The Progressive Message

Floor Speech

Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, my name is Keith Ellison. I am here to speak for the Progressive Caucus, to talk about the Progressive Message.

Tonight, before I begin, I just want to say that my heart is sick and broken for the horrible tragedy that occurred at Fort Hood, and I ask all Americans to keep the families in their prayers and in their thoughts.

I now will proceed with the hour.

Tonight is the Progressive Message, we are here to talk about a progressive message for America, a message that says the human and civil rights of all people must be respected; a message that says dignity of people, regardless of their race, class or religion must be respected; a dignity that says that if 36 other countries in the world can provide universal health care coverage for their citizens, how come the richest country in the world, not only the richest country in the world but the richest country in the history of the world, can't do it.

Why do we have 50 million people who are not covered? Why do we have a doubling of premiums for the people who do have health care coverage? Why do we have people being excluded for a preexisting condition? Why do we have these things?

Well, the time for those things to end is now. We are within grasp of major health care reform and no scare tactics, no fear-mongering, no stretches of the facts are going to change that.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are quite upset about the present state of affairs because they know that Americans want health care reform. They want health care reform, and I believe they're going to get it.

I want to say that I have spent these last several weeks talking about the problem. I have also spent many days discussing the Democratic bill, and I will do so tonight.

But I want to spend a little time talking about what our friends on the other side of the aisle are proposing in their bill because, ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Speaker, we haven't heard much detail from the Republican side of the aisle. We haven't heard much at all, but they recently put forth an outline of a plan, an outline of a plan, not a plan, but just sort of like an outline of one, and it's not good.

It was always convenient to just bang, bang, bang on what the Democrats were proposing, but now that America has said, okay, you guys don't like what the Democrats are calling for, what have you got? And their answer was less than satisfactory.

Under the GOP health plan--I don't believe it's been introduced as a bill yet; it's just sort of a plan--people with preexisting conditions would pay up to 50 percent more than average for insurance coverage under the GOP plan. States would have to cover the rest of the tab with a stable funding source. This is Roll Call, November 4, 2009. Check it out. Under the Republican plan, most States already have such plans but typically are much more expensive than regular insurance and have not made much of a dent in the ranks of the uninsured. Also from Roll Call.

A key piece of earlier Republican drafts, tax credits that would help people afford insurance, was rejected by the House minority leader as too expensive. Also Roll Call, November 4.

The Republican measure has no limits on annual out-of-pocket costs, which means bankruptcy for some. But let me quote from the Roll Call article: The Republican measure has no limits on annual out-of-pocket costs, nor does it provide any direct assistance for uninsured people to buy insurance.

So how are we going to deal with the uninsured problem, which you and I pay for anyway?

The Congressional Budget Office, the CBO, has said on Wednesday that an alternative health care plan put forward by House Republicans would have, quote, little impact in extending health care benefits to roughly 30 million uninsured Americans. This is from the New York Times.

Do you mean to tell me after all this attacking of the Democrats' proposal, the Democratic plan, that the Republicans have just bashed us, week after week, day after day, hour after hour, minute after minute--oh, it's bad, bad, bad, and that's all you ever hear is ``no''--they finally come up with their idea and they're going to leave 30 million people uninsured?

This has got to be April Fool's Day come early. The Republican bill has no chance of passage, because Americans really don't want it, because if they did, we would be talking about it. But I quote again from the New York Times: The Republican bill, which has no chance of passage, would extend insurance coverage to about 3 million people by the year 2019.

Why aren't they embarrassed? I have no idea. The Republican bill, which has no chance of passage, would extend insurance coverage to about 3 million people by 2019, and, continuing to quote, would leave 52 million people uninsured. The budget office said, meaning the proportion of nonelderly Americans with coverage would remain about the same as it is now, roughly at 83 percent.

Let me read it again. The proportion of nonelderly Americans with coverage would remain about the same as now, about 83 percent, meaning that we have upwards of 16 to 17 percent who don't have insurance.

Going along with the Republican plan, the Republican plan tonight, as we are discussing the Progressive Message, we're just going to talk about their plan since they got real expert talking about ours, we're going to let the American people know the real facts about the Republican plan. This is not a criticism or an attack on any individual member of the party apposite. I regard that they are honorable people, but we have to talk about their plan because it's not a good one. And the reason they haven't been bragging about it is because not even they are proud of it.

