NEWS
NRLN Speaks Out On Legislation To Authorize
Greater Access To Generic Drugs And A Medicare
Prescription Drug Benefit
Out of the
blue, General Motors retirees who belong to NRLN recently were solicited by
the President of General Motors, Gary L. Cowger, to write members of
Congress and urge enactment of the Senate-passed Greater Access To
Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act of 2002 (which is still pending in the House)
as well as legislation that would add a prescription drug benefit to
Medicare. The first would remove obstacles in existing law that prevent the
greater entry of generic drugs into the market, and the second would provide
Medicare-eligible seniors with prescription drug coverage, a proposal both
political parties agree on in principle but not as to the specifics.
Needless to
say, NRLN was struck by the fact that a corporate giant like General Motors
suddenly would start a legislative health crusade on behalf of retirees,
especially since this is the same General Motors that was responsible for
reneging on health commitments it made to its own retirees that resulted in
the notorious case of Sprague v. General Motors Corp., 133 F. 3d 388
(6th Cir.), cert. denied, 524 U.S. 923 (1998). In that
case, a federal court of appeals ultimately upheld GM’s right to gyp over
60,000 GM retirees of the health benefits they had been promised in return
for their agreement to retire early.
On closer
inspection, NRLN discovered that GM’s newly minted campaign in support of
retiree-friendly drug legislation probably has a hidden agenda – one not so
favorable to retirees. Without certain restrictions, greater use of cheaper
generic drugs – in itself a worthy objective – could permit GM to maneuver
more freely in compelling their retirees to forego prescription medicine
even though their doctors may have recommended in particular cases that they
should only use prescription medicine.
Similarly,
once a prescription drug benefit is added to Medicare, there is nothing to
prevent GM from terminating or substantially reducing the prescription drug
coverage it agreed to provide to its already existing Medicare-eligible
retirees, saving GM millions by forcing GM retirees to switch to a
lower-grade prescription drug program than the one they had.
The
question is whether GM is really interested in promoting better drug
coverage for seniors or whether it is using these otherwise praiseworthy
legislative proposals as a means of justifying the unloading of health
obligations owed to its existing retirees. Since all retirees – not just GM
retirees - could be adversely affected by other employers jumping on the GM
bandwagon – as many retirees as possible should alert both GM and their
Congressional representatives that retirees will not appreciate the
enactment of drug legislation that will result in many of them losing rather
than gaining health benefits.
Because
this entire dilemma would be rendered moot by the enactment of HR 1322, the
Emergency Retiree Health Benefits Protection Act (or its companion bill in
the Senate S.2904), which would ban post-retirement cutbacks in retiree
health benefits, both GM and members of Congress should be reminded that
there is a right way and a wrong way to deal with retiree health issues and
the GM approach is the wrong way unless it adopts the principles of HR 1322.
For
examples of model letters that retirees can send to GM and members of
Congress on this subject, keep reading below.
Model
Letter For Retirees Associated With NRLN To Write To The President of
General Motors About GM Lobbying In Support Of The Greater Access to
Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act and Federal Legislation That Would Add A
Prescription Drug Benefit to Medicare
Gary L. Cowger
President
GM North America
300 Renaissance Center
P.O. Box 300
Detroit, MI 48265-3000
Re: GM
Lobbying Concerning the Greater
Access
to Affordable Pharmaceuticals
Act and
Federal Legislation That Would
Add A
Prescription Drug Benefit to Medicare
Dear Mr. Cowger:
I am writing regarding recent efforts by
General Motors to urge their retirees to write Congress to enact the Greater
Access To Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act as well as legislation that would
provide a Medicare prescription drug benefit.
Speaking as a non-GM retiree, I strongly
support the above legislation, but I am deeply concerned that unless
Congress enacts certain restrictions to accompany it, employers, like GM,
could (a) force their retirees to use generic drugs even in instances where
physicians have recommended that only prescription medicine should be used,
and (b) withdraw or curtail prescription drug or other health benefits from
both their Medicare-eligible and non-Medicare eligible retirees on grounds
that the cost of providing drug benefits to the Medicare-eligible uninsured
makes it impractical for the employer to continue prior benefits.
I urge
GM to clarify its position on this matter and assure the Congress that it
will not renege on previous health benefit commitments made to existing
retirees and that it will support generic and Medicare prescription drug
laws that also restrict employers from making adverse post-retirement
changes to their retiree health plans. I call your attention to HR 1322,
the Emergency Retiree Health Benefits Protection Act, and its companion bill
in the Senate, S. 2904. This bill would go a long way to protect retirees
against post-retirement cutbacks in their company-provided health benefits
so that these benefits are just as secure as their pensions are under
ERISA. If GM is sincere in asking its retirees to support generic drug and
Medicare prescription drug legislation, GM can show its good faith by
endorsing HR 1322 and S. 2904.
Sincerely,
Model
Letter to Congress
To a Senator:
The Honorable (full
name)
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator (Last
name):
To a
Representative:
The Honorable (full
name)
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Representative
(Last name):
Text of Model Letter
Although I
strongly support the Senate-passed Greater Access To Affordable
Pharmaceuticals Act of 2002 (currently still pending in the House), as well
as legislation that would provide a Medicare prescription drug benefit, I am
deeply concerned that unless Congress enacts certain restrictions to
accompany this legislation, employers could (a) force retirees like myself
to use generic drugs even where our physicians have recommended that in
certain cases only prescription medicine should be used, and (b) withdraw
prescription drug coverage and other health benefits that retirees worked
all their lives to obtain as their price for supporting a prescription drug
benefit for Medicare-eligible retirees who lack such coverage.
I urge you
to see to it that the legislation in question is modified to safeguard
existing retirees against loss or curtailment of their prescription drug and
other health benefits, and also to support HR 1322, the Emergency Retiree
Health Benefits Protection Act, or its companion bill in the Senate, S.
2904. This bill will go a long way to protect retirees against
post-retirement cutbacks in their company-provided health benefits so that
these benefits are just as secure as their pensions are under ERISA.
Sincerely,
|