs. we think it is important.

we want to make sure that you have the opportunity to ask your congressmen and these panelists the questions. that would be greatly appreciated. if your question is not answered, there will be in debt cards -- in in-depth cards that will be passed out. you can ask the question if you are not able to ask. i hope we get through them all. looking at this room, that may be tough. it is my pleasure to introduce someone than most of you already know. during his 14 year career as a member of the fairfax board of supervisors, the last five as chairman of the board of washington's largest jurisdiction, mr. connolly championed an aggressive agenda that earns fairfax county the

moniker of best managed large county in the nation. i do not know of many of you know that the bill he has a long record of achievement on many issues, including issues affecting seniors. since taking office in january, he has already earned the reputation as an expert on state and local government issues and on budget issues. he was recently recognized by a national magazine for his work on issues concerning the federal work force. recently he was elected president of the freshman class in congress. without further ado, i give you congressman gerry connolly. >> thank you. thank you very much. i am irish, and i cannot resist telling a story. mrs. murphy was driving around and driving too fast in a residential zone.

she stopped by a very young police officer three weeks of the academy. he stopped her in said, you are going 50 miles an hour and a 25 mile an hour zone. what you have to say for yourself? she looked up at him with those eyes and said, i do not have a license. she said it was a stolen vehicle. he said, alecky to open the trunk. she said there is a dead body in there. he was flustered. the sergeant said he needed to see her license. she says, no problem. here it is. she gives them the license. he said, what about the registration. she handed to him. she opened the trunk and it was clean as a whistle. he said, i do not understand. he told my officer you did not have a license, the car was

stolen, and there is a body in the trunk. she looked up at him and said, i think he said i was speeding, too. the irish are always thinking. thank you for giving us such a warm welcome i am a familiar face. i have been coming here for the last eight or nine years. a few things i want to tell you about in terms of health care. you need to know that your congressman has not endorsed any bill. i have not said i liked this bill or that bill. in fact, i have raised some concerns about some provisions in the major draft in the house. there are three bills that need to be reconciled in the house. we do not yet have a final draft.

the working draft we are all working out is this one. if you want to know, if i read the bill, i just have read a lot. i have read hundreds of articles. i have gone through lots of briefings. i am trying to make sure i'm educated in health care and the we are looking at all the right issues. i have some current about the funding and the nature of coverage. i have some concerns about some of the reforms. when i look at reform, but me share with you what i start with and maybe you do too. while a lot of this like the coverage we have now -- and by the way, how many have medicare? i know that the republicans know that is a federal program.

a lot of us have medicare. i just talked to my dad. he said i had been using medicare for 17 years. him and my mother or in frail health. he said that i want you to know, in the 17 years of being a consumer of medicare, not once have they made a mistake but do not want said they failed to make the payments that they needed to make. that was important the back to get from my dad. -- feedback to get from my dad. if you did get the economics of health care, we are in trouble. it is costing too much. in the united states, we spend $7,000 per person per year on health care. that is twice the median of all the other industrialized countries. we are paying twice what they

are paying the we are not spending -- in 1960, we spend 5% of our gdp on health care. today we are spending 18%. if we do nothing by the time i am 100, we will be spending 48%, almost half of our economy on health care. that is not sustainable. you have not -- you have even seen it in medicare payments in terms of premiums. they are going up about 10% a year. it is taking a bigger bite out of our seniors. deductibles and the last 10 years have doubled. premiums have doubled. copayments have doubled. insurance company profits have gone up 428%. i want to look at three things. there are a lot of particulars.

i want to make sure that the 47 million americans without health care coverage. we are concerned about it because they represent a pact between you and me. what healthcare do they resulted they do not have coverage? they go to the emergency room. uncompensated care in america costs $43 billion. you and i pay that. we paid in higher premiums and billing. i want to address the 47 million and that do not have health care coverage to bring them into the system. if that can help lower costs by having risk pool. i want to have a meaningful basket of health care reform. let's start with medicare. i want to close the doughnut hole on prescription drugs. i want to make sure all of our seniors have access to the medications they need and that nobody in america over 55 or 65

have to make a terrible decision of buying the mill or drugs. there are some judge -- drugs that cost a lot of money. i want to make catastrophic illness does not bankrupt families. in our district along, last year, 1430 families filed for bankruptcy because of health care costs. any family in america, young or old, could be one accident away from catastrophic health-care costs. capping costs so that no family is forced to be in a position i think is an important reform. portability. that is important. preventing insurers from cherry picking for pre-existing conditions. you and i are of a certain age. a lot of my staff are in their