The Congressional Budget Office umpires say the House Republican health plan would only make a small dent in the number of uninsured Americans. Let me say that again. According to the Associated Press article on November 4, 2009, Congressional Budget umpires say, quote, the House Republican health plan would make only a small dent in the number of uninsured Americans.

Wait a minute. I thought that they had some great plan. How can you not make a dent in the number of uninsured Americans and still claim you have a good plan? Their plan is an embarrassment. They're not bragging about it because they, themselves, know that it's far more strategic to just bash away on the Democratic plan rather than talk about their own plan, which is nothing but status quo and keep insurance companies making lots and lots and lots of money. That's what it's all about--protect the wealthy and let everybody else do the best they can with what they got.

Let me go to another important quote: Late Wednesday, last night, a bill that Republicans expect to offer as an alternative to the Democratic package received its assessment from the congressional budget analysts who concluded that the proposal wouldn't do anything to help reduce the ranks of the uninsured. The CBO said some people would see higher premiums, including older and sicker people.

This is the Republican plan? Here is one. The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, begins with the baseline estimate that 17 percent of legal nonelderly residents won't have health care in 2010. That's a lot of people. Seventeen percent of legal nonelderly residents won't have health care insurance in 2010. That's an indictment of the status quo, which the Republicans support.

But, in 2019, after 10 years of the Republican plan, the CBO estimates that it will still be stuck at 17 percent of the legal nonelderly residents not having insurance.

That is from the Washington Post today.

My goodness, how in the world can our friends from the other side of the aisle claim that they are offering an improvement on the status quo when they are not changing the proportion of the uninsured even 10 years from now?

This is a scathing indictment, and I don't expect to hear them talk much about their plan. And, if they do, they are not going to tell you about this, because this is embarrassing to them. They don't want this out. They don't want you to know about this. They want you to just keep on listening to the nonsense about death panels and school sex clinics, and they want to talk about the polarizing political issue of abortion. And I want to get to this issue of abortion in a little while.

But I want to say that they want to use polarizing language, polarizing issues that divide Americans. They want to throw up scare tactics, all of it ultimately accruing to the benefit of the status quo now, which is an industry that reaps enormous magnitudes of profit at the expense of citizens who see their premiums escalate and see themselves denied coverage and see rescissions and see all these things that have cost the American economy dearly and the American middle class.

This is a Washington Post quote: ``The Republican alternative will have helped 3 million people secure coverage, which is barely keeping up with the population growth. Compare that to the Democratic bill, which covers 36 million more people and cuts the uninsured population down to 4 percent.''

How can the Republicans have a straight face and offer this bill? How can they look you in the eye, after months and months of all of these disruptive meetings, where people were disrupting meetings and causing so much trouble, causing so much fear, and this is what they have to show for it?

Madam Speaker, I can't believe that they honestly are offering this as a proposal.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Grand Old Party, the Republican Party's alternative, will shave or cut $86 billion off the deficit in 10 years. But get this: the Democrats, according to the CBO, will cut $104 billion off the deficit. The Democratic bill is fiscally superior to the Republican alternative.

According to the Washington Post today, you can read it, according to the CBO, the Republican alternative only cuts $68 billion off the deficit in the next 10 years. The Democratic bill cuts $104 billion off the deficit. That is just about $40 million more.

Wait a minute. Aren't these the guys who always complain about the deficit and spending and all this? Maybe that claim rings hollow.

The Democratic bill, however, in other words, covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. Let me just say this again for people listening out there. I know you have been scared.

They want to tell you that the Democrats want to take away Medicare. Not true. They are trying to tell you the Democrats are trying to change the scenario as it relates to this very polarizing issue among Americans, abortion. It basically keeps things as they are today. They are trying to talk about death panels and school sex clinics, and they are trying to say that health care reform is only about the uninsured.

None of these things are true, and it is important to come to the House floor and refute these false allegations. It is not the case, it is not right, it isn't true.

I just want to say I am so proud to be joined by one of the finest Members of this body, my dear friend from the great State of California, Diane Watson. She is going to get her papers together; but when she is ready to start talking, I am going to yield to her right away.

