BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Thank you very much, Congressman Akin, for leading this hour tonight and for all of the leadership that you have given, particularly this session, on bringing to the attention of the American public some of the things that need to be brought to their attention.
I think you are certainly on the right track in talking about the fact that it is impossible to do what the President and Speaker Pelosi have been saying about expanding health care coverage, government-run health care coverage, to other people without it costing another dime.
It reminds me of Congressman Miller saying last week, on another issue that I think you want to talk about in a little bit, on the government taking over the student loan program.
Mr. AKIN. I appreciate your bringing that up, but I would like to get there in just a minute.
Ms. FOXX. He said on the floor that we would go from the government having 22 percent of student loans, only 22 percent, to having all of them, and it wouldn't cost the government a dime. My point is these people keep promising programs and expanding programs and nothing is going to cost anything.
Mr. AKIN. Reclaiming my time, I would like to ask my friends here, and here is the specific statement made by the President. And I think it is helpful, you take the specific statements and you take a look at them and say: Does it make sense or does it not? Here is the statement, and what is a rational analysis of this?
``Here is what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, either now or in the future.''
We have heard that we are not going to add a dime to the deficits, and in just 6 months we have scored $3.6 trillion from all of these different programs. You have the Wall Street bailout and the economic stimulus, the SCHIP, the appropriations bill, and this cap-and-tax, which is the biggest tax increase in the history of our country, and for him to say it is not going to add a dime to our deficit.
He also promised during the campaign that nobody making less than $250,000 would pay any taxes, and yet this cap-and-tax that we did means that as soon as you flip a light switch, you are starting to pay taxes. Now tell me, do people who flip light switches, do they all make over $250,000? There is a question of credibility when you hear a statement as broad and as general as that.
Here is another one: ``Most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system, a system which is full of waste and abuse.''
Every year we are putting a patch on Medicare because the doctors are getting paid so little that they are getting to the point that when somebody walks into their office and says, I'm on Medicare, they say, Sorry, I can't afford to take any more Medicare.
So as a doctor, if you keep getting paid less and less for Medicare people, there is going to come a point where the people who have Medicare, they have government insurance, but they don't have government health care because a doctor won't accept the wage.
So I guess when we hear this, I don't know if this passes the sniff test.
Ms. FOXX. If the gentleman would yield, I think another point that needs to be made is that the President has said on many occasions that when he took office he inherited a $1 trillion deficit.
Mr. AKIN. That isn't true, is it?
Ms. FOXX. I wanted to see if you would help me with my memory on that. My memory is that when President Bush left office and President Obama came in, that the deficit was $259 billion, too big a deficit, but only $259 billion, compared to the $1 trillion which occurred almost immediately because of the stimulus package. The stimulus package created the $1 trillion deficit; is that your memory?
Mr. AKIN. It isn't just my memory. There is an expression that everybody is entitled to their opinion, but there is only one set of facts. And the facts are that it was in the range of $250 billion or so, and many of us who are conservatives would say that was too much. But still, it is not in the range of a trillion, or $3.6 trillion, which we are burning with all of these programs.
Here is another chart that I think people are vaguely aware of. President Bush, before, went where you are not supposed to go politically and said to the American public, Medicare and Social Security are broken. And maybe people beat him up for that, but in general Americans realize Social Security and Medicare, these programs are broken, partly because they weren't designed right to begin with and partly because of the demographic shift and all of those of us who are baby boomers and all of that. But here is a chart on the expansion of Medicare and Social Security.
My question is, if we can't manage Medicare and Social Security, and those costs are going up to this point where you have this dotted line. You have Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security added together absorb the entire budget. There is no money for the
arts, no money for public radio, and no money for defense or anything else, just those three programs. It totally gobbles up about the maximum you can get, because if you raise taxes more, you get less in because you kill the economy. So is it reasonable when you have the experience of Medicare and Medicaid expanding the way they are, the solution to this is obviously the government being more involved? Somehow, that doesn't pass the sniff test.
I yield to Dr. Fleming.
Mr. FLEMING. A point you raised, Mr. Akin, is a very important one that is often left out of the debate, and that is that Medicare and Medicaid are paying such low rates, far below cost in many cases, that it is only the private insurance market that is making up the difference, that keeps doctors solvent and keeps their offices open. If you look at the increase in private insurance premiums and the fact, and the President points this out frequently, the rate of increases is higher than inflation, well, what is causing that is the government-run health care that we already have which is being subsidized by the private market.
Mr. AKIN. Reclaiming my time, therefore, following your line of reasoning, if you keep taxing the privates more and more, they are going to get smaller. And when that gets smaller, your base of collecting those tax revenues gets smaller, and you have more and more people who are subsidized who are absorbing the resource, and pretty soon you are in a death spiral. Is that your point?