20s. what i say to them is if you are lucky enough, everybody in american will have a pre- existing condition, because as we get old, we develop conditions. some of them are more serious than others. 45% of all insured americans have a previous existing condition. my wife is a diabetic. she developed because of an asthma attack. she now index a drug several times a day. it costs a lot of money to maintain her health. as she gets older, it will get more aggravated. we care a lot about this. millions of american families face the same thing. all too frequently, insurers have actually exercise rationing of health care by denying health care.

we need a reform that will and end that. they can afford it. their profits have gone up 428%. the third thing i want to see is that over time we get control of the long-term health care curve so that the cost to the economy, to the government, and to families comes down. if health care is more affordable with businesses, and let me give an example -- the cost of doing nothing is that these costs continue to rise and more and more americans cannot access the health care they need. let's take small businesses. maybe most of the people in this room are not running one. you may know someone who is or maybe you ran one. 60% of small businesses just 10 years ago provided health care coverage to their employees. today is only 55%.

45% do not provide health care. if we do nothing, it the cost of small business over the next 10- years will get up to $2.40 trillion. we are going to have probably 35% of small businesses providing health-care coverage to their employees if we do nothing. i want to make sure that whatever we are talking about, do those three things. let me make one fact. i will not vote for any health- care bill that in any way does any harm to medicare. i think that is an important principle. i want to vote for one that increase medicare by closing at a doughnut hole on prescription drugs and that allows us to pursue preventive health care. the draft a bill here would

eliminate the co-payments for people who go in to see the doctor for preventive care. i think it is a good reform. the more we can focus on preventive care, the more we can get savings in the long run. i have an open mind. i'm here today to share with you and to also listen to you. i know where when to do that in a civil and respectful way. we always do that here. when we are finished, hopefully, the residents will show the rest of america have a town meeting ought to be held. vigorous debate, strongly held views, listening respectfully, and sharing civilly and respectfully with one another. thank you so much for having me here today. [applause] >> it is my privilege to introduce a barber. she is the president and chief

executive officer of the national committee to preserve social security and medicare. she has been 25 years in public service at the local state and federal levels, including 17 years as a member of congress. she is a former ranking member of the house ways and means committee subcommittee on social security. issues the first woman to serve as chief majority in the house of representatives. she is also the first woman to serve on the house committee on intelligence. she has advocated for social security, medicare, and other health and retirement issues. it is one of the reasons why we have heard here with us today. after leaving congress, she served as consulate to the commissioner of the social security administration. she served on the 2006 white house conference on aging. she was appointed to the social

security advisor for. i would suggest that she knows her stuff. let me give you barbara kennelly. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. talking but knowing your step. here congressmen certainly knows his stuff. i have been at a number of town hall meetings. to hear him go through that bill is music to my ears. i am here as the president of a [unintelligible] we have 4 million members in support. they come from all walks of life. the one common thing they have is their absolute passion about social security and medicare. before i get into medicare, i want to mention that some of you remember a few years ago when

our president bush decided he wanted to privatize this. it was not a good idea. i went around the country talking to our members. i would have audiences similar to this one. they knew their social security was not going to be affected. they might have a doctor -- a doctor with three children, and they knew that drdaughter would need social security. now have people saying to me all the time, you do not have to worry about social security. privatization is dead. we do have to worry about social security. the reason we do is the deficit that we have in this country and the people that were against social security in 1935 are the same people who work for privatization and vote now they

are saying that with this deficit we cannot afford social security. that is absolutely not the truth. it is not so secure the the cause the deficit. we all pay into that every single paycheck. amigo to medicare. -- let me go to medicare. it has been one of the most successful government programs there are. medicare is a health care program. it is not immune to what is happening and what congress was talking about. the high inflation rate continues for health care. medicare uses the same hospitals, doctors, mri's. although it is sufficient, it is not perfect, it cannot pull the

tide of inflation. it is important that any health care reform bill strengthens medicare and is not weaken it. my group has not taken a position on health care reform. do i want health care reform? of course i do. if you look at the three bills, they were all different. they have to go to the rules committee. that is the procedure. they have to be melded together. then they have to vote on the floor of the house. senator kennedy's health committee, they have a bill i love. i just love it but it is very expensive but talk about the finance committee. -- but it is very expensive. as talk about the finance committee. they do not tell us what they are doing i cannot endorse that

bill. we do not know what the bill is going to look like. the house bill that is voted on in the floor, then it goes to congress. in 2003 we had the medicare act or you have part d, that went to congress -- i read the bill. a schematic congress and i did not recognize it. -- when it came out of congress, i did not recognize it. for the last 25 years, we have been taxing medicare fighting against costs. we are not one to stop now. -- going to stop now. here is what i'm trying to say. i know there are those that think seniors and retired people do not seek health care reform. i promise you if we do not do

health care in conjunction with a greater situation, down , the only place you'll be able to cut inflation -- the only place the government has control over is medicare. my message to you today is do not be against any reform. if we do not do this, we will be out on a limb. the college entitlement reform. -- they call it entitlement reform. that will start in the budget office. am i glad this commerce men belonged to the budget committee. he understands how important medicare is. he also understands -- we act like our system is the most generous one.

the average social security check per year is $13,800 but . let's try not to cut that too much. let's talk about the $500 billion that we read about. some of the five under billion dollars is really going to help many predict-billion dollars is really going to help medicare. [unintelligible] you know well that it 21% cut from medicare, any doctor will look at the private group and not on medicare prepared that is . that is why we have to be careful about what we are doing. the good news about the doughnut hole [unintelligible]

the bad news is that it takes 14 years to close it. the drug companies have put on the table $80 billion, saying we will get 60% for name brand when you are in the doughnut hole. obviously, the army -- making an awful lot of money. we have to look at closing the doughnut hole. it is so hard to get out of it. it eliminates co-payments for preventive care. that is a very healthy thing to do. it improves benefits for lower income people. is it perfect? of course it is not. we thought very hard to have annual out-of-pocket expenses capped. i do not see why we do not know

more about their ears, eyes, teeth. will we get older, we need some help. -- when we get older, we need some help. my message to you is not to close the door on health care reform. medicare will be left out there hanging. you are looking at a woman worked stunning. -- studying. it was a complicated bill. they waited too long to show it to congress. congress was upset because they did not see it. the insurance companies hated it. i've represented hartford, connecticut it was the insurance capital of the world. before 1965, they would not touch anybody 65 and older.

if you are older 65, you have more claims. when medicare was passed, all those over 65 for put in a pool -- or put in a pool so there was risk sharing. that is why it has worked. our insurance companies happy? of course not. they know this time the inflation for health care insurance has gone so high that it is impossible. i stand here as a woman who voted for the bill. i could see what was coming. i could see inflation and health care is going to break people. the insurance companies never forgave me.

let's stick with healthcare. i was a politician for years. [inaudible] i understand why the opposing party is having a problem with this bill. they were in control for 10 years -- eight years. down the road, we need health care reform. everyone to keep medicare strong, we need a good bill and this congressmen will help us do that. [applause] >> thank you. he has served as state director for virginia since 1995. in that capacity, he oversees aarp's programs and advocacy activities. he has been with aarp for more

than 21 years ago he first served as a senior program specialist. he directed their national would no persons service. later he served as legislative riverses did where he organized their federal -- legislative committee where he organized their federal program. >> thank you for inviting us here today. thank you all for coming to the meeting. i usually stuck with an opening that will not work in this crowd. i can say to people, for those of you who have not noticed, there is a major demographic shift going on in the commonwealth of virginia, the

old is getting older. it is true. today 14% of the population in virginia is 65 and older. by 2020, that will change to about 20%. by 2030, virginia retirement population will look much like florida's looks like today. things are changing. that means the things we do today will probably not be the same the way we -- will not be the way we look at the future. well virginians have saved enough money to leave the extra 20 or 30 years? -- live the extra 20 or 30 years? how are we going to stretch the health care dollars? how are we going to develop the work force we need to develop all that health care? what about our communities, are

they livable? how are we going to deliver those services to those boomers who have their own way of doing everything? these some of these questions as we are addressing today. a few years ago as we were looking at this, we try to focus on what the major issues are the we need to think about today to prepare for the future. a few issues emerge from a unique campaign. this two issues were lifelong health and financial security. i want to take a little bit of time on this. i know you are here to talk about health. we know that retirement security -- you have social security. you have pensions if you are likely -- lucky enough and then you had your savings and investment. each one of these get wobbly

over the years. many believe now that work might be the only alternative. the savings is at an all-time low. investments are declining in value. social security will become much more important for future retirees, even more than it is today. in virginia, over 1,161,000 citizens seek social security benefits. you are not the only people. half of those rely on social security for at least half if not more than half of their income. one out of four rely on social security for all of their retirement. we need to get that going again. with this program, it to be much important -- much more important

for the future. we need to make sure it can deliver 100% that it promises. we know that our health care system needs improvement. in a a r p's view it cost too much and lead to many people out. -- and leaves too many people out. well you and other citizens are the only people in american society that have access universal health coverage, is the problem all over there really threaten the financial stability and viability of medicare. aarp is committed to working for comprehensive health-care reform in a way that increase medicare, expand access to the 46 million americans who have no health insurance, slows down runaway medical costs, and improves the

quality we receive no matter where you are in the system. that is a pretty tall order. it is certainly not one to be is to. there is certainly no silver bullet to solve the problem. we believe that if we all work together and if congress can move the not partisanship, we can find meaningful solutions that are good for every generation in society. we are in the middle of the debate right now. there have been some very strong opinions. the citizens are engaged. that is good. hopefully, congress will pass legislation that moves as in the right direction. we have got to get this job done. the cost of doing nothing is way too high. aarp has not endorsed any of the bills. we are very much for other individuals are here. we are looking at things we

would like to see in health care reform. the final bill that we might indoors, it will pauley had the best things in there. -- that we might improve, it will have the best things in there. there are still some who do not want to see any changes to our health care system. they have been spreading a lot of misinformation which does not solve the problem. i like to focus on some of that -- some of the myths. i'll talk about three the most common myths that we encounter. they are health care reform is for medicare. we cannot afford health care reform. and health-care reform means rationing. lease take a look that it will hermetic capita -- but take a look at it will hurt medicare.

[unintelligible] it is not there. aarp that we do believe that if done right, healthcare -- aarp believes that if done right, health care reform will lower the cost of medicare. it will better protect access to the doctor of their choice, which is being limited right now. it will reduce the cost of preventive services so you can stay healthy and save money by providing new services that reduce unnecessary remissions. health care reform will strengthen the financial status of the entire program. what about the cannot afford health care reform? both the president and congress

are committed to reducing legislation that will be paid for. it will not settle our children and grandchildren with unnecessary debt. it can be done if we do it right. we have to hold the president and congress accountable to answer that question. do not forget that as research for that answer, the cost of doing nothing is also a really high. if we do nothing to fix healthcare, families of medicare and employer based coverage, will likely see their previous year the double again in the next seven years. a greater share of their take- home pay goes to pay for health care every year and it grows at a rate that outdoes inflation. we have to make real changes to slow down the rate of growth.

we cannot afford not to reform health care. health care reform means rationing. this one has been kicking around for a while. none of the health proposals that we have seen would stand between individuals and their doctors or prevent americans from choosing the best possible care. let me emphasize this. healthcare reform will not give the government the power to make life and death decisions regardless of the person's age. those decisions and every bill we have looked at will still be made by the individual, their doctor, and their family. health care reform will inch your that medicare doctors are paid fairly -- will ensure that medicare doctors are paid fairly. health care reform is not about rationing. is about giving people the piece of ninth -- peace of mind that

they cawill not be discriminated against because of your age or your pre-existing condition. it is about introducing more choice and competition so that consumers can use their power to better control costs and get more, not less, health care. there are several difficult choices that need to be made. we need to consider how to do those best. we do not need to get the verdict on misinformation that will take this away from the real issues. i hope we will be discussing those issues today. when one out of three americans have someone in their family that is getting cut back on medical care due to costs, when the number of the uninsured and purchase 50 million, and when

employers struggle to pay for the cost of healthcare, the fact is we cannot afford not to fix the system. aarp pledges to cut to the noise to find the facts about the health care reform. i hope you'll join us. this is probably the most american dialogue the we have had a long time. if we were together in a bipartisan way, together i think we can make it better. thank you. >> he is the former national legislative chair for the virginia federation of chapters of narf. he has worked for many years for the department of agriculture, including with the foreign

agricultural service. he joins narf in august 1995 and has served as national legislative chair and as national legislative chair for narf's statewide virginia federation. he also chaired the legislative committee for narf's last two national conventions. [applause] >> thank you. narf has a laundry list of issues will apart from health care. you'll find them outlined in his brochure that is on the table in the back. i was wondering how much i would be boring if i went through some

of them. they had the instinct to call and say do not talk about there. talk about healthcare. that is what we will stick with intel arfe -- stick with and how arfe the views health care. who in here remember -- who in here is a member ofarfe? how many in here are federal retirees? a much larger percentage. let me say we do not have a current position on health care reform, because there is no specific legislation that we have provision on. you have seen the phone book

that congressman connolly wave at you. i assume the health committee bill is approximately the same size. i hear the senate finance bill when there is one will be smaller and more streamlined. as yet, we do not have that in the senate. our health care attitude primarily is that it is not going to affect us terribly much in terms of the current bills that we have seen. most federal retirees can take their health insurance plans with them and after they turn 65, they combine them with medicare and medicaid. the health care reform