I just want to say the Democratic bill that has been released covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. It covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. Yes, I am going to keep saying this on the House floor. It needs to be said.

The fact is, today we had a lot of visitors in Washington, and I want to say welcome to those folks. My colleague from the great State of Minnesota, and I am so proud to be from Minnesota, my friend, Congresswoman Bachmann, invited people down, and folks came. And I am glad they showed up, because democracy is good, and it is good to have people here.

Now, I will say that many of the people who came down to support my colleague from Minnesota, we probably didn't see the issue the same. But I just want to say, I was honored to have them in my office. I am so proud that I was able to talk to my colleagues.

But here is the thing that broke my heart. As they were explaining to me what their concerns were, they were saying, I have been dropped because of a preexisting condition. They were saying, I have been unemployed and I can't find an insurance policy to cover me. They were saying, I am afraid that I am going to go bankrupt. My family doesn't have any money. I lost my job. My husband lost his job. What are we going to do? And I said, you know what? You got on the wrong bus coming here, my friend. This Democratic bill is the one you need to be looking at.

The fact is that good people have been scared away from policy that is going to help them. Good people, made afraid that policies that are going to help them are not for them. And that is a shame.

So we had to come down here to the House floor today to explain that the fact is that middle class, working-class people struggling to make ends meet are going to benefit from the Democrats' proposal.

I just want to say that after years of the Republicans being in power, years where they had the House, the White House, the Senate, doing nothing at all to help Americans, Democrats are taking care of business right now. I am so glad we had a lot of people and I was able to talk to constituents and others about this important issue of health care. Some of us started out not on the same page, but we ended up a lot closer together because I was able to say here are the true facts, not the made-up ones.

I yield to the gentle lady from California.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ELLISON. I talked to some of the people walking around today. I was impressed with how good and decent many of them were. Many didn't have the facts straight. Many were suffering with real problems with health care. I think we need to take the time to talk to people. The fact is everyone knows there are certain TV people and radio personalities, and I am not even going to give them credit by mentioning their names, but these people, because of entertainment and ratings, they try to play on tear and whip up anxiety among Americans who are just trying to put food on the table. So they get scared.

People want to express themselves politically, but the leaders in front of them are not giving them good alternatives, they are just giving them fear. They are saying, Be afraid of those immigrants. Be afraid of those people over there who are not the same religion as you. Be afraid of these people over here. Just be afraid. As people are afraid, they are easier to manipulate. We ask people to overcome their fear and get the facts.

If I may just offer a few more critiques of the Republican bill. Here is what The Washington Post said: Amazingly, the Democratic bill has already been through three committees and a merger process. It is already being shown to interest group and advocacy organizations and industry stakeholders. It has already made compromises and been through the legislative sausage grinder. And yet, it covers more people and saves more money than the blank-slate alternative proposed by House Republicans.

Now I just want to ask the gentlelady from California, we have been working on health care for a long, long time. I have had to deal with angry folks at angry community meetings. People are worried. They are concerned. We have walked through that fiery furnace and done those tough town meetings. We have withstood all of that. You would think that our bill would be watered down to the point where it couldn't help anybody, but that isn't the case. The Democratic bills covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. How can that be? The Republican plan, which was just recently introduced to the American people, actually doesn't save as much money and doesn't cover as many people as the Democratic plan when they are just getting started.

You and I know when you first introduce a bill, it is just going to get sandpapered. People are going to wear it away. People show up and say, I don't like this part, and I don't like that part. After a while, your bill used to be here, and it is getting less and less. It doesn't meet as much of your vision, but that is okay, that is democracy. We have to come in here and we have to give and take and try and consider everybody's interests.

But this Democratic bill, having gone through a very rigorous process of democracy, the writer here calls it a sausage grinder, still saves way more money and covers way more people than the Republican bill. I want to know, how can that possibly be? Where are these great ideas we have been hearing about?

You remember during President Obama's speech in this very room, they're holding up pieces of paper, here is our plan, here is our plan, and they come up with a plan that is more expensive and doesn't cover as many people as the Democratic plan. There is a reason why the American people voted overwhelmingly to send Democrats to Congress last November because this is the best they could come up with. It is actually quite embarrassing. I feel a little bad for them.

