<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:21428.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-233
MONITORING CMS' VITAL SIGNS:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEDICARE
PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,
THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 5, 2005
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
21-428 WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800
Fax: (202) 512ÿ092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Counsel
Amy B. Newhouse, Chief Clerk
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota CARL LEVIN, Michigan
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Andrew Richardson, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Minority Staff Director
Nanci E. Langley, Minority Deputy Staff Director
Tara E. Baird, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Voinovich............................................ 1
Senator Akaka................................................ 3
Senator Levin................................................ 4
Senator Lautenberg........................................... 6
Senator Carper............................................... 7
Senator Pryor................................................ 29
Prepared statement:
Senator Coburn............................................... 41
WITNESSES
Tuesday, April 5, 2005
Hon. Mark McClellan, M.D., Ph.D., Administrator, Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services................................. 10
Marcia Marsh, Vice President for Agency Partnerships, Partnership
for Public Service............................................. 32
Ann Womer Benjamin, Director, Ohio Department of Insurance....... 34
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Benjamin, Ann Womer:
Testimony.................................................... 34
Prepared statement........................................... 85
Marsh, Marcia:
Testimony.................................................... 32
Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 64
McClellan, Hon. Mark, M.D., Ph.D.:
Testimony.................................................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 42
Appendix
Questions and answers submitted for the record from Dr. McClellan 94
Question and answer submitted for the record from Ms. Marsh...... 107
MONITORING CMS' VITAL SIGNS:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEDICARE
PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Oversight of Government Management,
the Federal Workforce, and the
District of Columbia Subcommittee,
of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. George V.
Voinovich, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Voinovich, Akaka, Levin, Carper,
Lautenberg, and Pryor.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH
Senator Voinovich. Good morning. The Subcommittee on
Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and
the District of Columbia will come to order. Good morning and
welcome to today's hearing, entitled ``Monitoring CMS' Vital
Signs: Implementing the Medicare Prescription Drug Program.''
This hearing will provide an opportunity to continue our
examination of the management challenges confronting the
Centers for Medicare and Services and ensure that the agency
has the financial and human capital resources it needs to get
the job done.
There is much at stake. For many, access to prescription
drug medications is a matter of life and death and a decent
quality of life. Today, conditions that used to require surgery
or in-patient care can now be treated on an out-patient basis
with prescription drugs. However, often times the cost of these
medications is prohibitive. We have to ensure seniors have
access to these life-saving medications and take advantage of
the new benefit. If it is properly administered, the new
Medicare benefit in my opinion will result in the most
significant improvement in public health since 1965 when
Medicare came into existence.
CMS has learned many lessons during the recent
implementation of the new Medicare drug discount card, which
will assist it as it continues with implementation of the full
prescription drug benefit. While I do believe there are still a
number of hurdles the agency must overcome before the launch of
that full Medicare drug benefit in 8 months, we would be remiss
not to recognize the success CMS and Dr. McClellan have had in
the past year.
Since the last hearing I held on this topic in April 2004,
CMS has successfully enrolled more than 6.2 million seniors in
the discount drug card program. These seniors are saving
between 12 and 21 percent of the cost of their prescription
medication. In addition to those savings, I believe the most
important part of the discount drug card is the transitional
assistance for low-income seniors--those under 135 percent of
the Federal poverty level. These individuals received $600 in
2004 and 2005 to help pay for prescription drugs.
I am pleased that 1.75 million low-income seniors have
taken advantage of the transitional assistance to date. Getting
these seniors enrolled took considerable work, and I saw this
first hand. I am proud to say that I join with CMS and the Ohio
Senior Health Insurance and Information Program (OSHIIP), the
Ohio Area Agency on Aging, and other community groups that
traveled around Ohio last year. We held 14 roundtables and
training sessions to educate and encourage seniors without drug
coverage, especially those with low incomes, to sign up for the
card. Together, my staff held an additional 426 sessions
throughout Ohio. I want to thank CMS and the OSHIIP program in
Ohio for participating and assisting us in efforts to get
Ohioans signed up for the program.
And, Mark, I want to thank you for coming on two occasions
to Ohio to help us get the job done. In fact, we went to the
training session together for an hour.
It has paid off for some 279,000 seniors in Ohio who have
signed up for the drug card. These individuals are expected to
save about $134 million on the cost of their drugs in 2005.
Ohio's low-income beneficiaries, who enrolled in the program by
the end of 2004, will have access to $73 million in direct
financial assistance with drug costs. While these seniors will
be able to take advantage of these savings until the full
benefit begins, it is now time to turn our attention to the
full drug benefit.
Using the experience of the implementation and the ongoing
enrollment in the discount card over the past years, it is the
responsibility of Congress and the Administration to make
certain that CMS has the means to implement the much larger and
more complex, full drug benefit in an efficient and effective
manner.
Preparing to administer the program in the tight 2-year
time frame is quite a challenge. However, from what I have
witnessed, CMS is well on its way. On January 21 of this year,
CMS took a crucial first step toward fulfilling the Act by
publishing the final regulations for the new drug benefit and
the enhanced health coverage options through the Medicare
Advantage program. I understand that the agency has an
ambitious timeline to review and approve potential plan
sponsors, work with employers and retirement systems that
choose to apply for the retiree subsidy, assist States in
adapting their prescription savings plans to help their
beneficiaries further benefit from the new Federal coverage,
and, of course, communicate and educate Medicare beneficiaries
about their options and ultimate enrollment in the plans.
Having the right people at CMS is the key to successful
implementation of this program.
And even before the passage of the Medicare Modernization
Act, CMS--and this is what we are here to talk about today--was
coping with administrative challenges. For example, a 2002
report by the National Academy of Social Insurance highlighted
the fact that between fiscal years 1992 and 2002, benefit
outlays increased 97 percent and claims grew by 50 percent;
however, program management funds increased only 26 percent,
and authorized full-time equivalent positions grew by 12
percent.
Currently, 18 percent of CMS' workforce is eligible to
retire, and the number is significantly higher, 30 percent, in
the Senior Executive Service. In addition, over the past 3
years, CMS has lost a quarter of its career executives to
retirement. If that does not seem like enough of a daunting
challenge, 46 percent of the existing CMS workforce will be
eligible for regular retirement by 2009. These statistics will
sound familiar to anyone knowledgeable of the Federal
Government's human capital challenges.
Before I introduce the witnesses, I would like to remind my
colleagues that the purpose of this hearing is not to discuss
the details nor the merits of the program. I know there is
still some controversy about the program. We are here to
determine if the agency has the wherewithal to get the job
done, to get it out on the street. I understand some have
concerns surrounding the program. However, it is the law. We
are here today to ensure CMS has the resources and personnel
capacity to ensure that the benefit is implemented as Congress
has directed.
I would now like to call on Senator Akaka for his opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have
long supported efforts to establish a meaningful Medicare
prescription drug benefit for the elderly and disabled, and I
remain committed to improving the Medicare prescription drug
benefit so that seniors are able to obtain all of the
medication that they need.
However, I voted against the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 because it offers a
false promise to all seniors. Under the MMA, new prescription
drug plans will be available to individuals covered by Medicare
beginning in January 1, 2006. The Center for Medicare and
Medicaid Services (CMS) recently issued the final regulations
implementing this benefit.
MMA coverage, in my mind, could actually, I feel, harm many
seniors. For example, Hawaii's seniors who have incomes below
100 percent of the poverty level and obtain their medication
through Hawaii's Medicaid program will be worse off under this
plan because they will have to make co-payments for their
prescription medications. I fear that too many low-income
seniors will not be able to afford these co-payments. Creating
a barrier that will prevent some low-income seniors from
obtaining needed medications will likely increase overall
health care costs. Denying necessary medication could lead to
more hospital visits and other health-related costs.
Mr. Chairman, I intend to introduce legislation shortly to
remove the co-payment requirement for dual-eligible
beneficiaries, and I hope my colleagues will support me in this
effort.
Mr. Chairman, I am also concerned that Medicare and
Medicaid dual-eligible seniors may have to alter their existing
treatments because of the formularies imposed by prescription
drug plans. For example, HIV and AIDS patients and individuals
in nursing homes may be forced to alter the physician
prescription because their formularies for their Medicare
prescription plans are too restrictive and are less generous
than their existing Medicaid drug coverage. More must be done
to protect the ability of beneficiaries to obtain for
themselves the best possible treatment, rather than being
subject to arbitrary formulary determinations.
Senator Voinovich, I thank you for calling today's hearing
to discuss with our witnesses the implementation of Medicare
Part D. This portion of Medicare will be difficult to
administer due to the complex design of the prescription drug
benefit plans and low-income subsidies. In particular, I look
forward to discussing today what steps will be taken to ensure
that seniors will have access to the information necessary to
make informed choices among private plans and utilize the
benefits for which they may be eligible.
This is a complicated task. Different communities have
diverse needs and challenges that must be met to make sure that
underserved populations will not be unfairly denied access to
assistance. It will be critical that access not be denied to
seniors because of language or cultural barriers or to those
who do not have access to the Internet, or even a telephone. We
must take steps to ensure that even those in isolated
communities, such as those on the island of Molokai, are
provided with the information necessary to utilize all of the
benefits that they may be entitled to under the MMA.
I look forward to the testimony, and I want to add my
welcome to Mark McClellan, Marcia Marsh, and Ann Benjamin.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Levin.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LEVIN
Senator Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
holding this important hearing. As we all remember, a few years
ago we had a vigorous debate about the future of Medicare and
the best way to deliver an affordable, voluntary, universal,
and guaranteed prescription drug benefit to our seniors. Many
seniors, retirees, were skeptical of the Medicare bill that was
enacted in 2003, and, quite frankly, so was I. Now, 2 years
later, we are beginning to get some answers which I hope we
will hear about today. For example, what is the increased cost
of the drug benefit since the Department of Health and Human
Services is apparently barred from negotiating lower prices for
Medicare beneficiaries? How many retirees will lose the solid
prescription drug coverage that they now have?
These were major concerns back in 2003. The law has given
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, the
authority to fashion implementing regulations that could
possibly ease some of the problems. I hope to hear today about
what CMS is planning to do with that authority.
The Administration has been less than forthcoming in
providing accurate information to Congress about the cost of
the Medicare drug benefit. In 2003, while the Administration
was publicly stating that the drug benefit would cost no more
than $400 billion over 10 years, the chief actuary for CMS,
Richard Foster, had internal documents predicting costs closer
to $534 billion. When Congress asked Mr. Foster to provide
those estimates during the House and Senate debate on the bill,
the former CMS Administrator refused to make either Mr. Foster
or those estimates available. New budget documents now project
a cost in the neighborhood of $720 billion.
The huge increase in the cost of this program in just 2
years from the original $400 billion price tag goes beyond
sticker shock. Accurate cost information and honest cost
projections are critical as the drug benefit is implemented
early next year and Congress begins to evaluate both the
program and possible changes to it. CMS needs to satisfy the
people of this Nation that it will provide accurate cost
information.
A related issue is the CMS decision to use critically
needed administrative resources to produce covert broadcast
materials to try to promote the new Medicare drug benefit. Last
year, CMS distributed a videotape on the program benefits in
the guise of an actual news report, when in reality the
reporter was a paid actor.
CMS is not alone in this. Political consultants and
commentators were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to
promote Department of Education policies and tens of thousands
to promote a program at the Department of Health and Human
Services. This type of covert journalism is just plain wrong.
And although last year the Government Accountability Office,
the GAO, concluded that this practice violated Federal law, a
memorandum by the Administration released just last month
states that the Executive Branch is ``not bound'' by GAO legal
advice. Disguising the hand of government in broadcast
materials is not only against the law, it undermines the
operation of a free press. Government should be protecting a
free press, not trying to buy it. It is my hope that CMS will
tell us today that it will end the use of covert broadcasting
materials to promote the Medicare drug benefit and to use those
critically needed resources for administration of this program.
I want to especially commend Senator Lautenberg for his
early blowing of the whistle on these abuses and for his
persistence in this matter. It has been brought to the
attention of the public as an abuse which must be corrected,
and I salute him for it.
I would like to thank Dr. McClellan for appearing here this
morning and for his public service over the years, and I look
forward to his testimony as well as the testimony of the other
witnesses.
[The prepared statement of Senator Levin follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LEVIN
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. I know that many
seniors and retirees are skeptical of the Medicare bill that was
enacted in 2003, and quite frankly, so am I.