Mr. FLEMING. Exactly. People say how will this ever lead--what you really have is a competing public plan against private plans, and how will this lead to rationing and long lines? The bottom line is, when you artificially suppress the income to the providers, doctors and hospitals and DME companies and so forth, what you end up with is really an artificial market which then is being collapsed in the private sector into a public sector market, and there is no way that is going to control costs, short of long lines.
Mr. AKIN. Speaking directly on that point, and I appreciate your going there because that is something that I thought was very interesting. In the context of our health care debate, something that happened here last week on the floor, and people should be paying big attention to this, and it seems like it is an unrelated subject but it is not at all, and that is the student loan situation. We are fortunate to have Congresswoman Foxx who was literally involved in the middle of that situation.
I would like to explain the history of the student loan program and how that connects to this concept, because one of the huge debates here, aside from the cost of the thing, is the question of whether there should be a government insurance plan included. The Democrats are about 50/50 divided on that point. The Republicans are not at all divided. We think no, absolutely not. It is a deal breaker. We do not want the government getting into the insurance business.
So why would we be concerned? Well, because where that is going to lead. Let's go over and take a look at what happens in student loans and how that then relates to health care.
I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina.
Ms. FOXX. I will give you a very brief synopsis of it. I handled the rule on the floor last week, so I was familiar with the bill. The Democrats have been trying to do this for a long time.
We have had in the Federal Government two ways for students to be able to borrow money to go to college. One was called the Direct Loan Program. They would go directly to the Department of Education and borrow money, pay it back over a period of time.
The second was something called the FFEL, and I can't remember exactly what those letters stand for, but students could borrow money from banks but the Federal Government would guarantee those loans. Back in the sixties when the Direct Loan Program was begun, right after it started, actually, it ran out of money and ran into all kinds of problems. Congress had to bail it out. That was long before my time, but it has constantly had problems.
Mr. AKIN. Reclaiming my time, was that the government Direct Loan Program always had problems?
Ms. FOXX. Yes.
Mr. AKIN. The deal is the government makes a loan to some student, you're going to go to college. The kid goes to college, doesn't repay the loan, and the government and the taxpayer has to then pick up the tab?
Ms. FOXX. That's right, put more money into it. So what happened was only about 22 percent of the people getting loans were getting them from the Direct Loan Program. Actually, that is a higher percentage than it had been over the years. The other 78 percent were getting their money from banks, and then the money was guaranteed by the Federal Government. What Chairman Miller's bill did was say we are eliminating the private sector.
Mr. AKIN. Here is the interesting thing, though. If you went for a direct loan from the Federal Government, you got a lower interest rate on your loan, so you would think, shoot, everybody is going to go for that kind of loan, and, in fact 20 percent did, and the other 70-some did not. They paid more money in interest. Why? Because the loan was administered through the private sector. And the private sector was so much easier to deal with, they were willing to pay more in interest just not to have to deal with the Federal Government on it.
So what we did last week, then, was to basically eliminate, and there were some people that weren't federally insured at all and they were just totally private. So 20 percent of the market was just private. You had not quite 20 percent that was just straight Federal Government, and then you had in between the sector of private money with a guarantee from the Federal Government. So we have taken that huge sector in the middle and gotten rid of that so now the government runs 80 percent or so of the student loans; is that right?
Ms. FOXX. It will work that way if the Senate passes that bill, despite the fact that we kept saying over and over and over again, Department of Education has no business becoming a bank, and that's basically what they are doing.
Mr. AKIN. So the first thing we are seeing is once more the Federal Government is getting their fingers into everything, and in this case, they are basically taking over student loans. But they started with the idea that we are just going to help the students get a lower interest rate. That was the toe in the door, the nose of the camel under the tent, to the point where now 60, 70, if this bill were to pass the Senate, where you have the government now in the student loan business.
Now, let's fast forward. How does that parallel our concern on health care? Well, our concern is you put a public option in and the government starts with that. It seems like just a little thing.
Then pretty soon you say, well, every insurance policy in the country has to be the same as the government's, which is what the legislation says. And pretty soon, guess what? You have one provider, the Federal Government, and the government has now taken over all of the health care.
I yield to my good friend, the Congressman from Georgia, who has a distinguished record here in the House but also is a medical doctor, which we don't hold against him. I would just be delighted to recognize my good friend, Dr. Gingrey.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding, Mr. Speaker. I hope my patients don't hold it against me as well.
But actually I just wanted for you to yield me time so I could ask our good friend from North Carolina, Ms. Foxx, a question in regard to this. You are right, she is a Member of our side of the aisle on the Rules Committee, does a great job of handling rules for us, and apparently does all of the education bills that come on the Floor.
There was some discussion, Representative Foxx, about how many jobs, in this time of losing jobs--they keep saying 14,000 people a day lose their health insurance; we know why, because they are losing their jobs--but in this particular instance, as far as that private sector, can you give us a number on that?
Ms. FOXX. We have an estimate that between 30,000 and 40,000 jobs in the private sector will be lost as a result of that education bill, and that, again, makes the statement that Mr. Miller from California made so astounding, because it is like the statement that President Obama has made about the health care bill. Mr. Miller said this will not cost the citizens of this country one single dime.
Mr. AKIN. Wait a minute. Reclaiming my time, you are starting to blow my circuits. You are saying that a Congressman on this floor, the head of the Education Committee now, says that this government loan program is not going to cost us a dime?
Ms. FOXX. The complete takeover is not going to cost a dime.
Mr. AKIN. In other words, the Federal Government is going to go in and take over all of these student loans, and it is not going to cost a dime. You know what you would have to prove to prove that true? You would have to say that every single loan is going to be made good. That is what you would have to say almost to make that happen. I mean, that is beyond credible.
Ms. FOXX. It also is beyond credible when we know that there are 30,000 to 40,000 people in the private sector servicing the existing loans. It is incomprehensible to me.
Mr. AKIN. 30,000 or 40,000--that is jobs lost?
Ms. FOXX. Jobs lost, and that they believe that people in the Department of Education are going to absorb the program into the Department without adding any personnel. Now, that is beyond belief for anybody in this country I believe, to think that you add responsibilities to people who work in the Federal Government and they are not going to ask for additional personnel.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I wanted to speak to what you started out talking about tonight, along with this comment. What are we to believe on all of these issues? There are lots of numbers being thrown around, lots of comments being made. First of all, let me give a statistic that I know of. Eighty-nine percent of those people that you talk about are happy with their health insurance.
Mr. AKIN. So you are saying of Americans in general, 89 percent are saying, We're pretty comfortable with what we've got.
Ms. FOXX. Right. The ones who have health care coverage.
But the point I wanted to make tonight is something that has just been coming out in the last day or two about what's happening in terms of informing the American public about what----
Mr. AKIN. This is the area that's kind of sacred to Americans, the idea of free speech, that you can have your opinion, you can disagree with a family member or a neighbor. But we can have this debate and this discussion, and we're not going to hide information.
Is that what you are getting at?
Ms. FOXX. That's right.
There is an organization called Humana which provides health insurance, primarily the Medicare Advantage Program, to seniors all over this country.
Mr. AKIN. So we've got Humana. It's a health insurance company provider, and it's particularly working with Medicare money and packaging that money into more of like a private medical plan type thing?
Ms. FOXX. Correct. The Medicare Advantage Program.
The Humana organization sent a letter out to the people who participate in that program, saying, We want you to be aware of what's happening in this health care debate. We'd like you to send back a card so we can send you information about what's happening. We do want you to know that the current bill under consideration--they don't name H.R. 3200, but we assume that is the bill they were talking about--will be cutting funding for this program. Well, that is absolutely true. Anyone who reads that bill will see that it's true.
Mr. AKIN. So specifically, the bill that's being proposed by Nancy Pelosi--and indirectly by the President--is going to cut Medicare. Specifically in Medicare, it's going to cut Medicare Advantage, and Humana works with that. I just want to make sure we get this down.
Ms. FOXX. Sure.
And this is a program that seniors like very much. Well, where the rub comes in is suddenly the organization, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, doesn't like the fact that Humana is exercising its free speech options and educating the people that are being covered by its program and writes to them and says, You cannot do this anymore. You can't write letters to the people participating in your program. It says, ``We are instructing you to immediately discontinue all such mailings to beneficiaries and to remove any related materials directed to Medicare enrollees from your Web sites.''
Mr. AKIN. Wait, wait, wait. Stop again. I feel like I have just blasted off and gone to some other country or some other planet.
Ms. FOXX. You're living in 1984.
Mr. AKIN. You are saying that we have a private company who is insuring people. They write a letter to the people that are buying their product and say to them, essentially, you're being targeted by Nancy Pelosi's health care bill. So they are a constituency, they are a group of Americans who have a right to have an opinion. Obviously they're somewhat predisposed to like it because they wouldn't be in the program if they didn't like it, and they're being told, Your program is going to be cancelled. The program you like in Medicare is going to be canceled. So they're warning their people that are buying their product, Look out. You're about to lose something. If you like it, you're going to have to say something about it.
And now the government is threatening Humana for communicating?
Ms. FOXX. That is absolutely true.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT