Since1965, Medicare has provided millions of seniors and disabled Americans with guaranteed health care coverage. Unfortunately, the new Medicare law contains serious structural problems that will preclude it from delivering what was promised -- namely, a guaranteed prescription drug benefit for all enrollees.

HR 1, which President Bush signed last December, offers prescription drug coverage that will not take effect until 2006. That gives Congress time to repair the law’s structural problems and establish a real universal benefit within the Medicare program.

On the first day of this Congress’ second session, I introduced the Preserving Medicare for All Act, HR 3702, to address the inadequacies in HR 1. My legislation would:

* Lower prescription drug costs by allowing the government to use the purchasing power of 40 million Medicare beneficiaries to negotiate with drug manufacturers;

* Provide a guaranteed, universally available prescription drug benefit option through Medicare;

* End discrimination against employer retiree plans who currently provide drug coverage;

* Repeal the voucher provisions that will jeopardize traditional Medicare as we know it;

* Eliminate excess payments to private managed care plans; and

* Repeal the "expenditure cap" that will result in harsh cuts to Medicare providers and patients.

It’s unfathomable that the law’s authors would explicitly prohibit the government from negotiating lower prescription drug prices for seniors. But that’s what they did, and as a result, beneficiaries will pay much higher costs for their medicine. My bill will correct that and stretch the dollars allotted for seniors’ drug coverage.

In addition, the prescription drug plans offered in HR 1 are not designed or administered by Medicare. Instead, the new law allows private insurance companies to devise their own drug plans, with no guaranteed prescription drug benefit. These companies can determine premiums, copays, and even the drugs that are covered, and they can change these features from year to year.

My bill would guarantee seniors the choice of the private-sector options in HR 1 or a nationally available, defined benefit prescription drug plan within Medicare. Seniors would be able to choose a Medicare-based option where premiums, deductibles, copays, and cost limits that will be set by law, not by private insurers.

Not only does the new law offer unreliable coverage to seniors who lack drug benefits, it also jeopardizes the existing coverage of three million retirees. HR 1 discourages employers from continuing their retiree benefits in two ways: by not fully reimbursing employers for the cost of drugs they cover, and by failing to count employer-contributions toward seniors’ catastrophic limits under the new Medicare plan. My legislation would correct both of these weaknesses in the law.

HR 1 also launches a voucher program in 2010 that will force seniors in traditional Medicare to pay vastly higher premiums than they do now. In addition, for the first time ever, seniors will pay premiums that vary depending on where they live. My bill would eliminate this so-called demonstration program that favors private insurance companies over fee-for-service Medicare, and ensure that Medicare remains a national program where seniors pay the same amount regardless of where they live.

In the last several months, I have talked to hundreds of beneficiaries who are worried about the new law and -- ultimately -- what it will mean for the Medicare program they depend on. I share their concerns, and I am committed to ensuring that the Medicare program will be protected. In order to do that, it is necessary that the new prescription drug program be restructured before it takes effect in 2006.