Congress is Close to Passing Prescription Drug Legislation

Published in Pawtucket Times on June 23, 2003

Within days of the July 4th congressional recess, the House and Senate continue their debates on enacting legislation to lower the cost of pharmaceuticals for the nation’s elderly.

The AARP will kick off a media blitz to get a point across to lawmakers that while they may take a short break during recess, the nation’s elderly don’t get a break when it comes to affording the costly medications they need.

“There’s no recess [for seniors] from high prescription drug costs,”  AARP declares in a press release sent to the nation’s media outlets.

In a written statement, Lt. Gov. Charles J. Fogarty, who chairs the state’s Long-Term Care Coordinating Council, calls on Rhode Island’s congressional delegation to pass meaningful Medicare drug benefits, rather than the legislative proposals being debated in the House and Senate chambers.

“While it is nice that after many years of promises Congress has finally taken on this issue these proposals will cause nothing but heartburn and headaches for seniors if passed,” said Fogarty, noting that many seniors will pay more for the program than they will get back in benefits. He charged that others will even be left without prescription drug coverage when they need it the most.

Under the Senate proposal, seniors would pay a $ 35 monthly premium and then have to meet a $275 deductible before Medicare starts to kick in to pay for half of the drugs costs.  Once senior’s reach a cost cap of $ 4,500 for the last year, they would then have to pick up the entire cost until they reach yet another cap of $ 5,800 in total drug spending. At this point, Medicare would then pay 90 percent of the covered drug costs.

Fogarty noted the Congressional Budget Office found that one-third of seniors would pay more money to enroll in the plan than they would actually get back in benefits.

That’s because a senior with $ 1,000 in annual drug costs would actually end up

$ 1,057 annual for the benefits ($420 in premiums, a $ 275 deductible and half of the drug costs).  A senior with $ 2,000 in drug costs would pay $ 1,557 out-of-pocket for the benefits.

Fogarty also called attention to the major gap in coverage for those whose costs exceed the $ 4,500 limit until they reach that $ 5,800 mark.

Furthermore, Fogarty, who authored the state’s expanded prescription drug program, said a study by Columbia University found that only those annual drug costs about $ 1,100 would benefit through the plan.  

In the House chamber, the Republican proposal also calls for monthly premiums of $ 35 along with a lower annual deductible of $ 250 with Medicaid paying 80 percent of the cost of drugs up to $ 2,000.

There is a gaping hole in coverage (in this legislative package).” Fogarty warned “Seniors would then have to spend at least another $ 1,500 depending on their income, on medications before coverage would again begin.”

According to Fogarty, Consumer Union, the publisher of the widely-read magazine, Consumer Reports, noted the “skimpy benefits [in the House and Senate proposal] and the historically high growth of prescription drug costs means that most who lack coverage today would wind up paying more for prescription drugs in four years than they do now.”

Will seniors see a prescription drug proposal enacted this year?

Probably, said Jason Ormsby, director of policy at the Washington, D.C.-based Allilance for Health Reform.

“There is a tremendous drive that I have not seen in the last there years [to enact a prescription drug bill],” said Ormsby.

He noted the House passed a legislative proposal to assist seniors in paying for costly pharmaceuticals, but it died in the Senate.

“The somewhat similar House and Senate bills will have a good change to pass by the July 4th recess,” Ormsby predicted.  Once passed, the legislative proposal will go to conference committee to iron out the differences between the 600-page House and 350-pshr Senate bills,” he said.

The prescription drug benefits are just a small portion of these massive legislative proposals, he noted.

Robert Greenwood, vice-president of public affairs for the National Pace Association, added: “Many Democrats see the limitation of these bills.  This legislation passed presents a historic opportunity to get this law on the book so it can be amended and improved in future years.”

While not a meaningful drug prescription proposal, it’s the first step in the right direction.

Once enacted into law, the Rhode Island congressional delegation must begin their efforts to improve the law – improve access for all: make out-of-pocket costs and cost sharing affordable; lessen gaps in coverage; more important, put the breaks to the steady increase in high-cost drugs.

Governor’s Budget is Silent Regarding Many Senior Issues

Published in Pawtucket Times on March 24, 2003

Many of Gov. Don Carcieri’s policy initiatives can be found sprinkled throughout Fiscal Year 2004 Budget address.

While Carcieri’s 3,200-word speech identified his administration’s priorities – that is, maintaining human services, investing in education and creating jobs and fixing the state’s crumbling roads and bridges- it was silent on issues of interest to aging advocates and seniors.

At an AARP debate of gubernatorial candidates, Carcieri was asked if he would budget $15 million to overhaul the existing Medicaid payment system. The additional funding would greatly improve the quality of care and services provided to 10,000-plus nursing home residents.