As we all remember, we had a vigorous debate 2 years ago about the
future of Medicare and the best way to deliver an affordable,
voluntary, universal, and guaranteed prescription drug benefit to our
seniors.
Now, 2 years later, we are beginning to get some answers, which I
hope we will hear about today. For example, what is the increased cost
of the drug benefit since the Department of Health and Human Services
is apparently barred from negotiating lower prices for Medicare
beneficiaries? How many retirees will lose the solid prescription drug
coverage they now have. These were major concerns of mine in 2003. The
law has given the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services or CMS the
authority to fashion implementing regulations that could possibly ease
some of the problems. I hope to hear today about what CMS is planning
to do with this authority.
Another concern that needs to be aired today is the fact that, from
the beginning, this Administration has been less than forthcoming in
providing accurate information to Congress about the cost of the
Medicare drug benefit. For example, in 2003, while the Administration
was publicly stating the drug benefit would cost no more than $400
billion, the chief actuary for CMS, Richard Foster, had internal
documents predicting costs closer to $534 billion. When Congress asked
Mr. Foster to provide those estimates during the House and Senate
debate on the bill, the former CMS Administrator refused to make either
Mr. Foster or those estimates available. New budget documents from the
Administration now project a cost in the neighborhood of $720 billion.
The huge increase in the cost of this program in just 2 years from
the original $400 billion price tag goes beyond sticker shock. Accurate
cost information and honest cost projections are critical as the drug
benefit is implemented early next year, and Congress begins to evaluate
both the program and possible changes to it. CMS needs to satisfy the
people of this nation that it will provide accurate and honest cost
information.
A related issue is the policy decision to use covert broadcast
materials to try to promote the new Medicare drug benefit. Last year,
CMS distributed a videotape on the program benefits in the guise of an
actual news report when, in reality, the reporter was a paid actor.
Political consultants and commentators were paid hundreds of thousands
of dollars to promote Department of Education policies and tens of
thousands to promote a program at the Department of Health and Human
Services. This type of covert journalism for hire is plain wrong. And
although last year, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
concluded that this practice violated two Federal laws, a memorandum by
the Administration released just last month states the Executive Branch
is ``not bound by GAO legal advice.''
Disguising the hand of government in broadcast materials is not
only against the law, it undermines the operation of a free press.
Government should be protecting a free press not trying to buy it. It
is my hope that CMS will tell us today that it will end its use of
covert broadcasting materials to promote the Medicare drug benefit. I
commend Senator Lautenberg for his early blowing the whistle on these
abuses and his persistence in this matter.
I would like to thank Dr. McClellan for appearing here this
morning. I look forward to his testimony as well as the testimony of
the other witnesses.
Senator Voinovich. Senator Lautenberg.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LAUTENBERG
Senator Lautenberg. Thanks, Mr. Chairman, and thanks,
Senator Levin, for mentioning the fact that I had been
following this trail of what I will call propaganda very
arduously. And, Dr. McClellan, you have been on the job long
enough to look back longingly, I assume, and wonder which job
was a more welcoming one. But you have the intelligence and the
backbone to do these things, so we are not going to take it
easy on you, I promise.
It has been almost a year and a half since President Bush
signed this law that is going to make such profound changes in
the Medicare program, and we have since learned that the
information given the Congress during the debate on this bill
was false. The cost was understated by hundreds of millions of
dollars, and, unfortunately, the deception did not end there.
Since the bill was passed, the Administration has engaged in
illegal propaganda, defined by the GAO, in what I will call an
attempt to sell this bill of goods to the American people. And
it was done by producing the video news releases, as mentioned
by Senator Levin, distributed to local television stations for
use in their news programs. And as someone who saw these videos
on their local stations, they could believe that they were
listening to a valid news commentary instead of a sales pitch.
In fact, at one point they featured a fake news reporter
paid for by the government and reading a script prepared by the
government. And it is not news. It is government propaganda.
But the viewers who were exposed to this material on TV
stations around the country had no way of knowing that. These
videos were produced with money from the Medicare trust fund.
Three propaganda releases were produced, two in English and one
in Spanish. And in one script, the Administration suggested
that the local news anchor in doing the video concluded her
remarks by being identified as Reporter Karen Ryan, and she
helped sort through these details. That was described by the
news anchor. But Karen Ryan was not working for a news
organization that was part of our free press. She was working
for the government and getting paid to say what they wanted her
to say. And, again, that is not news. That is propaganda.
On May 19, 2004, the Government Accountability Office
issued a legal opinion that HHS and CMS had violated the law by
using taxpayer dollars to fund covert propaganda.
Now, I asked GAO to investigate this matter further to
determine exactly where the Administration had crossed the line
between legitimate information and political propaganda. And it
is wrong to pull the wool over the American people's eyes. And
if you try to do it with their own money, it is illegal.
But that was not the end of the matter. Basically, HHS and
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services thumbed its nose
at the law. It is bad enough that the Administration crossed
the line between information and propaganda, but it is even
worse to ignore a legal opinion from the Government
Accountability Office. When you do that, you are telling the
American people that we are not accountable. And I ask what
kind of an example that sets.
Mr. Chairman, if the Administration or the White House, can
say those laws do not apply to us, well, what laws do apply to
them? I think all laws apply to all of us, and one of the
things that I want to do is make sure that redress can be
sought in the courts by organizations to break through the
sovereign immunity proposition. To question that in the courts
we should not have to do that, and normally one would not be
able to do it. But we have to find an opportunity to give the
public an honest account on this.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from Dr. McClellan.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator Lautenberg. Senator
Carper.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER
Senator Carper. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
To Dr. McClellan, welcome. It is good to see you, and we
thank you for your continued service in this role.
I just want to follow up briefly on Mr. Lautenberg's
comments. There is obviously a difference between propaganda
and information that is really meant to inform seniors as they
try to make what can be difficult decisions between now and the
beginning of next year. And the key is, as in most things, to
find the right balance. And in our own State, as one who voted
for the Medicare bill--a tough decision, maybe the toughest
that I have cast here in my first 4 years in the Senate--I have
a strong interest--and I know it is shared by our at-large
Congressman, Congressman Castle--that we do the best job we can
to figure out how to take the State's drug benefit--we have a
State drug benefit that we signed into law during my time as
governor--and how do we really wrap these two benefits together
so that we have a State benefit and a Federal benefit, that
they complement each other, and we derive the very best
benefit, not complex but as comprehensive as we can, for our
seniors.
And in the end, I think back on my own Mom, who recently
passed away, and how confusing things like this are to her and,
frankly, to all of our mothers, grandmothers, and grandfathers.
We need to focus real hard--and we are certainly trying to do
that in my own State with our own congressional delegation--on
making sure that older folks and their children understand what
their options are and make the right choices.
Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I would just reiterate, as
others have, that we are pleased to have this hearing today. We
are grateful to you for calling us together. This legislation
signed into law is obviously an important one for our country
and an important one for a lot of our citizens. The policies
that we have adopted obviously cannot be implemented if CMS
does not have the resources and the staffing that you need. We
understand that, and we want to be supportive to meeting your
needs.
I again want to congratulate Dr. McClellan for the job that
he has done so far in getting this historic piece of
legislation off the ground. Obviously, there is a lot to be
done, but I appreciate the complexity of the task that has been
presented to CMS and believe that you and your colleagues have
done a good job so far.
I think that the next 8 or 9 or 10 months will in large
part dictate whether this program is going to be successful.
The launch and all kinds of things--my friend here, Carl Levin,
is from Detroit. They worry a lot about the auto industry, and
I do, too. We have got a couple of big auto plants in my State.
We worry about launching new public sector. We are going to
launch a new Pontiac, Solstice, from our GM plant in Wilmington
later this spring. The launch has to be perfect in order to
help ensure the future of that car and, frankly, help ensure
the future of the company.
Having said that, the launch of this Medicare drug benefit
will in large part, I think, help to determine whether it is
going to be around for a while and whether it is going to
realize the potential and promise that it has.
We need to make sure that all stakeholders have access to
the information that they need and that they understand the
changes that are to come. We need to be able to present this
information to people so that folks the age of my mother, who
died in her 80s last week, can come close to understanding it
and that their children and others around them can understand
it if their loved ones cannot.
We need to make sure that States, for example, receive
ample assistance from CMS to identify the dual-eligible
population, and I think this is vitally important. Seniors who
comprise this dual-eligible population often have special
needs, and we must make sure that this population is
transitioned smoothly into the new benefit, or as smoothly as
possible. We need to make sure that doctors, pharmacists,
nursing homes, and other providers understand the new benefit
and how it will affect their patients. And, finally, we must
ensure that CMS has the resources that are needed to oversee
the many plans that we hope will participate.
CMS is responsible for ensuring that plans do not
discriminate against beneficiaries, that their formularies
include a sufficient array of drugs so that seniors can get all
the medications that they need, and that the plans have
appropriate safeguards in place to deal with the complaints and
appeals and other disputes that are sure to come.
Again, I just want to repeat how important it is that we do
this right, get it right the first time out, and I am committed
to seeing that this historic new benefit is implemented as
smoothly as possible, and I hope that CMS will continue to do
the good work that you have begun in this regard.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator Carper. That is
exactly why we are here today. We want to make sure this thing
is launched properly and that people take advantage of it.
I would like to welcome Dr. Mark McClellan today. Dr.
McClellan has been serving as CMS Administrator since March 25,
2004. It has not even been a year since Dr. McClellan has taken
over. He succeeded Tom Scully, who left the agency before the
program he promoted was launched, leaving you perhaps in the
lurch a bit. But Dr. McClellan is used to taking on daunting
challenges.
Prior to taking this post, he served the Bush
administration in the Food and Drug Administration and in the
White House as a member of the President's Council of Economic
Advisers. Success at any agency is the result of strong
leadership, and that begins at the top. I have been impressed
with Dr. McClellan's drive and dedication. I look forward to
hearing from him about the challenges he has identified and the
steps the agency has taken to address them in order to ensure
that all 43 million Medicare beneficiaries have the opportunity
and information they need to take advantage of the drug
benefit.
Testifying on our second panel of our witnesses today are
Marcia Marsh from the Partnership for Public Service and Ann
Womer Benjamin from the Ohio Senior Health Insurance
Information Program, and she is the Director of the Department
of Insurance of Ohio. Both Ms. Marsh and Ms. Benjamin have
partnered with CMS throughout the past year to help the agency
advance different aspects of the drug benefit. They will
provide valuable insight about the agency's progress and
thoughts on how CMS might better position itself to ensure the
successful implementation of the benefit.
It is the custom of this Subcommittee, Dr. McClellan, and
the other two witnesses, that you are sworn in. Will you stand
and I will administer the oath. Do you swear that the testimony
you are about to give this Subcommittee is the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you, God?
Dr. McClellan. I do.
Ms. Marsh. I do.
Ms. Benjamin. I do.
Senator Voinovich. Let the record show they answered in the
affirmative. Dr. McClellan, welcome.
TESTIMONY OF HON. MARK McCLELLAN, M.D., PH.D.,\1\
ADMINISTRATOR, CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES
Dr. McClellan. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Dr. McClellan appears in the Appendix
on page 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Voinovich, Senator Akaka, and distinguished
Members of the Subcommittee, I want to thank all of you for
inviting me to provide an update on the implementation of the
Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 and, in particular, on
bringing critically needed help with drug costs to all Medicare
beneficiaries. With the important new hiring and management
provisions and the support for our agency that were included in
the Medicare law, we are on track to provide new prescription
drug coverage and new Medicare Advantage plan options to our 43
million beneficiaries to help them both prevent diseases and
keep their medical costs down. Millions of low-income
beneficiaries, almost a third of our beneficiaries, will
receive comprehensive prescription drug coverage at little or
no cost.
Mr. Chairman, you and your colleagues have long emphasized
the importance of healthy and up-to-date government
organizations to provide effective, up-to-date government
services. Thanks to your leadership, the Medicare law has given
us new authorities to reform our agency, to bring new expertise
and perspectives to our dedicated professional staff, to meet
our new responsibilities in providing these up-to-date benefits
in Medicare. And I want to thank this Subcommittee, and
particularly you, Mr. Chairman, for providing CMS with the
flexibilities needed to hire individuals quickly with the
skills required to implement the new Medicare law. Using the
new authorities that you have provided, we have undertaken
nothing less than what has been called an extreme makeover of
our most important resources at CMS--our human resources.
