‘Scaring the Elderly’ About Medicare Danger

I was amazed by the contention in your editorial (March 23), “Scaring the Elderly,” that “Medicare is not in jeopardy.”

I refer you to the report by the federal hospital trust funds trustees issued last March 31, which said, in rather blunt language, that unless prompt corrective action is taken, the Medicare trust fund will go bankrupt by the mid-1990s. That is “jeopardy,” yet the Congress has yet to act to correct the situation.

Even if the trust fund were on a sound financial footing, Medicare benefits would still be in jeopardy. I ask you to study closely what has happened to Medicare in the past six years--seniors forced to pay more and more of the cost of each hospitalization, while the cost of the monthly Medicare premium goes up and up. Both the premium and the deductible are increasing at a rate far, far higher than the cost of living.

I also question your comment that I said the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare has done nothing about any legislation. You may be referring to a statement I made at a recent congressional hearing when I refused to name a congressman whose mind had been changed by the national committee. As anyone who has ever watched Congress closely knows, no congressman--no senator--will admit to having his or her mind changed by a lobbyist. And I certainly wouldn’t put anyone on the spot by naming them.

However, I would point out that members of the national committee--our first line of lobbyists--have flooded Congress with literally millions of letters, postcards and petitions regarding Social Security and Medicare. If some congressman wants to admit publicly he pays no attention to and is not influenced by mail from constituents, he can--I won’t do it for him.

I would add that the national committee has had strong differences with the actions of the Social Security Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee. We differ strongly regarding the need to correct the notch benefit inequity, just as we opposed--and asked our members to write of our opposition--the Social Security trust funds protection legislation drafted by that body last year. We supported the Senate trust fund language, and we prevailed on the Senate side. Our members let the Ways and Means Committee members know that--just as they will force that subcommittee to deal with the notch.

I would also point out that the record does not show that most of the money raised by the national committee “goes for postage and products of the direct mail operatives,” as your editorial contends. In fact, our direct mail firm received less than one-tenth of the income of the national committee, despite overseeing the mailing of 41 letters, issue briefs, legislative alerts, newspapers, brochures and other pieces of mail to our members.

Frankly, I am surprised that The Times would fall for the old ploy being offered by our critics on Capitol Hill that it’s quite all right for bankers, doctors, lawyers and gun owners to band together to lobby Congress, but it’s wrong for seniors to do so.

That attitude flies in the face of Washington reality--the strong, well-organized, effective lobbies get heard and heeded; the weak and ineffective don’t. Aren’t seniors entitled to be heard and heeded?

In closing, I would point out only one additional fact--seniors in this country are upset and they have plenty of reason to be. Social Security and Medicare aren’t what they used to be at the start of this decade and the climate for further deterioration is still with us.

JAMES ROOSEVELT

Chairman

National Committee to

Preserve Social Security

and Medicare

Washington