Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title United States Code, of the Rule Submitted By the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Health and Human Services Relating to ``State Relief and Empowerment Waivers''

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it is my honor to come to the floor to speak on an issue that is important for so many Americans.

Let me start at the outset--before I move to unanimous consent on a specific piece of legislation--by saying that I believe that the change in the Affordable Care Act, which prohibited discrimination against people because of preexisting conditions, is one of the most fundamental changes in health insurance in America. Who among us doesn't have a member of their family or a friend with a preexisting condition?

There was a time, of course, when because of that, people were denied any coverage or charged exorbitant amounts of money. Overwhelmingly, we understand that if we are going to have a health insurance system that really serves the entire Nation, we cannot allow health insurance companies to pick and choose.

Prior to the Affordable Care Act's passage in 2010, health insurers used to charge people with preexisting conditions higher monthly premiums or simply deny them coverage all together. Health insurance companies used to impose annual lifetime caps on what they could pay for. These arbitrary limits disproportionately hurt people with preexisting conditions who often needed ongoing intensive medical care, and insurance companies before the Affordable Care Act used to refuse coverage for certain healthcare services that people with preexisting conditions needed--prescription drugs, hospital visits, mental health and substance abuse treatment, maternity and newborn care.

The Affordable Care Act changed all of that. There are no more denials or higher premiums for preexisting conditions, which is an amazing breakthrough. There are no more annual or lifetime caps on benefits and no more refusals to cover maternity benefits or doctors' visits.

Ten years ago, every single Democrat--I was one of them--voted in favor of the Affordable Care Act, and I would do it again today. It was a law that ensured these protections for people with preexisting conditions really meant something and were enforceable.

Ten years ago, every single Senate Republican voted against the Affordable Care Act. Since it has been signed into law, House and Senate Republicans have voted more than 100 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Their efforts have failed. There was one most dramatic effort, which many of us can recall happened just a couple of years ago, right here in the well of the Senate when the late Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, came to the floor in the middle of the night and cast a ``no'' vote. He believed, and I think he was right--I am sure he was right when he said: You can't be just against something; you have to be for something. The Republican side of the aisle has no alternative to the Affordable Care Act. They are just against it. They don't like it. They don't like the name of it. They don't like ObamaCare. They don't like Obama's administration. They just vote no over and over again.

Right now, there is a pending lawsuit that even would try to eliminate the entire Affordable Care Act, including the protection for people with preexisting conditions. Eighteen Republican-led States, including the State of Texas, brought the suit after congressional Republicans eliminated the CRA's individual mandate. President Trump's Department of Justice supports this bill to eliminate the Affordable Care Act. If this lawsuit is successful, nearly 20 million Americans-- 600,000 of them living in Illinois--could lose their health insurance, and nearly 133 million Americans with preexisting conditions--3 million in Illinois--could once again be at risk of discrimination by health insurance companies. As if that weren't bad enough, President Trump has also proposed new rules that would allow States to discriminate against Americans with preexisting conditions.

This week, the Senate will be voting on a Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn the Trump administration's latest assault on Americans with preexisting conditions. Senator Warner of Virginia has offered a resolution of disapproval, cosponsored by every single Senate Democrat. If any Senator on the Republican side really wants to help people with preexisting conditions, join us. Make this a bipartisan effort to tell President Trump and his administration it is wrong. We should not discriminate against people with preexisting conditions.

I hope that Senate Republicans will consider supporting a piece of legislation known as the MOMMA's Act. I am cosponsoring it; in fact, I am the lead sponsor in the Senate. The House sponsor is Congresswoman Robin Kelly of Illinois. It would ensure that all pregnant women get the care they need. Why is this important to raise in a modern country like America, with our great natural and medical resources? Because the United States is 1 of only 13 countries in the world where maternal mortality rates are worse now than they were 25 years ago. I want to repeat that because it is an incredible statement, though true. The United States is 1 of only 13 countries in the world where maternal death rates are worse now than they were 25 years ago.

Fortuitously, the Presiding Officer is a medical doctor. I know he has devoted a good part of his professional career to serving people of low income, limited means.

You think when you hear that number about maternal mortality in the United States, it cleverly must be associated with economic levels, income levels, wealth levels, education levels. It turns out it is not. Nationwide, more than 700 women die every year as a result of pregnancy, and more than 70,000 suffer near-fatal complications. More than 60 percent of maternal deaths are preventable.

Sadly, the tragedy of maternal mortality is even more pronounced when it comes to mothers of color. In the United States, women of color are three to four times more likely than White women to die as a result of pregnancy. In Illinois, they are six times more likely than White women to die.

When I researched this, I went to the University of Chicago and asked the OB/GYNs there to look into the stats, look into the studies, and tell me what is behind this. They said: Senator, there is no correlation among income, education attainment, and this death rate among women. It is only a question of color. We are losing new moms, and, sadly, we are losing babies as well. Every year, more than 23,000 infants die in the United States, largely due to factors that could be prevented. Black infants are twice as likely to die as White infants--a disparity that is greater than it was in the year 1850 in this country.

That is why Representative Kelly, my colleague Senator Duckworth, and I introduced the MOMMA's Act. First and foremost, our bill would expand the length of time that a new mom can keep her Medicaid healthcare coverage. Currently, Medicaid has to cover women only for 2 months postpartum--after the baby is born. Our bill would expand that to a full year.

Next, the MOMMA's Act would improve access to doulas, as well as improve implicit bias and cultural competency training among healthcare providers. Too often, Black women are just not listened to or taken seriously by healthcare providers. Doulas can provide education, advocacy, and support for women whose voices are being ignored.

Lastly, our bill would improve hospital coordination reporting on maternal healthcare outcomes.

Leader McConnell has made it clear that he has no intention of allowing the Senate to debate and pass legislation, instead, rendering the Senate to what has been characterized as a ``legislative graveyard.'' Senator McConnell says with pride that he will be the Grim Reaper--his words--the Grim Reaper. Nothing will pass in the Senate.

But I hope he will make an exception for the MOMMA's Act, which is currently moving through the House of Representatives. Whether you are pro-choice or whether you are right to life, shouldn't we all stand together--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--and say: Let's do something to eliminate this unacceptable level of maternal mortality in the United States. Let's do something to save these babies. Let's agree on that part if we can't agree on anything else.

960 and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration; that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. We throw that word around here on the Senate floor, and it usually doesn't mean much, but it is true. We are friends. I respect him very much. I think he is a good father, good grandfather, and I think the time will come--and I hope soon--when we can sit down and take his proposal and my proposal and put them together and make a bill we will both be proud of. We have done that before, even to the point of getting the President to sign the bill into law.

For the time being and because his proposal cuts some Medicaid benefits that are a great concern to me, I am going to object in the hope that we can use this opportunity and this moment as a basis for sitting down and finding a bill we can agree on.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source