We have revamped our entire human capital management plan
and our hiring process, and we have realigned our functional
groups inside of CMS. Through this strategic process, we have
been building a staff that possesses new talents aligned with
our new services, including individuals with expertise in drug
benefits, in pharmacy services, including the specialized
pharmacy services provided in nursing homes, in retiree health
benefits, in contracting with health plans, in disease
management and prevention, in quality measurement and quality
improvement programs, and in many other areas related to
helping our diverse population of seniors and population with
disabilities get more up-to-date, prevention-oriented,
personalized care. In fact, we have brought some of these
talented people out of retirement.
We appreciate the additional resources provided by Congress
and the flexibilities in our hiring process, especially our
management staff authority. Aided by the direct hiring
authority and the Federal Career Internship Program, CMS has
hired a total of 345 new employees. We are on track to a
commitment of about 400 in place right now, and we expect close
to another 100 beyond that.
We have also restructured within CMS to improve our ability
to use these human resources to meet the requirements of the
Medicare law. Using our new hires and our updated agency
structure and business processes, we have worked to develop an
effective system for providing reliable access to quality
prescription drug plans and to Medicare Advantage plans
throughout the country. We have combined the expertise and
experience of our staff with that of the experts who have
joined the agency, including leaders from the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program, pharmacists, or other health
professionals and benefit managers from the private sector.
Much like FEHB, we have sought to develop a transparent process
that provides predictable and sensible oversight. And we have
augmented our own capabilities by listening carefully to ideas
and perspectives from many diverse outside groups through an
extensive public comment process about our regulations and
guidances and application materials and other support
documents.
For example, as part of our work with the potential
prescription drug plan and Medicare Advantage sponsors, we held
four conferences around the country. Sponsors found the
opportunity to meet with our leadership and our subject area
experts extremely valuable. March 23, as you mentioned, was the
deadline for sponsors to submit applications to participate in
the program in 2006, and we are holding a similar conference in
Baltimore today to make sure that we are very clear about the
requirements for the final bids that are due on June 6.
I am pleased to say that we have seen a very strong
response from organizations interested in participating in the
Medicare Advantage and prescription drug plan programs, clear
evidence that our new hires and our restructuring are getting
the job done. Based on the high interest level, CMS is
confident that throughout the country beneficiaries will have
access to prescription drug plans on schedule on January 1, and
we do not think we will need the so-called fallback provision
because all areas of the Nation are on track for having
sufficient health plans.
In fact, we have already seen an unprecedented response to
our implementation of the new Medicare Advantage program in
2005. We have received over 130 new Medicare Advantage plan
applications this year, including 50 plans completely new to
the Medicare program and around 80 new preferred provider
organizations, PPOs. And we have received more than 70
proposals for expanded service areas.
As a result, we are headed for 49 States participating in
the Medicare Advantage program this year. Based on the
applications that have come in, we expect well over 90 percent
of all Medicare beneficiaries to have access to these lower-
cost health plans in 2005, and that is the highest level ever
in Medicare's history. And it is not just in the big cities
anymore. Three-fourths of rural beneficiaries will have access
to a Medicare Advantage plan.
These much improved health plan options are really
important because they enable beneficiaries to get better
benefits and to lower their health costs more than ever. Based
on the benefits that are available now, Medicare beneficiaries
can save an average of almost $100 a month when they enroll in
a Medicare Advantage plan compared to traditional Medicare with
its gaps in coverage or to buying an individual Medigap plan to
fill in these gaps. And with our increased use of risk
adjustment that targets additional payments to Medicare
Advantage to beneficiaries with chronic diseases, there are
greater opportunities than ever for beneficiaries with chronic
illnesses to save through the comprehensive benefits and better
coordination of their care. In fact, more than 40 plans are
offering special needs programs, that is, programs specifically
targeted to our beneficiaries who are frail and have multiple
illnesses, this year, and we expect well over 100 special needs
plans next year.
But we know that providing up-to-date benefits is not
enough to lower health care costs and improve health for our
seniors. For this reason, we are developing and implementing a
comprehensive education and outreach campaign, including
unprecedented collaboration with other government and private
organizations, to support our beneficiaries in getting help
with Medicare's new coverage.
The three phases of this education campaign focus first on
awareness and the sources of help; second, on education to make
an informed choice; and, third, on targeting those who have not
made a choice yet, to help them understand the benefits of the
program later in 2006.
Our central office and our ten regional offices are working
with the Social Security Administration, the Administration on
Aging, with other Federal agencies, with States, with State
Health Insurance Assistance Programs (SHIPs), plans like the
one you mentioned, with employers, unions, national and
community-based organizations, and private organizations to
educate beneficiaries and their caregivers and others at a
grass-roots level to give them the support they need to make an
informed choice. So, Senator Carper, that is very important, as
you said.
And, of course, we appreciate the support of Members of
Congress, like all of you, to help educate beneficiaries about
how they can get this help to lower their medical costs. Groups
like OSHIIP in Ohio and the Access to Benefits Coalition and
you, Mr. Chairman, have been very important assets for seniors,
and it has been extremely helpful in getting us moving in the
right direction for implementing the law effectively.
We are working hard at CMS, and we have made a tremendous
effort to move toward full implementation of the new benefits
created under the Medicare law on schedule. So, again, I want
to thank you for the opportunity to update you on our progress
in implementing the Medicare prescription drug coverage and for
your support in making sure we have the strongest possible
organization to take advantage of the tremendous opportunities
provided by the Medicare law. I want to thank all the Members
of this Subcommittee who may want to add to the Medicare
benefit legislatively and bring in even more coverage, but who
are also working with us constructively to make sure that we
are using the Medicare law that we have now to get the most
help to seniors.
Thank you very much, and I would be happy to answer any
questions you all may have.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Dr. McClellan.
All of us are interested in having our people take
advantage of the program. I know in my State we have 650,000
people that are at or below 150 percent of poverty. Many of
those people today, most of them, have no drug coverage. This
new plan will provide them with drug coverage. For a generic
drug they will pay $3. For a name brand drug it will be $5. So
it is really important that these folks get all the information
they need to take advantage of this wonderful benefit that is
being made available to them.
A new Congressional Research report on beneficiary
information concluded about the program, the temporary card,
``The outreach and education experience of the discount card
program can offer lessons for implementing the Medicare
prescription drug benefit beginning in 2006. Then decisions
beneficiaries must make are likely to be more complex and the
stakes higher for not enrolling or selecting a prescription
drug plan that does not target an individual's needs as well as
alternative plans.''
What I would like to know is what lessons have you learned
thus far in implementing the card, the temporary card, that are
going to accrue to the benefit of fully implementing this
program.
Dr. McClellan. Mr. Chairman, as you know, the Medicare
discount drug card program was a temporary program that we
implemented quickly to provide help to seniors who were paying
the highest prices for their medicines, and especially seniors
who were having to choose between drugs and other basic
necessities. That drug card, as you mentioned, is now providing
assistance to almost 6.5 million beneficiaries. Those millions
of beneficiaries are getting billions of dollars in drug
savings.
Let me talk about two types of lessons we have learned. One
is on the operational side, and the other is on the outreach
and educational side.
On the operational side, we found some challenges when drug
discount providers had only a limited amount of time to get an
application together and get it in to us. So with the drug
benefit we are taking advantage of the additional time we have.
It is not a lot of time, but it is more than we had to
implement the drug card, to have some discussions between the
potential drug plan sponsors and the Medicare program. We have
modeled this on the way the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program successfully does business. We have an exchange of
information to help make sure that we have answered questions
and overcome obstacles with the drug plans being developed,
that they meet all of our standards and that they do so in a
way that provides the best deal for beneficiaries. That is
paying off with the tremendous response that we have seen for
participating in the drug benefit next year.
The next part is on outreach, and we have seen that direct
interactions with beneficiaries over a prolonged time period
can really help in informing them about new benefits. This is
not just a new finding with the drug card. We have known for
every low-income assistance provision that the Department of
Health and Human Services ever implemented, as well as other
changes in Medicare benefits. The more we give seniors and our
beneficiaries clear and simple information and the earlier we
can start, the better.
We have taken several steps to do just that. For example,
we have worked with the Social Security Administration to
develop and finalize a low-income subsidy eligibility
application, which is being field-tested right now, and in the
next month or so will be sent out nationally to everyone who
may be eligible for the low-income subsidy. That gives us even
more time to get low-income beneficiaries enrolled. Previous
low-income assistance programs often took a decade to get up to
50 percent participation, we are going to try and overcome that
by using simpler forms, by getting them out earlier, and by
relying on much more extensive grass-roots support.
Senator Voinovich. Are the number of plans going to be less
than the number of cards available under the old program? The
problem is that so many seniors just had too many options
available and it made it very difficult for them. In addition
to that, many of them are not computer literate. Maybe 15 years
from now it will be fine, but the fact is they are not computer
literate. Have you done anything to try and reduce the number
of options that these individuals will have available to them?
Dr. McClellan. Senator, we do not know exactly how many
drug plans are going to be available. I am confident that we
are going to have a significant availability of drug coverage
in every area of the country. I don't think it is going to be
anything like the overall numbers with the drug card. But we
have also learned----
Senator Voinovich. Well, are you going to put people into a
program? If you recall, at the end, because we were very upset
because so many low-income people were not taking advantage of
it, you identified people that were eligible and sent them the
information. At that stage of the game they were in a program,
and then if they did not want to, they could opt out of it.
Dr. McClellan. Right. We are going to get our identifiable
low-income beneficiaries into drug coverage. So for the dual-
eligible beneficiaries, people who are in Medicaid drug
coverage now and are going to transition to Medicare drug
coverage in January, we are working with the States to identify
all dually-eligible beneficiaries early. Additionally, we are
working to ensure they are notified in early October about the
plan that they will be assigned to in January, if they do not
make a choice on their own. That gives them, their caregivers,
their institution, if they are in a facility, and their health
plan 3 months to prepare for their transition. They can also
switch month to month.
In addition, for other low-income beneficiaries, as long as
we can identify them, we are going to make sure they get drug
coverage by the end of the open enrollment period. The key is
getting that low-income subsidy application filled out. For
people who we have identified because they are in one of the
limited Medicaid benefit programs, the so-called Medicare
saving programs, like SLIMB and QMB, we will work with the
States to identify those people, enroll them automatically in
the low-income subsidy, and get them into drug coverage.
But the other group that we want to reach are those low-
income seniors that you mentioned, Senator, who are not getting
any help with their drugs or other medical costs. In many
cases, we have been able to get them signed up for the drug
card and the $600 in assistance and the wrap-around subsidies.
Those people we do need to get enrolled in the low-income
subsidy so that they can then be subsequently enrolled in the
drug card if they do not make a choice on their own.
So, yes, we are planning on enrolling many of these
beneficiaries automatically in the drug benefit, and that is
why we are starting this process so early this time. This is
something that we learned from the drug card experience, that
we want to take advantage of all the time we have because these
populations can be very challenging to reach.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. McClellan, there are approximately 60,000 dual-eligible
HIV/AIDS patients along with 6 million other dual-eligible
beneficiaries in the United States. The final regulations have
no grandfather clause covering drugs that dual-eligibles have
been stabilized on under Medicaid. The question is: How will
CMS avoid forcing beneficiaries to change their medications if
the drug plans do not provide the same coverage as Medicaid?
Dr. McClellan. Senator, the first thing we are going to do
is require the drug plans to provide beneficiaries access to
all medically necessary treatments. And we have worked
extensively with advocacy groups for our vulnerable Medicaid
beneficiaries who often have illnesses that requires them to
depend on particular medicines for AIDS, for mental illnesses,
and for other sensitive and complex conditions.
As a result, we issued not only this regulatory requirement
for access to medically necessary treatment, but we have backed
it up with further regulatory guidances. Let me give you an
example of a couple of those.
One of those is our guidance on formulary coverage for the
drug benefit, and the formulary coverage is very explicit
about----
Senator Voinovich. Dr. McClellan, you keep using the word
``formulary.'' Could you explain what a formulary is, please?
