Health Insurance Marketplace Modernization And Affordability Act Of 2006
HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETPLACE MODERNIZATION AND AFFORDABILITY ACT OF 2006 -- (Senate - May 10, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I wish to express my wholehearted support for the bill that the chairman of the HELP Committee, the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, the Senator from Wyoming, Senator Enzi, has shepherded so far through this process, this small business health plan bill. I think it presents an outstanding opportunity for the Senate to do what my constituents tell me they want every time I go back home and I talk to them, and that is to have access to good quality health care.
The fact is this bill will allow small businesses to band together on a national basis and give them the leverage they need to negotiate good terms with insurance companies for their small businesses and for their employees. This bill would let these insurers bypass some of the mandates that are well-intentioned but which have the impact of driving up the cost of health insurance for employers to the point where many people can't afford it.
In my State we have the unfortunate distinction of having one-quarter of the population without health insurance. What that means is that people end up going to the emergency room for their health care, which has a couple of unintended consequences: No. 1, it costs a whole lot more than it should to treat those conditions in places like a clinic or somewhere else where they could be treated on a nonemergency basis. No. 2, it has the consequence of causing emergency rooms to have to go on divert status, and that is when people come with true emergencies to those emergency rooms and they can't be seen because the emergency rooms are full of people who are going there for nonemergency care. It literally endangers the life and certainly the well-being of that individual who needs to be seen in an emergency room. So we have a broken health care system that can be so inefficient and not serve the best interests of the American people.
What this bill does is provides a means for, as I said, small businesses to band together to increase their negotiating leverage. It is anticipated to be able to bring down the price of health insurance by about 12 percent, which will allow more and more people to gain access to health insurance so they don't have to go to the emergency room, so they have more choices, and so they have the peace of mind that comes with having that coverage in a way that allows them to enjoy the benefits that many of us have but which we take for granted.
We have an alternative that has been offered by Senator Durbin and Senator Lincoln, and I think it serves a useful purpose, not because I agree with the alternative proposed, but what it does is it demonstrates the competing approaches or visions or principles between this side of the aisle and that side of the aisle when it comes to providing access to health care.
It has become increasingly apparent to me that while we share the goal of access to good quality health care on both sides of the aisle, we approach it in fundamentally different ways. For example, our side of the aisle--and this bill, I think, reflects the fact that we believe there ought to be something other than a government-run health care system; that private insurance companies offering competitive plans to individuals create consumer choice. It creates competition. And we know that competition creates better service and better prices for American consumers.
The alternative being offered is a command-and-control health care system operated by the Federal Government that is neither efficient nor does it offer the sort of choice and competition, lower price and better service that would be offered through private health insurance options. Indeed, I think our friends on the other side of the aisle have, if nothing else, been consistent in their approach to health care. They believe the Government ought to dictate health care choices for the American people, whether it has to do with CHIPS, the Children's Health Insurance Program, the Medicaid Program, the Medicare Program, or whether it is veterans health care. They believe the Federal Government knows best and that bureaucrats in Washington, DC ought to make the choices that I believe ought to be reserved for me and my family when it comes to what is best for us.
As I said, this is an issue I hear about all the time when I talk to my constituents. It is, in fact, the growing cost of health care and the unavailability of health care that is one of the greatest concerns of my constituents in Texas. Rising costs, systemic inefficiencies, barriers to access, and the increasing costs of coverage represent the challenge we have to confront and which this bill directly addresses.
I understand the difficulties that small businesses have in Texas when trying to obtain quality health care coverage for their employees at reasonable prices. One employee of a small business in Addison, TX, for example, had this to say about the disparity in coverage available to small versus big businesses:
Our February 2006 renewal premium increased by nearly 40 percent. For a group of 4 insured with no major medical issues and no increases in plan benefits, this was difficult to understand. Our course of action was to look for affordable plans with fewer benefits, but that proved to be difficult and the results undesirable. Fortunately, one of our employees decided to waive coverage and join the policy offered by a large corporation that employs her husband. Her premium under our policy would have been $4,740 a year. The price to carry her on her husband's policy was only $700 a year. Now, that is a disparity. If adequate health coverage is to be provided to employees of small businesses, it is going to be vital that small businesses be allowed to pool their employees in order to maximize their leverage and in order to minimize the premiums to which they are now being subjected.
That is exactly why I support this legislation. Because it would allow associations such as trade, industry, professional, chambers of commerce, for other small business associations to offer fully insured health plans to small businesses. I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation, and I believe this bill is an important step toward making health insurance more available and affordable to more Americans.
I thank Chairman Enzi and his committee for their hard work in bringing this bill to the floor.
The goal of this bill is to reduce health care costs and expand access by creating small business plans. As I mentioned, a recent study indicated that the price of health insurance could literally be brought down as much as 12 percent and as many as an additional 1 million working Americans insured who currently are not insured and have no alternative but to go to the emergency room for their health care.
Recently, the Small Business Health Plan Coalition sent a letter signed by organizations that represent more than 12 million employers and 80 million workers. They wrote in support of this bill, saying it will:
Provide workers employed in small businesses and the self-employed with access to Fortune 500-style health benefits now enjoyed by workers in corporate and labor union health plans.
This is a principle that resonates with the American people, and I must say that the American people have every right to be frustrated at Congress's unwillingness to step up and deal with this problem. And woe be it to those politicians who stand between the American people and their desire to see health coverage expanded and access increased. Almost 90 percent of voters, including 93 percent of Republicans and 86 percent of Democrats, in recent polls state that they favor allowing self-employed workers and small business employees to band together to negotiate lower insurance costs.
It is time for the Senate to act. In 2005 alone, health care costs rose three times faster than inflation--and even faster than that for many small businesses. Many small firms had to simply cut benefits or eliminate health care coverage entirely. Only 41 percent of firms with 9 or less employees offer health benefits, compared with 99 percent of larger firms.
We all know that small businesses are our Nation's chief job generator, our No. 1 job creator. They deserve to be treated fairly. But by themselves, these small firms and self-employed people have almost no leverage against insurance companies to try to negotiate fair prices and fair plans.
As it stands now, if they want to join other small employers and purchase insurance through national associations, they have to deal with an enormous array of State-level health insurance regulations and benefit mandates. It goes without saying that many of the mandates that are ordered by State legislators to be included in insurance policies in their States are passed with the best of intentions, but they have the unfortunate effect of raising the price of the insurance to the point where many people simply cannot afford it.
It makes no sense to say that everyone must have a Cadillac with all the bells and whistles when all some people want or can afford is a basic model of a similar vehicle. Big businesses, for the most part, do not have to deal with these regulations. The Congressional Budget Office and Government Accountability Office and others have found that State-imposed benefit mandates raise the cost of health insurance and, in effect, represent an unfunded mandate on employers.
Small business health plans will have a strong incentive to offer the best policies possible for their members. After all, that is what the competitive market is all about. Small businesses will have to compete with large businesses for employees. And when employees decide where they want to go to work, they will look at not only the salary they will be offered but the benefits that will be offered, including the health coverage that is available. This is simply a case of the market working and allowing individuals the maximum freedom to choose what is best for themselves and their families.
In order to remain competitive and attract a talented workforce, I believe small businesses would want to have the ability to offer high-quality health benefits, the same opportunity that large companies currently enjoy. Right now, small businesses effectively have the choice of offering expensive plans with all the required mandates, whether employees will actually even use those services or simply not offering insurance at all. That policy in my State is part of what has been responsible for 25 percent of the people of Texas not having health insurance. It must change.
This is not a complete panacea, but it will provide dramatically better and expanded coverage to the people of my State and the people across this country.
Under the Enzi bill, every small business owner will have the opportunity to choose a comprehensive plan, but they will also have other, more affordable, high-quality choices, too. This will improve access for millions of Americans who currently do not have any insurance at all. I believe this legislation is a good step in the right direction toward increasing the affordability and access to health care that all Americans deserve.
More can certainly be done, and I certainly believe that while this is an important step, we should not stop here. We should continue to increase the number of choices available to the American people--things like consumer-oriented health care, which provides greater transparency and provides information to consumers so they can determine where to go for their health care services based not only on price but based on outcomes--things like health savings plans, which would give people greater access and greater control over their health care decisions and allow them to determine how their health care dollars will be utilized rather than having to buy high-priced plans that contain attributes that they frankly don't need or don't want and which cost them additional money.
Certainly, more could be done, but I urge my colleagues today to support this important legislation because I think it represents a dramatic and long overdue improvement over the status quo.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov