House Rejects Pepper Plan for Home Care

The House Wednesday killed a proposal for a $28-billion program of home care for the elderly and disabled, but supporters vowed to push for the new government benefit during the presidential campaign and in the next Congress.

Rep. Claude Pepper (D-Fla.) received a standing ovation after an emotional closing speech promoting the measure, but his effort was defeated by two powerful committee chairmen who were angered that he had circumvented the conventional legislative process in bringing it to the House floor.

By a 243-169 vote, the House rejected the provisions for debating the Pepper plan, effectively scuttling it for this session of Congress.

“The people will have the last say--this will be one of the critical issues in the coming campaign,” a defiant Pepper told a news conference after the vote.

He lost because 99 Democrats joined 144 Republicans in opposing the measure. “I am hoping the (defecting) Democrats will repent and be baptized,” Pepper joked.

Opposition by Two

The Democrats opposed him at the urging of Rep. Dan Rostenkowski (D-Ill.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, two panels that normally would have reviewed the measure before House consideration.

Pepper, chairman of the influential Rules Committee and an ardent advocate of the elderly, brought it to the floor without hearings before either committee.

Dingell said that he suffered a “great sense of sadness” for fighting Pepper, but denounced the digression from normal procedure as one of the most flagrant in his 33 years in Congress.

Pepper was attempting to win approval for the second major program for the elderly in Congress this year, supplementing the extensive Medicare expansion passed by the Senate Wednesday.

His measure would have subsidized care for the chronically ill who are living at home but cannot take care of themselves. Under the plan, the government would pay for a helper at the disabled person’s home.

Would Extend Payroll Tax

The 32 million Medicare beneficiaries were to be eligible, along with chronically ill children 19 and younger. Financing would come from extending the 1.45% Medicare payroll tax to all salary income. The tax now applies only to income up to $45,000.

The total cost was estimated by the bill’s supporters at $28 billion over five years, but opponents said that it might be much more expensive because families now providing care would flock to take advantage of a new government benefit.

Speaking without notes during a 10-minute final oration, the 87-year-old Pepper told a packed House chamber: “Today is a day for which I’ve waited and worked for 50 years.”

“Ladies and gentlemen, when you go home at night and close your eyes, and ask, ‘What did I do today to lighten the burden on those who suffer?’--at least you can say you voted to help those in need,” he said. The bill “will not answer all the problems, but it will soothe the brow of many who suffer.”

Pepper originally sought to include this benefit in the new Medicare legislation that provides unlimited days of hospital care and a cap on patients’ spending for doctor bills.

Withdrawn From Package

But he withdrew it at the urging of House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.), who said that the big payroll tax increase could draw a veto from President Reagan, killing the whole package of aid.

Pepper said he tried to get separate consideration of his home care plan, but that Rostenkowski and Dingell rebuffed his invitations to prepare a bill for their committees or to revise it.

In an unusually direct criticism by a Democratic chairman for his colleagues, Pepper said: “They didn’t want to make this bill better, they wanted to kill it.” However, Rostenkowski, saying that Wednesday’s vote was “not a referendum on long-term care,” said he did not believe Congress could push through another major elderly aid program this session. The issue of home care and the pressing problem of nursing home costs are major social problems that “must and will be addressed” in the future, he said.

The politically powerful senior citizens’ organizations have been supporting the Pepper bill and they indicated that Wednesday’s rebuff will not end their campaign. “We’re disheartened that members chose to go with a jurisdictional squabble rather than pay attention to the overwhelming consensus of the American public, “ said Lawrence T. Smedley, executive director of the National Council of Senior Citizens.

“But we are extremely happy that Chairman Rostenkowski apparently has committed to take action on it in the next session.”