Dr. McClellan. A formulary, Mr. Chairman, is a list of
drugs that are covered under a particular drug plan, those
drugs get the most favorable subsidies from the drug plan and
can be obtained at the lowest cost by the beneficiaries in the
plan. Drug plans are also required to have an exceptions and
appeals process for access to off-formulary drugs that are
medically necessary. And we have tried to make that process
quicker, faster and simpler as a result of the regulations and
the input that we have received. But the main goal is to have a
smooth process for people to get access to the drugs that they
need within their drug benefit, and that is why in our
formulary guidance, we explicitly said that HIV and AIDS drugs,
and other important types of drugs, must be adequately covered.
In particular, for the HIV and AIDS drugs, we said that
substantially all or all must be covered. That is the test in
our CMS formulary review. And we are further requiring that the
coverage reflect the kind of coverage that is widely available
in some of the best private plans and Medicaid plans today.
So, for example, the most popular plans in the Federal
Employees Health Benefits Program cover typically, on
formulary, 25 or more HIV/AIDS drugs because the beneficiaries
need access to those particular drugs because of the complexity
of their disease. And we are going to require the same kind of
oversight for the drugs offered in the Medicare program.
Second, when there are requirements for a drug transition--
and I think these are more likely to be when you transition,
for example, one cholesterol-lowering drug to another.
Beneficiaries can get much lower prices when you can negotiate
and get people switched to another drug that meets their needs
as effectively. The plans must also meet well-established best
practices for any medication transitions. That often involves
giving a patient more time on a particular medicine as well as
making sure that the medicine that is the subject of the
transition is likely to meet the beneficiary's needs. If the
beneficiary has already tried a drug and it has not worked, we
are not going to make him go back to that.
So there is formulary guidance, there is transition
guidance, and there is our regulatory oversight to require
plans provide access to needed drugs. And we are relying on the
best practices of existing drug plans to do that.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for your response. My time is
almost up. I hope we have another round, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you.
Senator Voinovich. Senator Levin.
Senator Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you again,
Dr. McClellan. I want to talk about the statement that you made
that you expect that in all of the regions there will be at
least two private plans that will be offered to beneficiaries
and, therefore, there will be no fallback triggered, so that
there will not be provisions by Medicare itself or the offer of
a plan by Medicare itself. That means that you are budgeting
next year, I assume, for no costs for that fallback. Is that
correct?
Dr. McClellan. Well, that is correct, but we are planning
for all contingencies, and what I can tell you now is that
based on the response that we have seen, if we are able to stay
on the track that we are on now, we will get those drug plans
available everywhere, and we will not need the fallback.
Senator Levin. And I take it that is your goal.
Dr. McClellan. Absolutely, and I think we are on track to
achieve that goal.
Senator Levin. So the goal is not to trigger a fallback.
Dr. McClellan. Well, the goal is to trigger access to up-
to-date coverage for all of our beneficiaries in all areas.
Senator Levin. With private plans?
Dr. McClellan. And it looks like the health plans are going
to be able to deliver that coverage everywhere.
Senator Levin. Is the goal to have private plans deliver
that type of prescription drug benefit?
Dr. McClellan. The main goal, Senator, is to get drug costs
down for seniors right away and to make sure that their
coverage does not fall behind again, like it has over the last
several decades. And the health plans are going to enable us to
do that.
Senator Levin. All right. Now, what are the ways in which
you will try to avoid the cherrypicking problem? Since the
premium and the co-pay is within the discretion of the company,
the private company--there is no limit on those and, therefore,
they can have a very high co-pay and cherrypick healthier
seniors mainly through using a high co-pay. How are you going
to be sure that there are not only two plans or more in each
region but that at least one of those plans is an affordable
plan for people who are sicker?
Dr. McClellan. Well, Senator, our main focus is on making
sure all of our beneficiaries have access to the drugs they
need, and I have already talked about some of the regulatory
requirements that we are imposing to make sure that plans
provide access to coverage.
Now, I talked about the formulary requirements a minute
ago, and I want to make clear that our oversight and our
regulatory guidances apply to other tools used by the drug
plans, like how they structure their co-pays and which drugs
are preferred drugs on their formularies. And we will be
enforcing the rules to make sure that there is not
discrimination against any particular type of beneficiary.
Once again, there are good examples of how you can do this
from the private sector, and we will be looking to make sure
that those kind of co-pay structures are used to prevent
discrimination against any type of our beneficiary.
Beyond that, there are actuarial requirements that the drug
plans have to meet. They cannot require high co-pays on every
drug. They must meet the actuarial standards in the law for a
75-percent subsidy between drug spending at $250 and $2,250
where most seniors have much of their drug spending. They must
all provide catastrophic coverage for beneficiaries who have
high out-of-pocket costs. And they must provide comprehensive
benefits to low-income seniors.
So through all of those steps--our regulatory oversight,
our requirements that the plans meet the strong benefit
intended by the law--we are going to make sure that the plans
do not discriminate against any type of beneficiary.
Senator Levin. The co-pay, though, is left up to the
private company.
Dr. McClellan. Within our oversight. They can, just like
they do now in mainstream health insurance plans, in retiree
plans, like for your automakers in the Detroit area, have tiers
and have preferred drugs and non-preferred drugs. The
requirement, though, is that they cannot discriminate against
any types of beneficiaries in the process. We will be comparing
the co-pay structure and the other tools used by the drug plans
to widely used best practices and retirees plans and the
Medicaid plans to make sure that does not happen.
Senator Levin. And those regulations have been written?
Dr. McClellan. The regulations have been written, and not
just the regulations but we have issued specific guidances on
our formulary oversight, on our oversight of co-pays and other
tools used to manage drug costs, on drug transitions. You name
it. We are trying to cover comprehensively based on the input
we have received from a lot of groups who are very concerned
about making sure we address this problem effectively.
Senator Levin. I am less optimistic than you are about
avoiding the cherrypicking problem, but you are telling us that
you then are designing your regulations and you will predict
for us that problem will be addressed and that there will not
be cherrypicking so that all seniors across the level of
fragility will be participating, not just being offered plans.
Dr. McClellan. The intent of the regulations----
Senator Levin. If the plans are not affordable for
everybody, you are saying that it is your goal--and you predict
you will achieve this goal--that seniors of different levels of
sickness will participate in these plans. Is that what you are
telling us?
Dr. McClellan. That is right, and we think the plans are
going to be particularly attractive to beneficiaries with
chronic illnesses where using these drugs can help them avoid
other medical complications and costs. So we will be
implementing our regulations, we are applying our regulatory
guidance now to applications that have come in to make sure
that they reflect, again, widely used best practices in
formularies and drug benefit management.
Senator Levin. I understand. If I could conclude this, Mr.
Chairman, with just one more question.
What percentage of seniors do you predict will participate
in these plans that will be offered now in every region by the
private sector? You said you believe that there will be at
least two or more offered in every region. What percentage do
you believe will participate? Do you have an estimate of that?
Dr. McClellan. Well, there are actuarial estimates out from
the Congressional Budget Office, from our own independent
actuaries, and other sources, and those have projections of
very high participation levels.
Senator Levin. Give us the percentage that you are
predicting.
Dr. McClellan. I think their participation rates are close
to 90 percent, something in that range. I think Senator Carper
mentioned the issue of how you think about launching a new
product, and this is something that is new. It is new for
Medicare. It is new for seniors. And it is a topic that is
complicated and that seniors are going to have to spend a
little time understanding because it is so important for their
health.
What I think that means is that we are not going to see
dramatic sign-ups overnight, that over time, by letting seniors
know what is coming, by making them aware of the details in
ways that are very relevant and understandable to them this
fall, by seeing what their experience is in the first months of
the program, we will see more and more sign-ups. We are
definitely expecting tens of millions of seniors to enroll in
this program, to get help. No matter how they get their drug
coverage now--through retirement benefits, through State-
sponsored plans, through Medicare Advantage plans--we are
expecting tens of millions to enroll, and that is the big
focus, on making sure that those beneficiaries are informed
about their opportunities to save next year.
Senator Levin. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Speaking of product launches, yesterday was
the launch of the baseball season, and Senator Levin and I are
big Detroit Tigers fans, and we got out of the starting gate in
pretty good fashion yesterday, 11-2.
Senator Levin. We are in first place.
Senator Carper. First place. This is the team that, I
think, 2 years ago was second to the New York Mets, was the
all-time losing baseball team in America. This year we are
going to vie with the Cleveland Indians for the Central
Division crown in the American League. So we will see how those
Indians came out of the starting gate yesterday as well.
I have two questions, Dr. McClellan. I want to go back on
one of them to something that Senator Voinovich raised a minute
ago, I think. And just take a minute and just talk with us
again. How does CMS plan to ensure that, to the best of the
ability of the States, they identify all the dual-eligibles?
How can you help them do that? It is a tall order.
Dr. McClellan. This is a very important issue. We want to
make sure that there is a smooth transition, and the way to do
that is to ensure that it does not happen between December 31
and January 1 but, rather, it begins early and it has a smooth
process to get beneficiaries in the new plan in January. There
are many facets to this, and in the limited time I am just
going to give you a few examples.
One is that we are working with States right now to make
sure that we have all of their dual-eligible beneficiaries
identified. States are sending us lists of those beneficiaries
now, and we are preparing to start contacting them and their
caregivers about the changes that are coming.
Second, by early October we are going to let them know what
plans are available in their areas that they will be able to
choose for free and that they will be able to get access to for
no premiums, no gaps in coverage, and, as Senator Voinovich
said, just a few dollars in co-pays, we are going to assign
them to a plan if they do not choose one on their own by
January 1. We are going to do that by early October so that the
plan, working with the beneficiary and the beneficiary's
caregivers, can start planning for a smooth transition.
Beneficiaries who are dual-eligibles can change anytime.
They do not have to stick with the plan that we assign them to.
They can go to a different one that is available in their area.
In fact, even after the benefit starts, they can change month
to month if there is a benefit that they think would be a
better fit for their personal needs.
In addition, we have developed a guidance for the
transition of beneficiaries in Medicaid programs, and we are
working with the States and the health plans to make sure that
they follow that guidance. The guidance focuses on issues like
medication transitions to make sure that if there are any
medication transitions they are handled appropriately, combined
with our guidance on access to medically necessary treatments.
We think many of the beneficiaries are going to be able to
continue the drugs that they are on, especially since many of
these formularies are going to be pretty broad and the co-pays
for these dual-eligible beneficiaries are very low, just a few
dollars. So those are some of the steps that we are taking.
Another step involves using electronic health systems to
help support this effort. We are planning for the contingency
that, in spite of all of the effort we undertake, there are
going to be people who are on Medicaid who show up at their
pharmacy in early January and say, ``I want a refill,'' and are
not going to know any of these specific details. We are
implementing an electronic coordination of benefits system so
that a pharmacist sitting right there at the counter, as long
as this person knows their name and their date of birth, just
some basic information, they will be able to tell that
individual what plan they are in, what their coverage is, and
get those prescriptions filled appropriately.
Finally, there are steps that States can take to help make
the transition work better. For example, we have notified
States that, at their option, if they want, they can fill 3-
month prescriptions in December that would effectively extend
the transition period through March, and they will get the full
Federal match for those provisions. Senator Rockefeller has
talked about legislation along these lines, and we can do 3
months administratively at State option.
We are having specific contacts with States about this. We
have a major conference sponsored by the National Governors'
Association coming up later this month in Chicago to go over
the specific transition issues, and we are going to have a
specific team in place with each State to make sure that they
are keeping up with the checklists of the things that need to
be done for a smooth transition.
Senator Carper. But other than that.
Dr. McClellan. We are trying to keep busy.
Senator Carper. Good enough. My second question deals with
the number of personnel, the kind of resources, personnel
resources you are able to apply to, I guess, reviewing all the
plans that are being proposed. I understand as many as a couple
thousand are going to be submitted. I have heard that you may
have as few as 10 full-time personnel to actually review all of
those and I think over maybe a month-and-a-half period, which
is not much time and is a lot of work in order to do it well.
First of all, is there any basis to what I have heard?
Dr. McClellan. Well, I do not know about the couple of
thousand plans. We have received a lot of applications, but I
think that number is on the high side. And that gets back to
the earlier point about the importance of having time to do
this effectively. We have divided the process of getting the
bids in and getting the plans provided into several steps. We
had early notices of intent with the plans back in February.
That led to some preliminary discussions to make sure that the
plans knew exactly what we were expecting in terms of
applications. We had an application deadline on March 23, which
included a lot of the details about formularies and where the
service areas are going to be. And then the final bids are due
in June.
What we have effectively done is have this multiple-step
process so that we can spread out the work, deal with issues
earlier, and make sure that we can provide some close oversight
and coordination with the plans so that they are meeting our
objectives and our requirements for offering a Medicare drug
benefit. At the same time not only does the plan have a clear
idea about what to expect, we have a smoother workload flow in
process. This is the way the FEHB has done business
successfully for many years, back and forth a dialogue at each
step in the process.
Beyond that, we have a team of individuals assigned to
reviewing each and every application. It is not 10 people
versus 2,000. We have a lot more staff at CMS that are meeting
this workload, and we have been tracking this very closely. We
have a very clear idea about the maximum number of bids that we
are going to receive because we have all the applications in
now. The staff is meeting the workload burden of reviewing the
applications, and we are planning ahead for the actuarial,
technical, and other reviews that are going to go along with
the final bids when they come in.
Senator Carper. Any idea how many applications you have
received?
Dr. McClellan. I do not have an exact number now. The
deadline was just a week and a half ago, and I want to divide
the applications into those that look complete and serious and
likely to meet all of our requirements and those that may not
be so promising. But we will try to get you the numbers on that
as soon as we can.
Senator Carper. All right. And in closing, I would just ask
that you keep in mind, whether it is 2,000 or 1,500, whatever,
that is a lot, and to make sure that you have the adequate
resources to vet it well. Thank you.
Dr. McClellan. I appreciate that. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Voinovich. You talked about the Advantage plans.
Could you explain what those plans are. I assume it is
something like an HMO where somebody would sign up and that HMO
would be given X number of dollars and they would provide
services, ordinary Medicare services, and now they would have
an additional drug benefit. How would that work? And would they
help the individual that was in that Advantage plan to make the
right decision in terms of the drugs that they should be--the
plan that they should go into or will they have a plan of their
own? How does that work?
Dr. McClellan. That is right. In general, Senator, the
Medicare Advantage plans have their own drug benefit as part of
the plan, and that is part of the advantage of coordinated
care. We are expecting a lot of the Medicare Advantage plans to
offer more generous drug benefits beyond just the basic
Medicare statutory requirement. The reason for that is that
through care coordination they can keep their overall costs
down and provide more benefits to seniors. That already happens
now. Many Medicare Advantage plans--most of them--are providing
some limited drug coverage, and now with the new drug subsidy
in 2006, they will be providing much more.
They found that providing effective drug coverage and
giving people affordable access to medicines helps them keep
costs down in other areas. It helps them keep their patients
with heart failure out of the emergency room. It helps them
keep their patients with diabetes from experiencing
complications that lead to surgery and circulatory problems and
the like.
We are also reinforcing this aspect of care coordination by
increasingly targeting the money that goes to Medicare
Advantage plans to the plans that are taking care of
beneficiaries with chronic illnesses. We are doing this through
risk adjustment. We are going to 100-percent risk adjust our
payments to the plans. That means that if you are a coordinated
care plan, you have to attract chronically ill beneficiaries
and serve them well in order to make any----
Senator Voinovich. How many Medicare-eligible people in
this country are in Advantage plans, what percentage?
Dr. McClellan. We are over 5 million enrollees now, and
this has been increasing by 50,000-plus a month in recent
months. So that is about 14 percent, and it is growing
substantially because these plans are offering better benefits
and lower costs and they are more widely available in Medicare
than ever before. And this is not just HMOs. That is
historically the main kind of coordinated care plan in----
Senator Voinovich. In other words, if I am an individual
out there and I am on Medicare and I do fee-for-service, I go
to see a doctor and I have something wrong with me and they get
reimbursed for it, under ordinary circumstances what I would do
is I would sign up for Part D separately from that.
Dr. McClellan. Separately from that.
Senator Voinovich. So then I would have my A, B, and D.
Dr. McClellan. That is right.
Senator Voinovich. Right, or I would have the alternative
to check around in my community to find out if there is an
Advantage plan where I could enter into that plan, they would
get the money from CMS, and they would then take care of
looking after me in terms of my health care and my prescription
drug needs.
Dr. McClellan. That is right, and they would have a
comprehensive set of benefits, and they increasingly cover
services beyond the minimum that Medicare offers. So, for
example, AltCare is a good example of a coordinated care plan
in Ohio that is run by doctors and that focuses on taking this
holistic approach to keeping a patient healthy. They do not
think about doctor visits separately from drugs, or separately
from hospitalizations. They think about the patient. How do you
help a patient with heart failure, diabetes, or asthma, or
another chronic disease stay well and get the most out of their
health care? By combining this new drug coverage with the other
coordinated services they provide, including wellness services,
or visiting patients in the home when they need help in
managing their medications, they can take a lot of steps to
keep overall costs down and, most importantly, to keep patients
with chronic illnesses healthy.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. McClellan, I understand that soon seniors will be asked
to select a drug plan. CMS will be responsible for counseling
and outreach for seniors and vulnerable populations, such as
individuals suffering from mental illness.
As you know, the MMA required GAO to examine the accuracy
and consistency of answers provided through the Medicare toll-
free help line that is supposed to provide answers to questions
about program eligibility, enrollment, and benefits.
Unfortunately, GAO's findings were not encouraging. Accurate
answers were provided only 61 percent of the time, inaccurate
answers were provided 29 percent of the time, and no answer was
provided for the remaining 10 percent.
Given these results, what assurances can you provide this
Subcommittee that CMS outreach efforts on implementation of the
regulations will be more effective?
Dr. McClellan. Well, let me answer that in two parts.
First, we want to make sure that accurate information is
available through our 1-800-MEDICARE number.
Second, 1-800-MEDICARE is only one of a number of sources
that are going to be available for seniors starting now and
throughout the year to help them learn about and get the most
help from the drug benefit.
On 1-800-MEDICARE, that GAO survey asked a set of
hypothetical questions that are not necessarily what our
customer service representatives actually are faced with when
beneficiaries call in every day. We have an ongoing independent
review process that checks how accurate the information
actually provided by our customer service reps are on the calls
that come in.
We have been monitoring that very closely, on an ongoing
basis. We review a sample of all of the calls in every single
month, not just a one-time asking of hypothetical questions.
And I am very pleased that we are maintaining accuracy rates--
meaning the beneficiary was satisfied with the answer, the
answer was independently reviewed and found to be accurate--
well over 90 percent of the time. We have a quality control
process built in for when the answers are not complete and are
not accurate and are not given in a timely fashion to make sure
that is the case.
There are several other reasons for the GAO's findings that
we pointed out in our response, when you actually interpret it
properly, and get the numbers up and in line with what we are
seeing in these ongoing independent evaluations of 1-800-
MEDICARE. This is very important to get right.
Third, as you mentioned, we need to make sure that we are
doing actual outreach at the grass-roots level to a lot of
beneficiaries who may not be able to call in or may not be able
to use a computer. I was at an event in Philadelphia at a
senior center recently where they are organizing grass-roots
outreach teams that are using the Internet but in support of
beneficiaries--they are not counting on the beneficiaries to
use them directly--to get them informed and then signed up for
benefits this year, and I had not one, not two, but three
translators at that event. They are focusing specifically on
their beneficiary populations that do have language barriers or
do have cognitive impairments, just as they provide assistance
now with helping those beneficiaries get access to the coverage
they are eligible for in Medicaid and helping them manage their
health costs.
So those grass-roots efforts are very important in addition
to making sure we have effective 1-800-MEDICARE answers.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for that response, Dr. McClellan.
In recent testimony before the Senate Committee on Finance,
the HHS Inspector General nominee, Daniel Levinson, testified
that prescription drugs are especially vulnerable to fraud,
waste, and abuse. And he said, ``It is therefore essential that
the CMS build a sound infrastructure for program implementation
with strong internal controls, adequate data collection to
enable proper oversight, and sound financial management
systems.''
How has CMS addressed these concerns?
Dr. McClellan. Well, I agree completely with Mr. Levinson's
statement. He is a man of great integrity who is watching
closely what we are doing in this area and has had great advice
for us. I hope he gets confirmed by the Senate soon.
Here is another case where we have learned a lesson from
the drug card. With the drug card, early on we contracted with
a program integrity organization that has helped us with
monitoring the financial transactions with the drug card, with
making sure there was not any bait-and-switch, and keeping a
close eye out for exactly the kinds of things that you are
worried about. We made that announcement, instituted it in
April, 2 months before the drug card started, and we have been
monitoring the drug card very closely. We have seen no
systematic evidence of any fraud or abuse or even misleading
statements by cards, and we have been right on top of any minor
violations to get them corrected and to help the program keep
working smoothly.
We are going to do the same thing with the drug benefit. We
will have program integrity oversight in place, we have special
contractors that are making sure that the money is used
appropriately, and that the subsidies are spent on their
intended purposes of helping seniors get access to affordable
medicines. We will be watching that very closely with a lot of
help and a lot of tight oversight from the Office of the
Inspector General.
This is a very important area for making sure that we
continue to have a high level of program integrity. We have
also requested additional funds in our fiscal year 2006 budget
to help us meet these new responsibilities, which we take very
seriously.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Senator Levin.
Senator Levin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Act that we are talking about contained tax subsidies
to encourage employers who keep their retirees covered with
prescription drug coverage. The threshold which was used by the
bill is called ``credible prescription drug coverage,'' so that
if a company maintains that credible prescription drug coverage
they will then get a tax subsidy for doing so.
Has the criteria for what is credible been set forth
already in the regulations?
Dr. McClellan. Yes, sir, it has.
Senator Levin. OK. And who makes the decision as to whether
a particular company meets that criteria? Will that be a
Medicare decision, an IRS decision, or a combination?
Dr. McClellan. It will be a Medicare decision done by our
independent actuaries. It is an actuarial test that the
coverage is of high quality and that the money we are providing
in the subsidy is going to the beneficiaries to support their
coverage.
Senator Levin. Now, when we were debating the bill, the
Budget Office estimated that once it was fully implemented by
CMS that as many as 25 percent of retirees with existing
prescription drug coverage would still lose the coverage
despite those subsidies. According to one estimate, that would
be about 2.5 million retirees who now have good coverage from
their former employer who would lose that coverage or have it
significantly reduced.
Do you agree with that estimate, first of all?
Dr. McClellan. No, and this is a good example of why the
interaction in our process of developing the regulations and
issuing guidances is so important. We have developed a number
of steps that employers can take to continue and enhance their
drug coverage, and there are lots of ways to do it. The bottom
line is that we want to make sure beneficiaries are better off.
From what we are seeing in recent surveys, about 90 percent
plus of employers are planning to continue their coverage in
one way or another, and continue their support for
beneficiaries. There are a lot of ways they can do it, not just
with this employer subsidy. And I can talk about that if you
are interested.
Senator Levin. This is for retirees, we are talking about.
Dr. McClellan. This is for retirees that we are talking
about, and then there are some retirees who are just in access-
only plans. It is not like the Big Three automakers. This is
where the retirees are paying for all their coverage on their
own. Those retirees may well be substantially better off in the
new highly subsidized Medicare drug coverage. So we are not
expecting that kind of drop rate at all.
Senator Levin. What is the drop rate you are predicting?
Dr. McClellan. Well, in our final regulation we talked
about approximately 90 percent of beneficiaries having coverage
either through continuing the current coverage with the retiree
subsidy or through the employer doing what is called a wrap-
around. They get the basic Part D benefit, and then they fill
in gaps, just like many employers do with retirement benefits.
We pointed out that, right now, this other small group of
beneficiaries is not getting help from their employer. So they
are going to be better off, and they are going to get lot
bigger subsidies in Part D, which is subsidized coverage, than
they would from any unsubsidized employer coverage. But we are
expecting, from what we are hearing and what all the surveys of
businesses are showing, that the vast majority of employers are
going to take advantage of the new help from Medicare to
continue or to improve their coverage.
Senator Levin. So is your prediction that 90 percent of
employers essentially will maintain their coverage or better
for their current retiree----
Dr. McClellan. Or they will--through one mechanism or
another. They can either use the retiree subsidy or they can
wrap around the basic benefit. In working with States like
Michigan, they may be better off financially doing a wrap-
around. But the point is to continue and improve coverage for
retirees.
Senator Levin. That leaves somewhere around 10 percent who
will be worse off?
Dr. McClellan. I do not think they will be worse off.
Senator Levin. Will there be anybody worse off?
Dr. McClellan. Well, we are obviously trying to minimize
that number.
Senator Levin. I know what your goal is. Are you projecting
that there will be any retirees who will lose their coverage
that they now have?
Dr. McClellan. We have not been able to do specific
projections at the level of each and every beneficiaries.
Senator Levin. Just a gross number?
Dr. McClellan. What our actuaries projected was that there
was going to be a substantial increase in the total support for
retiree coverage. Now, we have the government working with
employers to support the coverage, not just the government
alone--not just employers alone.
Senator Levin. So your actuaries are not projecting that
any retirees are going to be worse off.
Dr. McClellan. They have not done detailed specific
estimates at the level of each and every firm. I can tell you
that we are working with small employers, large employers,
States, all of them, to help make sure they take advantage of
the new subsidies to get that----
Senator Levin. I understand that. You have said that here.
But that means the glass may be 90 percent full. I am just
trying to figure out how empty it is.
Dr. McClellan. Well, the glass is----
Senator Levin. It is OK because I am running out of time
and you are trying to make sure there are none. But you are not
willing to tell us that there is a projection as to how many
will be worse off.
Dr. McClellan. Our projection is that the glass is going to
get a lot fuller.
Senator Levin. A lot fuller, but you are not willing to
tell us how much fuller.
Dr. McClellan. I cannot give you an exact number for each
and every----
Senator Levin. Or an approximate number.
Dr. McClellan. I think it is around 90 percent, and the
rest, they are probably better off.
Senator Levin. You are not going to give us an approximate
number. That is OK. I just want to ask my last question. I give
up trying to get the answer to that one.
When the GAO finds, as it has, that the CMS violated the
Anti-Deficiency Act by spending appropriated taxpayer dollars
on the unallowable activity--we are talking here about those
commercials--CMS is required by law to file a report relative
to that finding of that violation to the President, Congress,
and the GAO, even if it disagrees with the GAO's determination.
And I don't doubt that you disagree with the GAO determination.
At least I would not be surprised to hear that you do not agree
with it.
First, are you going to follow it, even though the Justice
Department says you do not have to? And, second, are you going
to submit that report, which has to be required, even if you
may not agree with the finding of the GAO? This is the area
that Senator Lautenberg has been so creative and so determined
to explore, not just with CMS but with a number of other
agencies which have engaged in the same activity. So that is my
specific question. It has to do with that report. First, are
you going to file the report required by law? Second, are you
going to follow the GAO's recommendation even though the
Justice Department says you do not need to?
Dr. McClellan. Well, Senator, I am going to make sure we
fully comply with the law and that we are transparent with
Congress and everyone else in all of these sensitive issues.
Now, I am a doctor and not a lawyer, and our main focus is on
getting accurate information out to beneficiaries. But we
absolutely want to make sure that we do that in full compliance
with the law.
As you know, the Department of Justice sets the rules for
the Executive Branch for interpreting the law, and they do have
a disagreement with the GAO on this particular issue. The
Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, which has the
binding legal authority for the Executive Branch, says that our
interpretation of the law in this case was appropriate. But,
more importantly, I will make sure that we comply with the law
in providing any information you want. I think the main goal
here, which is to get accurate information to beneficiaries, is
our foremost goal this year as we try to inform beneficiaries
about the facts of the drug benefit. There are a lot of
beneficiaries out there who do not have the facts, who do not
think this benefit applies to them, who do not realize that it
can help them save half or more of their drug costs. There are
also low-income beneficiaries who do not realize that there is
extra help and a comprehensive benefit for them.
So I want to make sure we are absolutely complying with the
law and rely on the experts to make sure we do that, at the
same time we really are focusing on getting accurate
information out to beneficiaries.
Senator Levin. For a non-lawyer, you have been very deft.
Senator Voinovich. Senator Lautenberg.
Senator Lautenberg. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Just a few brief
things on the news reports.
Dr. McClellan, I heard what you said very clearly, and I
just want to confirm it because I thought your statement was
very positive in terms of response to what the law requires. I
just want to draw this out so that everybody is clear on this.
We have a statement from the Government Accountability
Office. They say that it is a violation of law. The
Administration says they do not care.
Now, you are in charge here. Will you try to eliminate the
distributing of these fake news reports? There is a responsible
agency of government that says they are fake. So now the ball
is in your hands. Has CMS stopped producing these video
releases?
Dr. McClellan. I think you are referring to this video news
release from a year ago. There has not been another one since
then. But in terms of the legal authority here, as you know, in
the Executive Branch I am bound by the legal interpretations of
the Department of Justice, and the Department of Justice and
their Office of Legal Counsel sees this issue a little bit
differently than the Government Accountability Office.
Regardless of the technical aspects of the legal
disagreements here, I want to make sure we get accurate
information out about the drug benefit. We have not had any
video news release since the one that you are mentioning from
over a year ago.
Senator Lautenberg. But the declaration of war is already
laid down there. The Administration is saying they do not care.
I am not sure that those were the precise words, but that was
the precise meaning. Are you prepared here and now to say that
you will not permit anything in your Department to be prepared
that goes out that imitates, that portrays a news release when,
in fact, it is not?
Dr. McClellan. There has been a lot of attention around
this issue over the past year. There have been no new video
news releases issued since the one you are talking about from
over a year ago, at a time when we have been doing an
unprecedented amount of outreach and providing information to
beneficiaries and working with other groups that do that. I am
going to keep following effective approaches and I am going to
make sure that we stay within the law in doing it. But the main
goal is to make sure that beneficiaries get accurate
information.
Senator Lautenberg So you are willing to step up and say
that your Department, CMS, will absolutely be unwilling to have
anything produced with your--that you have knowledge about that
isn't factual as we would expect it to be in terms of not using
actors, actresses, not using any means of seduction, either
compensation or otherwise, to news broadcasters to color the
issues?
Dr. McClellan. We absolutely want to follow the law, and
these details happened before I got to the agency a year ago.
From what I understand, though, the GAO wasn't issuing a
finding relating to the accuracy of the information. They just
said that they wanted a clearer identification that this was a
produced news release, something that was not attributable to
the Federal Government. And in two out of the three segments of
that release, it was attributed to the Federal Government. They
wanted it in that third segment. And, yes we will make sure we
follow the law on----
Senator Lautenberg. There is a judgment about the accuracy
of these things. I correct you here. There is a judgment about
the accuracy. If the process is bad, does that suggest it is
bad because those who are producing it want to tell the truth?
Or is it bad because people are being given false information?
Dr. McClellan. Well, I want to make sure we are getting
accurate information to beneficiaries. Over the past year,
Medicare has developed a lot of materials in close consultation
with outside groups, including many groups that did not support
the Medicare law. These materials communicate accurately the
basic facts about this being a drug benefit available for
everyone, that it can provide help for everybody with Medicare
regardless of how they get it, what their drug costs, and that
the benefit provides extra help to low-income seniors. That is
our main goal, and I want to be absolutely in compliance with
the law.
Senator Lautenberg. So you are willing to say that your
agency will not produce or pay for any releases that are
sponsored by the government other than just the facts and not
used for any coloration of the facts?
Dr. McClellan. Well, Senator, we are producing an
unprecedented amount of information support, working with lots
of outside organizations to get beneficiaries informed about
the drug benefit accurately. And I absolutely want to make sure
that the information is not misleading, and obviously we are
going to fully follow the law in doing this very important
outreach and education effort.
Senator Lautenberg. Following the law as defined by
government accountability?
Dr. McClellan. Again, the authority on what the law means
for the Executive Branch is the Department of Justice. The
authority for the Legislative Branch is the Government
Accountability Office. They do differ sometimes in their
interpretation of specific provisions of the law. In terms of
our overall goal, though, of making sure beneficiaries have
exact information, 99 percent of the time they agree, and that
is what we are following in our implementation of this law
right now. This outreach effort----
Senator Lautenberg. OK. So what do you do with the 5
percent that they do not agree on?
Dr. McClellan. We are bound under the Constitution to
follow the Executive Branch legal authorities, and if there are
further issues here, I am sure they can get sorted out.
Senator Lautenberg. If you were running a company, Dr.
McClellan--and you are a very clever fellow, and I always enjoy
seeing you----
Dr. McClellan. Thank you, sir.
Senator Lautenberg [continuing]. And talking to you. If you
were running a company and the auditor said, look, this
accounting statement is 95 percent right, and you say, OK, I am
going to listen to the auditors. Now, if you know it is wrong,
you are going to have to say it is wrong and that you will not
permit it.
Is the $35 monthly premium the correct figure, or is just
an estimate?
Dr. McClellan. It is an approximate estimate. Some may be
lower, some may be higher. If beneficiaries get access to extra
coverage because that is what they want, they may pay a little
bit more for it. But that is the best estimate of the range of
premiums. Some beneficiaries are going to pay less. That is the
advantage of having choices that let beneficiaries get the care
the beneficiaries need.
Senator Lautenberg. The regs are out. Don't they say $37?
Dr. McClellan. It is right around $35 to $37. Again, some
plans are going to offer lower-cost coverage; some I expect are
going to offer supplemental benefits at a higher cost, and
seniors will be able to choose the coverage that is best for
them.
Senator Lautenberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator Lautenberg. Senator
Pryor.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PRYOR
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. McClellan, I
appreciate your time and your patience with our questions.
The first question I have relates to the Medicare
Modernization Act, and specifically, I know that several CMS
employees have extensive knowledge of pharmaceutical issues
given their experience in working with the Medicaid program. To
what extent have those people been able to apply their Medicaid
expertise implementing what is going on with the MMA?
Dr. McClellan. Extensive application, Senator. Just to give
you an example, Gail Arden, who has been working on Medicaid
issues for a long time in our Center for Medicaid and State
Operations, is one of the key coordinators of our outreach and
transition issues with the State for dual-eligible
beneficiaries and also for the State pharmaceutical assistance
programs.
You are absolutely right that we have a lot of expertise in
the agency on Medicaid issues, and this is an agency-wide
effort to implement the Medicare drug law effectively. That is
the best way to make sure that States save money as intended,
the best way to make sure that we get a smooth transition. So
we are absolutely relying on their expertise.
Senator Pryor. Let me stay with the MMA, if I can. This
Subcommittee has jurisdiction over, ``the management,
efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of all departments,
agencies, and programs of the Federal Government, including
overlap and duplication of Federal programs.'' Chairman
Voinovich has really been a bulldog on trying to keep the
agencies accountable and trying to make sure that Congress
exercises its oversight, which we should. One thing I noticed
with the Medicare Modernization Act is that the MMA mandates
that Medicare Advantage local programs receive an average of
107 to 109 percent of traditional Medicare payment levels,
correct? Do you follow me so far?
Dr. McClellan. I think you are talking about the GAO
estimate there.
Senator Pryor. Right.
Dr. McClellan. Yes, I think the estimate is 107 percent.
Senator Pryor. Right. However, experts believe that private
plans will actually receive about 116 percent of the cost of
the same patients in traditional Medicare because the plans
serve healthier than average enrollees. Do you have any
comments on that?
Dr. McClellan. The trend is getting our payments focused on
the beneficiaries that have chronic illnesses and have higher
costs. I was talking earlier about how we are moving towards
more risk adjustment of our payments to private plans. They are
at 50 percent this year; they are going to 75 percent next year
and 100 percent in 2007. So we are truly accelerating the focus
of targeting the payments in Medicare Advantage on the patients
who have the most to gain from coordinated care, and that is
people with chronic illnesses. They can use drugs in
conjunction with the care they get from their doctors, stay out
of the hospital to avoid complications, and keep their overall
costs down. That is why the Medicare Advantage plans are so
important. They are saving beneficiaries now about $100 a
month--$100 a month compared to fee-for-service Medicare, and
that savings means lower overall health care costs but, most
importantly, it means lower health care costs for our
beneficiaries who really need help right now and need to be
able to take advantage, if they want to, of what care
coordination has to offer.
Senator Pryor. Well, let's talk about our beneficiaries
here for just a moment, because I cannot speak for Ohio or
other States, but I know in Arkansas our Medicaid program
currently provides coverage for prescription drugs. I assume
most states do, but probably not all required it. We do and
starting on January 1, Medicaid will not cover any drug covered
by Medicare Part D, and the beneficiary must rely on the
Federal program exclusively. Many of these beneficiaries, as
you can imagine, as you mentioned a moment ago, have multiple
and many times chronic conditions.
I am just concerned that there is going to be difficulty in
switching to a new formulary overnight. I am concerned there is
going to be some needed transition--I hate to use the word
``casualties,'' but there are going to be some folks that miss
and fall in the gaps because the formularies are not set up the
right way. And, I guess I am just concerned that you all are
trying to provide some guidance on this, but I am not sure that
we are going to make sure that we get the transition needed,
that I think we, in Congress, would like to see. Would you like
to comment on that?
Dr. McClellan. Yes, we would be delighted to work with you
and your staff to make sure that you are aware of all the steps
that we are taking to make that transition work smoothly, and
that means extending it from just December 31 to January 1,
early notification of not just the fact that it is coming but
which plans people would be going into, transition requirements
on the prescription drug plans for handling Medicaid
transitions effectively, as well as many other safeguards built
into our oversight of the program. We are building electronic
data systems that make it possible for someone who just walks
into a pharmacy to tell the pharmacist their name, their date
of birth, and they will--even if they did not pay any attention
to this transition, they will be able to let them know which
plan they are in and how they can continue to get the drugs
that they need.
This is a very important issue. It requires a lot of
ongoing close work with each and every State, including
Arkansas, to make sure that people get the full advantage of
this comprehensive benefit.
Medicaid drug coverage, Senator, is an optional benefit.
Many States have limited their Medicaid coverage to keep costs
down. The Medicare drug coverage is going to be comprehensive.
It is going to cost Medicaid beneficiaries at most a few
dollars a month, and we intend to implement it to get State
savings so they can provide even more help for their low-income
citizens at the same time. This is very important in Arkansas.
You have a lot of low-income beneficiaries, many of whom do not
even qualify for Medicaid now, and are getting no help beyond
the drug card in the transitional system with their drug costs.
And so we would very much like to work closely with you to make
sure we get all of those people or as many as possible into
effective coverage, and that includes a smooth transition.
Senator Pryor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Doctor, you have done a wonderful job
today.
Dr. McClellan. Thank you.
Senator Voinovich. You have been on the grill here for
quite some time, but you have really gone into a lot of areas
where I am sure that Members of the Subcommittee wanted
information, and I am sure that anyone that is having an
opportunity to watch us on C-SPAN will be much better informed
about this wonderful program.
I just want you to know that as Chairman of this
Subcommittee, if there is anything that we can do to be of help
to you, if there is flexibility that you have discovered that
you need or anything else, money, whatever, I want you to pick
up the phone and call us, and we will do everything we can to
help you. You have got a very formidable task ahead of you, but
I am encouraged by what I have heard here this morning.
Thank you very much.
Dr. McClellan. Senator, thank you very much. We truly
appreciate your support, and we are looking forward to
continuing to work with you to get this help to seniors. Thank
you.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you.
We will now call on our next two witnesses: Marcia Marsh
and Ann Womer Benjamin. I apologize to our two witnesses. I
hope that you have learned as much this morning as I have.
Ms. Marsh, thank you for being here today, and we look
forward to your testimony.
TESTIMONY OF MARCIA MARSH,\1\ VICE PRESIDENT FOR AGENCY
PARTNERSHIPS, PARTNERSHIP FOR PUBLIC SERVICE
Ms. Marsh. Thank you. Senator Voinovich and Senator Pryor,
I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today about our
partnership with CMS on our Extreme Hiring Makeover. That
project was modeled after the popular television series that I
am sure the two of you probably do not get to take advantage of
watching in the evenings. But it brings together the experts
from the private sector in recruiting and assessment with three
Federal agencies. And when we first announced this program, the
HHS Director called us that afternoon and said, ``You really
need to meet with the leadership team at CMS.'' And I stepped
up to the plate to take that public challenge right off the
bat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Marsh with attachments appears in
the Appendix on page 64.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
So where are they? Our heavy lifting in the last several
months has focused on two key areas. The first is in mapping
their hiring process, what they are doing, and the second part
is in doing a demonstration project that will show how they
might want to model it going forward. And I know when I mention
process mapping, your eyes probably glaze over. That is not
exactly a sexy topic. But it is the way in which we can really
get to the information that will demonstrate how long things
are taking, why we cannot have qualified candidates on
certificates, and how we can fix the process.
So we worked with the CMS hiring managers, their HR
expertise, and with their new hires to really map that process.
And when we completed it, we rolled out the map across a
conference table like this, and it included 64 steps. And the
reaction of the HR managers and the managers has been fairly
similar: What can we do to streamline that?
So in the next 2 weeks we will be meeting with the CMS
redesign team to work on how we remodel that process, and we
are looking for one that has a goal of efficiency and only
value-added steps.
Now, the most exciting thing that we have done is in the
demonstration project, and here is where I think CMS is really
stepping out as a great model for government. We have an
illustration up here for you of one of those early efforts.
We worked with some volunteers from the Centers for
Medicaid and State Operations around the position of a health
insurance specialist, a GS-13, and we picked that one because
it is fairly common to CMS and cuts across the entire
organization. They are going to have multiple openings in the
course of the next several months. And what we did with that
job was to first start to redefine a new look. And we worked
with our partners at Monster Government Solutions in trying to
put out a new vacancy announcement, and I know, Senator, you
have been very keen on what is happening in recrafting the
image of government.
And here is an example of the old vacancy announcement
appears on your left, and you will see it is very text heavy, a
lot of Federal jargon, and when you read down into it, you have
a lot of the ``shall not's'' and the ``no's.''
The new vacancy announcement, which appears in the new
USAJobs format, appeals to a candidate right off the bat about
the mission of CMS and your ability to impact the Nation's
health care. We have had a real uptick in response on that
basis.
So I know in our detailed testimony we outline for you all
the steps that CMS took in this demonstration process. So I
would like to use this exhibit to just take you through that
fairly quickly.
What we wanted to do because we had multiple openings was
to attract as many candidates as possible for this particular
announcement. Previously, the same announcement within HHS
attracted about an average of 53 applicants. And what we did
was to post it on USAJobs and Monster, but we did not want to
settle for that. It drove a lot of eyes there. We really wanted
to dig deeper into some of those people that sit out in the
private sector companies and at the States, with apologies to
my colleague over here, who are those sorts of experts and see
if they wouldn't want to take a look at that job announcement.
So one of our partners in this process, a company called
AIRS, did an Internet targeting campaign for us when in the
last few days of this position they went out, they searched
candidate resumes from across the country in all sorts of job
databases, and sent them all E-mail messages saying, ``Wouldn't
you like to apply for the CMSO position? You look like you are
very qualified.''
On that basis, when we concluded that operation, we had 227
applicants for this particular position, and 33 of those came
from our target pool. So we proved the fact that with the
better advertising and the targeting we can bring a lot of
people in the door.
So how do we select from those candidates to pick the very
best? And the first thing that a candidate has to do when they
apply is to answer some basic questions that are prescreening
questions, and they are in the automated tool that CMS uses
called Quick Hire.
What we did there was to just ratchet up that performance a
little. Previously, that screen would eliminate about 6 percent
of the candidates as not minimally qualified. But with sharper
questions based on the competencies that the CMSO managers
outlined, we were able to take that up to a 15-percent screen.
And then for all the people that successfully came to the other
side of that, we sent them an E-mail asking them to take a 45-
minute skills assessment test. It tested their knowledge of
Medicare, Medicaid, managed care, writing skills, and a variety
of other things. We were pleased that of about the 200
applicants that successfully managed the screen, 169 invested
the time to take that particular test.
On that basis then, we used category ranking, and 24
candidates floated to the top. Of those 24 candidates, many
were invited in for interviews and an additional behavioral
interview assessment. And as you see on the results here, we
had six candidates who were hired very quickly. I would like to
let you know that the top candidate based on just abilities was
a disabled veteran who was interviewed, first interview, first
job offer, and he reported for duty yesterday with five new
colleagues. Two of those came from our targeting campaign.
We are excited about folding this into our new process
redesign. We think that CMS would be a model not only for HHS
but for the rest of government. And given the fact that every
Federal hire is important and really represents a multimillion-
dollar investment, if you look at the personnel costs for a
single person over the course of their career, we think that
managing this kind of process in this kind of time will result
in a great benefit not only for CMS but for the rest of
government.
I look forward to answering any questions that you have
about the project.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much. I am sure that Dr.
McClellan was very appreciative of your being involved. He has
to hire 500 people more, or something like that? That is quite
a task.
We are so happy that you are here today, Ann, and, again, I
apologize that you had to sit around for so long. But you have
done an outstanding job in the State of Ohio in terms of being
the Director of our Insurance Department, and I cannot thank
you enough for the wonderful help that you have given us during
this last year or so in trying to sign up as many people in
Ohio to take advantage of this new drug benefit. We are anxious
to hear your testimony today.
TESTIMONY OF ANN WOMER BENJAMIN,\1\ DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT
OF INSURANCE
Ms. Benjamin. Thank you very much, Chairman Voinovich. I
appreciate being here. I am Ann Womer Benjamin, the Director of
the Ohio Department of Insurance, and I want to thank you, Mr.
Chairman and Senator Pryor, for the opportunity to provide this
testimony today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Benjamin appears in the Appendix
on page 85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CMS has indeed been a reliable and supportive partner
working with the Ohio Department of Insurance and our Ohio
Senior Health Insurance Information Program, or OSHIIP, to
educate and enroll Ohio seniors and Medicare beneficiaries in
the prescription drug program.
The Ohio Department of Insurance regulates and licenses
approximately 1,740 insurance companies, 180,000 agents, and
more than 13,000 insurance agencies, and monitors the financial
solvency of the insurance industry in Ohio.
Another very important facet of our consumer protection
mission and of particular relevance today is the Ohio
Department of Insurance's OSHIIP Division. OSHIIP was
established in 1991 by then-Governor Voinovich and plays an
essential role in educating Ohio seniors and others who qualify
for Medicare. Through its toll-free help line, 950 volunteers,
objective and understandable literature, and speakers' bureau,
OSHIIP provides valuable information to Ohio's 1.8 million
Medicare beneficiaries.
I would like to take a brief moment to publicly thank
Senator Voinovich for his leadership and support of senior and
Medicare initiatives, including OSHIIP. Further, I would like
to thank Dr. McClellan for his strong commitment to providing
the needed resources and information to educate Ohio's Medicare
population.
Since the passage of the Medicare Modernization Act of
2003, CMS has been instrumental in helping OSHIIP with
information and resources to prepare and respond to the many
changes that are coming to Medicare. These efforts could not
have been more apparent than last April, when Senator Voinovich
and Dr. McClellan joined Governor Taft and me at an OSHIIP
volunteer training session to kick off Ohio's introduction of
the Medicare prescription drug card program. More than 100
community volunteers participated in the training designed by
CMS.
CMS has continued to provide OSHIIP and Ohio consumers with
invaluable assistance, including many workshops, publications,
and toolkits to update OSHIIP training teams on the many facets
of the Medicare program. CMS also seeks the input of all State
SHIP programs to ensure that the material is meeting the needs
of the consumer and regularly distributes E-mails on critical
issues and common problems facing the States.
Outreach and educational efforts have also increased at the
State and local levels with the support and coordination of CMS
through biweekly and monthly conference calls to keep lines of
communications open, allowing OSHIIP to have the most current
and pertinent information available. CMS also spearheaded Ohio
Medicare Partners to help answer a wide range of health- and
health insurance-related questions here in Ohio.
In mid-February of this year, CMS introduced its ``2005
REACH National Medicare & You Training Program'' focusing on
the new prescription drug coverage training module. CMS also
facilitated working sessions for each State's Medicare Partners
so that coordinated outreach plans could be jointly developed
to maximize population penetration and group efficiency.
Later this year, the Ohio Department of Insurance and
OSHIIP will be hosting local Medicare prescription drug
coverage enrollment and outreach events in each of Ohio's 29
most rural counties. CMS has committed to mailing invitations
to these events to the low-income residents of these counties.
The department and OSHIIP have been very pleased with our
collaboration with CMS, but there is always room for
improvement. We have experienced some delay in getting training
materials needed to conduct our volunteer training sessions. We
also have experienced delays regarding technical and
statistical inquiries we make to CMS. While our impression is
that CMS is trying to ensure that the proper individuals
respond and provide the most accurate information in a timely
fashion, CMS delays sometimes result in gaps in accurate
information being available.
This year we have received a substantial increase in our
annual Federal grant to help administer OSHIIP, and Ohio and I
thank you. We will utilize some of those funds to hire another
employee to assist in what we predict will be a dramatic
increase in calls. With the expected increase in our workload,
the ever-increasing 65-plus population, and the many options
consumers face, our challenge will be to continue excellent
consumer service to those Ohioans struggling to make informed
decisions.
Dr. McClellan has been a real champion of seniors, and his
leadership of CMS has reflected this commitment. He and CMS
have worked hard to take Medicare benefits and options to
seniors and ways to make their choices easier to understand and
evaluate. I would like to thank Chairman Voinovich again for
the opportunity to share the many positive and exciting things
we are doing for seniors in Ohio. From our perspective, we feel
the collaboration with CMS has been very beneficial, and we
only hope it continues to grow. Thank you.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much.
Ms. Benjamin, you have worked pretty closely, as you have
mentioned in your testimony, with CMS and just mentioned that
they have made more money available. Do you feel that the
additional money made available to the State of Ohio is
adequate to give you the resources you need to be effective in
helping them get the job done?
Ms. Benjamin. Chairman Voinovich, certainly resources are
always an issue, particularly in a program such as this that
continues to grow and expand and the beneficiaries continue to
expand. With your encouragement and support last year, we had
the foresight to continue to develop our volunteer pool, which
we have done. Last year, we had about 800 volunteers statewide.
Now we have 950, and that number continues to grow. That
certainly helps where we have resource shortages because, as I
said, we have volunteers who provide information after they are
trained freely.
In addition, we are continuing more and more to use the
area agencies on aging, senior centers, and other such centers
and activities that deal with seniors on a daily basis so that
people involved in those programs will also, without direct
charge to our OSHIIP program, be able to provide not only
contact information but also valuable enrollment information to
the seniors they encounter.
Senator Voinovich. I know that some of the municipal
offices on aging have been participating. I am very familiar
with what is happening in Cleveland. Do they get any resources,
additional resources, to do the job that they have been asked
to do?
Ms. Benjamin. Chairman Voinovich, honestly, they don't from
us. I don't know if they do from other sources, but they don't
come from OSHIIP. The only money that we distribute out from
OSHIIP is part of our Federal grant goes to the Ohio Department
of Aging, likewise for outreach programs that are complementary
to OSHIIP's.
Senator Voinovich. Has CMS or have you looked out across
the State to look at the various levels of groups that are
providing information to see how it is all coordinated and
whether there are any holes in the information system?
Ms. Benjamin. That is a continuing challenge, and we have
realized, for instance, over the last year that rural counties
are a particular outreach challenge. And one of the things that
we have done over the past year is reach out in particular to
rural counties to develop our volunteer pool as well as to
develop our contacts where we perhaps did not have them or did
not have as many with local senior agencies and centers so that
we would make sure that we reach those seniors in the more
outlying areas.
Generally the more urban areas have better outreach systems
and information systems in place for seniors.
Senator Voinovich. Dr. McClellan talked about the Advantage
plans, and it looks like there is a growing number of people
taking advantage of them. As part of your responsibilities and
information distribution, are you making information available
about those Advantage plans also?
Ms. Benjamin. Yes. That information is in very
comprehensive brochures that the OSHIIP program distributes. In
addition, we have been coordinating our brochures and
information with the Department of Aging to make sure that we
cover all bases, so to speak.
Senator Voinovich. One of the things that I am concerned
about is that the whole Medicare delivery system to a degree is
expensive and in so many instances really does not respond to
the needs of our senior citizens; that is, they come in when
they are really sick, and too often they do not have a regular
physician they go and see and have someone looking after them.
And it seems to me that if someone is encouraged to get into
one of these Advantage plans, that is a whole lot better way of
their getting the kind of medical services that they need,
including prescription drug benefits. And I think anything that
CMS can do, and you can do, to at least make that information
available to people would be very helpful to them. As you
remember, my motto when I was governor was ``Working harder and
smarter, and doing more with less.'' And the fact is that I
think that we would spend less money and we would have better
service to our Medicare-eligible individuals.
Ms. Benjamin. Chairman Voinovich, if I could expand on what
you just said, we do at the department, and in OSHIIP in
particular, have trained personnel available to answer the
telephone during business hours during the week to respond to
seniors' questions as to which plan or plans or drug cards
would be most appropriate for them. In fact, we also can run
the PDAP right there while the senior is on the telephone and
provide a detailed report to that senior within 24 to 48 hours
as to what drug card or cards would be more appropriate for
that senior's situation.
We have trained personnel who help senior consumers
evaluate all their options, and I think that just further adds
to the ability of these seniors to make informed decisions and
to know what all their options are.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you.
Ms. Marsh, during the course of the Extreme Makeover
project, the Partnership for Public Service learned much about
the inner workings of CMS, and I would like to say publicly
that we really are grateful for the Partnership for Public
Service. Many people are not aware that it did not exist
several years ago, and that a man named Sam Heyman from New
York, who was concerned about the fact that not enough people
were going to government service, created this new partnership,
and you have been very helpful in encouraging people,
particularly on college campuses, to take advantage of the
opportunities to come to work for the Federal Government.
How familiar was the Partnership with the department before
you began this project? And how did you get into it?
Ms. Marsh. How familiar were we with the department or vice
versa?
Senator Voinovich. How familiar were you--well, I am
interested in how you got together.
Ms. Marsh. We have a monthly meeting with all the HR
directors in the major departments in the offices to talk about
issues that are key to them. And we made comment about this
Extreme Makeover project, and as I mentioned, that very
afternoon----
Senator Voinovich. In other words, what you are telling me
is that the CHICOs--you get together with them once a month,
with the partner----
Ms. Marsh. Their operating HR directors typically in some
of the CHICOs come and have a conversation about their issues,
what they would like to see, and we mentioned the Extreme
Makeover project, and that afternoon the HHS HR Director called
back and said, ``I want you to get on the phone right now with
the leadership team at CMS.'' So we had an initial
conversation, and then met virtually everyone in the
organization and their senior leadership team, focusing on
their key hiring issues and talked about what we are trying to
do.
Among the things that we required of an organization was
senior leadership commitment and an organization that was in
pain. We did not want to have to educate people in this
project. And CMS was in pain with the big ramp-up they had, but
also their senior leader said this is really important, we will
sign on, and they have been at the table with us throughout
this process.
Senator Voinovich. So, in other words, they found out about
you through the meetings that you had once a month.
Ms. Marsh. That is right.
Senator Voinovich. And wasn't it the Partnership for Public
Service that also brought, was it, Monster to the Department of
Personnel?
Ms. Marsh. Well, actually, Monster had responded to the RFP
that the OPM had put out to modify USAJobs, and they have been
one of our partners in this endeavor and, in fact, had
introduced us to many of the other individuals and firms that
came together as part of this hiring effort. And I should point
out that all the efforts that we have had from all of these
firms have been pro bono. So they have dedicated hundreds and
hundreds of hours to the effort among three agencies to try and
really create a successful model within the Federal Government.
Senator Voinovich. It is interesting because when we got
started with this human capital challenge that we had to create
a situation where we would be able to attract the best and
brightest to the government, we had an executive session that
was sponsored by Harvard University, and the folks from Monster
were at the table with us. We tried to get the best and
brightest people in the country together to talk about how does
the Federal Government attract the best people and at the same
time have an environment where you keep the best people working
for you. And so this has just moved along, hasn't it?
Ms. Marsh. It has, and I think, Senator, it was at one of
your hearings where Jeff Taylor, who is the CEO of Monster,
rolled out a 47-page job announcement--I think that might have
been one of yours--just to say, ``How does a candidate plow
their way through 47 pages and who is intrepid enough to want
to do that?''
Senator Voinovich. Well, I have heard complaints for a long
time about the fact that they make it difficult for us to go to
work for the Federal Government.
Ms. Marsh. And I think in showing the new and improved
advertisement--and much credit given to OPM. They have this new
five-template format that starts with ``What is your mission?
What are you really looking for? Let's sell the benefits.''
There has been a lot of momentum in the last couple of years.
Senator Voinovich. Great. And are there any impediments
that you have noticed over there that we might try to knock
down?
Ms. Marsh. At this point, we do not have any. We are still
trying to consider--we are still trying to go through all of
the findings. We are completing our 2(b) process. What we are
trying to do is to look and see if agencies could make
improvements with the existing flexibilities that have been
given out in the last couple of years. So we certainly see that
we are able to do a lot. That example that I gave you was not a
direct hire authority example. It was with the existing
flexibilities.
There may well be.
Senator Voinovich. Now, they came to--we changed the law to
give direct hiring, but they had to come to the Office of
Personnel Management to get permission to do the direct hires.
Ms. Marsh. They did, and they have been very successful
with those. And part of our endeavor is to look at their
ordinary hiring and the non-direct hires to make sure that we
can backfill some of those positions that will be subject to
the retirements that you mentioned earlier on.
When we finish this project across all three agencies, we
are really looking at investments in the HR function. As you
well know, that strength has been depleted over the course of
the last couple of decades with retirement and downsizing. So
one of the things we may want to come back to the Subcommittee
with is some observations about some special investments in the
HR function across government, sort of Clinger-Cohen-type
endeavor for the very important HR assets.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Do either one of you have
anything else, any comments? You have heard the lengthy
testimony and the questions to Dr. McClellan. Any comments that
you would like to make in conclusion?
Ms. Marsh. The only thing I would say, they have a massive
challenge. Having come from a private sector benefits
consulting organization, I understand what it is like to roll
out on a private sector company a major endeavor like this. And
this is a scale that just boggles the human imagination, what
you all have to do collectively over the course of the next
couple of years. So it is really a privilege to try and assist
that particular organization doing something that is as
important.
Senator Voinovich. Well, I want to thank you and the
Partnership for Public Service for stepping forward and helping
us out, and I look forward to your recommendations on how we
can help other agencies get the job done. And, Ann, thank you
very much for all the good work that you do in Ohio. I think
that the partnership that we had between CMS and the Department
of Aging and the Department of Insurance is probably one of the
best in the country, and I think that had it not been in
existence, we wouldn't have had the number of people sign up
for the discount drug card. I think there is a tendency out
there to kind of feel it is all in the hands of the Federal
Government, but I learned when I was governor that when new
programs come out, people usually do not call the Federal
Government, they call State Government. And I knew that it was
coming, and our folks just did a great job, and I am so
grateful to you.
Ms. Benjamin. Well, I really appreciate that, and I thank
you for your help and encouragement along the way, you who are
so familiar with the OSHIIP program from its very beginning,
and I have to say it indeed has been a challenge and will
continue to be a challenge as the program changes to get the
information out to the people who need it. But we are doing
everything we can at OSHIIP to get that information out, and
CMS has truly been a very helpful partner and continues to be
so. If we have problems, we call the regional people and they
respond generally very quickly.
Senator Voinovich. Well, if they don't, you call me.
Ms. Marsh. I will. Thank you. I will take that. [Laughter.]
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much. The hearing is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:13 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR COBURN
On Tuesday, March 23, the Medicare and Social Security Trustees
released their annual report on the financial status of the Social
Security and Medicare trust funds.
I'd like to just take a minute to go over some of the findings of
the Medicare trustees report and the drug benefit.
The Medicare report shows the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund in a
deficit state by 2010 (just four years away) and in bankruptcy in 2018.
The report also shows a significant unfunded liability for the Medicare
program.
From what I understand from reading the report and the laws and
regulations, the cost containment provision would be triggered next
year. The way I understand the provisions, there is a ``cap'' on the
general revenue amount that can be spent on the total Medicare
program--this cap is 45 percent. It is estimated that 45 percent of
total Medicare spending will be funded by general revenues within the
next 7 years, if this is the case then the cap would have been reached
and this would initiate a trigger that would result in either cutting
the program benefits or increasing dedicated program revenues either
through premium increases or dedicated payroll taxes. If this is the
case, then it is my understanding that in next year's report the
trustees believe they will issue the warning that the cap will be
reached within 7 years and the cost containment process will be
activated to implement ``corrective action.'' I find the instability of
this system disturbing. I look forward to hearing the testimony of our
distinguished witnesses.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1428.066
<all>