American Recovery And Reinvestment Act Of 2009

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I wish to enter a colloquy with my good friend, the Senator from Montana, and the senior Senator from Wisconsin, one of the chief authors of this amendment and the distinguished chair of the Special Committee on Aging. I would like to talk about the importance of investing in the long-term care workforce in order to provide good care for seniors and the disabled. Specifically, I would like to discuss the inclusion of long-term care reforms in the health reform bill.

Chairman Kohl and I have worked together on the Long-Term Care Worker Recruitment and Investment Demonstration Program Amendment to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 because direct care jobs are a 21st century growth industry. With the aging of the baby boomer generation, this workforce will need to grow substantially if we are to meet the coming demand for both medical and nonmedical support services delivered in the home and in small community residences, as well as in more traditional nursing homes and assisted living facilities. However, today, we are not on track to achieve this goal.

In order to meet the future health needs of older adults and recruit and retain a stable and competent long-term care workforce, the Congress, State governments, and the Obama administration need to work together.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Long-term care is in need of rethinking. Right now it is a form of Russian roulette for many Americans who pray they can avoid it, and with it a fatal financial bullet. Under the current system, we are sending older Americans into a long-term care system that is more fragile than they are. States are staggering under the weight of projected Medicaid long-term care costs and fear that they will face economic calamity as their baby boom population begins to need services. Similarly, the staggering weight of family caregiving for many ``sandwiched'' adult children, who are caring for their children as well as their elderly parents with serious health problems, makes some family members feel like they are staggering too.

Every 15 years, since the days of Harry Truman, health care advocates have woken up, looked around, and said, ``This is the moment. This time my dream of universal health care will be achieved.'' Then something goes wrong. That vision is not returned by the powers that be, and the dream of finding a health care solution is dashed on the rocks of harsh reality.

That 15-year reawakening is upon us again, but this time I believe this story might have a different ending because of the leadership of the Senator from Montana and the commitments of Chairmen Kennedy and Kohl and President Obama.

As we work together to tackle health reform and entitlement reform, I want to work with you and Chairman Kohl to include thoughtful health care workforce reforms. Long-term care has been too often overlooked as the health care stepchild, and as we move into what I and many experts think will be our next real window for health reform this year, it will be important to make sure that long-term care is not left behind in the health reform debate.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, Senators are working to limit the cost of the stimulus legislation. This bipartisan amendment that I offer with Senator Snowe and Senator Lincoln, holds down the cost of the stimulus legislation by bringing back to the taxpayers billions and billions of dollars.

This amendment provides a way to quickly return to taxpayers much of the $18 billion that has been paid out in excessive bonuses to companies under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Americans were horrified recently to learn that Citigroup and others that had received extensive Federal support had paid out billions of dollars in excessive bonuses. This bipartisan amendment makes it clear it is not enough to say the excessive Wall Street bonuses were wrong, it makes clear they have to be paid back.

Our amendment gives those companies that receive Federal bailout money and pay the unjustified large bonuses a choice: Pay back the cash portion of any bonus paid in excess of $100,000 within 120 days of the amendment's enactment, or pay an excise tax of 35 percent on what is not returned to the Treasury.

The money can be repaid by the financial firms buying back the preferred stock the Federal Government owns in these companies or in any other fashion the institution chooses.

Senator Snowe, Senator Lincoln, and I have received extensive legal analysis with respect to this amendment. It is clear our approach passes constitutional muster. Recently, I had printed in the Record a letter to me from Edward Kleinbard, head of the Joint Committee on Taxation, on this matter.

I also wish to thank Mr. Kleinbard and his very professional staff for their analysis of this legislation. No other bipartisan bill proposed in either this body or the other body would force the repayment of these bonuses and actually protect the taxpayer. This amendment has real teeth, and it is supported by colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

Let me close by saying, first, I wish to thank the distinguished chairman of the Finance Committee and our wonderful staff. They have been so gracious, as always, to assist me on this. I would close by saying I think the President summed it up. The President said these bonuses ``were shameful.'' Now it is time for us to do our job and pass legislation with teeth that requires that these bonuses are repaid and the taxpayers are protected.

I urge my colleagues to join Senator Snowe, Senator Lincoln, and myself in supporting a bipartisan approach in this area. It is particularly relevant this afternoon.

I see my colleague and friend, a former chair, Senator McCain on the floor. He has done yeoman's work in terms of blowing the whistle for unjustifiable Federal spending. This is a bipartisan way, colleagues, to hold down the cost of the stimulus legislation.

I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 468 be made pending. I know of no opposition at this point. No colleague has spoken in opposition and urge my colleagues to approve it. My sense is, it can probably be done on a voice vote.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source