With this additional $ 15 million in state funding, the federal government would pick up another $ 15 million, for a total increase of $ 30 million.

At the debate, Carcieri acknowledged it would be difficult to find $15 million to fix the system because of the state’s looming budget deficit.

After a first read, Alfred Santos, executive director of the Rhode Island Health Care Association, found the recently released administration budget did not allocate the $ 15 million in new funding to allow nursing facilities to be reimbursed for the actual cost of care that they provide to frail residents.

Santos hopes to schedule a meeting with Gov. Carcieri and his policy staff to discuss Medicaid reimbursement and staffing issues.

“One of the biggest disappointments for seniors in the governor’s budget is his failure to include funding to allow more low-income persons to choose Medicaid waiver-funded assisted living,” noted Maureen Maigret, who serves as Lt. Governor Fogarty’s director of policy and executive director of the state’s Long-Term Care Coordinating Council.

“This has been a priority for the senior advocacy community, and the governor was supportive of this funding during his campaign,” says Maigret.

Maigret told All About Seniors that more than a year ago, the federal government had approved an additional 180 units in the state’s Medicaid assisted living waiver to respond to Rhode Islander consumer demands.

“Failure to fund these units is short-signed in terms of saving taxpayer dollars and denies low-income seniors the option to choose a less restrictive care setting,” said Maigret, who calls the state’s current assisted living waiver program a great success.

According to Maigret, in the last fiscal year, there was a decrease in state-funded nursing home use of about 50,000 days and an increase in Medicaid funded Assisted Living of about the same number of days. “We have reached the funding cap for these Medicaid-funded assisted-living units and have a waiting list of 35 persons,” she said, noting that some of these persons will now be forced to enter nursing facilities at twice the cost of the state.

Meanwhile, Maigret added that the governor’s budget does not address the dire need of more regulatory staff in the Health Department to monitor assisted living and enforce state standards.

On the other hand, the Rhode Island Pharmaceutical Assistance for the Elderly Program (RIPAE) is intact, Maigret said.

“With the costs of prescription drugs increasing at such alarming rates, RIPAE is a vital safety net for thousands of Rhode Island seniors.

Maigret noted that changes this year in Blue Chip and United Health senior plans may further impact many seniors’ accesses to prescription drugs, as these plans have new features which limit benefits for brand name drugs. Legislation proposed by Fogarty and introduced by Sen. Elizabeth Roberts and Rep. Peter Ginaitt will address this pharmaceutical issue, she said.

Finally, Maigret said senior advocates must watch other areas of the state budget that will ultimately impact seniors. Some community grants, such as those that support senior centers, are targeted for 10 percent cuts. While nursing homes are in line for an annual cost of living increase (COLA) in their Medicaid rates, no similar COLA is included for home and community care providers.

Maigret added the governor’s budget cuts about $ 10 million (state and federal funds) to continue its efforts of downsizing the Eleanor Slater Hospital Cranston campus, with a proposal to close two more wards. To offset these closures, the budget includes about $ 800,000 to fund about 20 more nursing home placements and new funds to increase capacity to serve persons with mental illness in community residential settings.

The push to get residents back into the community concerns Roberta Hawkins, state ombudsman and executive director of the Alliance for Better Long-Term Care. She opposes the closure of wards because there are persons in the community who require a higher level of care, a level that is only available at the Eleanor Slater Hospital.

Hawkins noted the administration budget does not include Medicaid funding to pay for dental services to seniors in the community and those residing in nursing facilities.

“The short-sidedness of this fiscal policy ultimately will increase care costs when the resident must be hospitalized for malnutrition, dehydration and bed sores, all caused by dental problems,” Hawkins said. “On a human level, who would want to constantly suffer from pain all night because of a toothache or gum problems?” she added.

Sandy Centazao, president and CEO of Meals on Wheels of Rhode Island, is still waiting to see if Carcieri will ultimately institutionalize her nonprofit group’s funding rather than continue to allocate it as a legislative grant. She expects this decision to be made before the enactment of the state’s FY 2004 budget on July 1.

With a looming recession and a nation at war, Carcieri and the General Assembly must ultimately make difficult decisions as to how to slice the state’s FY 2004 budget. The state’s final budget must  provide the funding and adequate resources to enable long-term care providers to take care of the state’s burgeoning older population. It’s the right thing to do, even n times of uncertainly.

Lawmakers Consider Proposals to Reduce Costs of Prescription Drugs

Published in the Pawtucket Times on April 15, 2002

Amid the political bickering over the separation of powers bill and the controversy over allowing Rhode Islanders to vote next November on bringing gambling to the Ocean State, the Rhode Island General Assembly is getting around to considering three legislative proposals with broad public and bipartisan political support.

In the shadow of a huge state budget deficit, bills strongly endorsed by both senior and disabled advocates, would make pharmaceutical costs affordable while not costing the state one penny.

It was standing room only last Wednesday in Room 35 at a House Finance Committee hearing, chaired by Chairman Steven Costantino (D-Providence), of the subcommittee on human services. The legislative hearing, lasting almost four hours, drew the attention of the Rhode Island Commission on Aging, the Forum on Aging, the Gray Panthers, and Choices, to name a few.

Dozens of aging and disability advocacy groups, staffers of the Department of Elderly Affairs and the Department of Human Services, and lobbyists for the powerful pharmaceutical industry came to listen to testimony that would officially kick of the state’s debate on lowering pharmaceutical costs for seniors and persons with disabilities.

Under on legislative proposals (H 7291/S 2729), the state Department of Human Services would seek a waiver from the federal government allowing Rhode Island to use Medicaid funding to pay for prescription drugs for low-income seniors with incomes of up to $ 17,720 and couples with incomes up to  $ 23,880.

This bill, authored by Lt. Gov. Charles Fogarty and sponsored by Rep. Constantino and House Finance Chairman Gordon Fox, would enroll approximately 90 percent of the 37,500 seniors now enrolled in the Pharmaceutical Assistance for the Elderly Program (RIPAE) – the state’s pharmaceutical program. Because these seniors would now quality for prescription drug coverage under Medicaid, all Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drugs would be covered, not just those currently covered under RIPAE. Seniors would likely pay small co-payments, probably less than $ 10, rather than the 40 percent co-payments currently charged.

At this hearing, testimony was gathered on two other Fogarty legislative proposals that would make prescription drugs  more affordable to seniors and persons with disabilities who are not covered by the waiver. One bill (H 7290) would allow seniors enrolled in the RIPAE – approximately 5,000 seniors – to buy prescription drugs not currently covered by RIPAE at the discounted state price.

The second (H 7524) would allow 4,300 low-income persons on Social Security Disability Income (SSDI) who are between ages 55 and 65 to become members of RIPAE and purchase prescription medications at the state discounted rate.

Under both of these legislative proposals, the state would be able to obtain the manufacturer’s rebate available through RIPAE. Rebate funds gained from drug purchases by persons in the new SSDI part of RIPAE would accrue in a special fund to be used to subsidized the cost of these drugs in the future. This legislative initiative, like the other two, would be of no cost to the state.

There’s a very good reason why these proposals should be enacted, says Fogarty, who chairs the state’s Long-Term Care Coordinating Council. “Far too many of our seniors still face great burdens in paying for their medications. If your income is less than $ 10,000 per year – which is the median income for a person on RIPAE – having to pay $ 1,000 or more out of pocket for one’s prescription is a big problem.

“This year, in spite of our budget woes, we have a tremendous opportunity to greatly expand our prescription assistance program for seniors and persons with disabilities. By taking advantage of federal Medicaid dollars, we can save seniors millions and we can do these expansions with no added costs to the state,” Fogarty adds.

Susan Sweet, who represents CHOICES, a home and community advocacy agency and the Rhode Island Minority Elderly Task Force, says the expansion of RIPAE is critical, especially in light of the federal government’s failure to create a federal Medicare pharmaceutical benefit.

“Being able to pay for prescriptions avoids sickness, unnecessary hospitalizations and admissions to nursing homes, saving millions of dollars and many years of productive lives for seniors,” says Sweet. “Pharmaceutical products are the current and future medical miracles, and health insurance is inadequate without adequate drug cover, she says.

Shirley Kaiser, president of the Rhode Island Gray Panthers, whose group has battled years for putting the brakes on rising pharmaceutical costs, says seniors are giddy with the news that Rhode Island may finally move to addressing the problem.

The Gray Panthers strongly endorse the legislative proposals, and she believes this is the year for enactment of a legislative remedy.

At the Rhode Island General Assembly, some bills are enacted while many die during the legislative process, even those with great merit.

In light of the state’s fiscal uncertainties, lawmakers now have a rare opportunity to assist older Rhode Islanders and persons with disabilities in obtaining affordable prescription drugs at no cost to the state coffers.

With the widespread support and endorsement of these legislative proposals from state officials, aging and disability advocacy groups, and the pharmaceutical industry, for me it’s a no brainer – pass these bills and quickly sign them into law, says Kaiser.

It is now time to put this longtime aging issue behind us and move forward to other pressing matters like creating and paying for a seamless long-term care system.

Ensure passage of the three bills by telling your representatives and senators how important these three proposals are for you, and request their passage.