I yield back to the gentlelady.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. WATSON. I always say be a seeker of truth. I taught school for many years. I told my youngsters, you need to reason. Let's think this through together. I can tell you anything. Seek the truth. Check it out. When it is said that we are going to take benefits away from seniors, that is untrue.

When it is said that government, who fails at everything it does, you know, how are they going to do this, we are not running the program. What we do is allow citizens to come to the marketplace and choose a plan, A, that they can afford; B, that is accessible; C, that will allow them to get into the coverage even if they have asthma, even if they had breast cancer, even if they have diabetes, they can come in and be covered.

You can say to seniors under our plan, when you hit that doughnut hole, you won't go through the hole and hit rock bottom because we are going to close that hole.

Mr. ELLISON. Which party was in power when the doughnut hole, the doughnut hole that people are falling into that needs to be fixed and is going to be fixed by the Democrats, what party was in power when the doughnut hole came to be?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ELLISON. I thank the gentlelady and appreciate the gentlelady's remarks about collegiality, and also the gentlelady reassuring our seniors about what is really in the bill. This whole fear thing about scaring seniors about taking away their Medicare, I really don't appreciate. My dad was born in 1928 and my mom was born in 1938. Both of them are folks who would be classified as seniors, both very active, vibrant people, and both of them definitely active at the polling places and voting.

And they've actually asked me, Is this really true? And I have to explain, Mom, no, it isn't true. But the reality is this is a campaign tactic to try to scare seniors and try to scare all kinds of Americans. I'm of the mind that, let's not use fear tactics, let's use logic and truth.

Here's a few facts:

The House Republican bill will cover just about 3 million more Americans over the course of 10 years. Today, 83 percent of the nonelderly Americans are insured. Under the GOP plan, 83 percent of nonelderly Americans would still be the proportion of the uninsured in 2019. No change.

So I ask the gentlelady, look, if the problem today is the high percentage of the uninsured, people who are authorized to be in America and people who are nonelderly, if the proportion of uninsured is 17 percent, shouldn't we be better off in 10 years? Under the Republican plan, we will not be. I think that is a complete failure of their effort.

The Affordable Health Care for America Act put forward by the Democratic-led Congress extends coverage to 36 million more Americans. Today, 83 percent of the nonelderly Americans are uninsured. Under the Democratic plan, 96 percent of nonelderly Americans will be insured. That's what I call success. I hope some of our friends on the other side of the aisle come on and join this plan that's good for America.

The House Republican bill does not reduce the number of people who must buy insurance on the individual market because they're self-insured, don't have coverage of their employer, or lose their jobs. This segment of the market now pays the highest premiums and consumer abuses by the insurance industry. No change in this unfair practice.

The Affordable Health Care for America Act put forward by the Democrats creates a health insurance exchange with a public plan as one of the choices people have that provides competition and offers large group rates to employees of small businesses, entrepreneurs, and Americans looking for jobs. Under the Democratic plan, affordable options and affordability credits make all the difference, something the Republican plan--even though they've had all this time to think of something good, haven't been able to think of anything good at all.

Preexisting conditions. The Republican bill fails to require insurance companies to end the practice of discriminating against Americans with preexisting medical conditions. Let me just say this one more time, Mr. Speaker. The Republican bill fails to require insurance companies to end the practice of discriminating against Americans with preexisting conditions.

There's no wonder that they have and will spend their time this evening talking about the divisive, polarizing issue of abortion, this very important issue which has Americans of goodwill arguing both relatively strongly held positions, trying to get us fighting over that when we're talking about health care reform. They say, Don't worry about this health care reform. Let's talk about this divisive issue that has divided Americans for so long. This is not a bill about abortion. This is a bill about health care reform. Why don't they want to talk about that fact?

The Republican bill does not repeal antitrust exemptions for health insurance companies. Why not? The Republican bill does not repeal antitrust exemptions for health insurance companies. Why do they want to protect the health insurance companies? Why don't they want the health insurance companies to compete? Who is getting PAC money from the health insurance companies? Let's find out.

The House Republican bill does not include provisions to stop price gouging by insurance companies. Why not? The Affordable Health Care for Americans Act put forth by the Democrats--and, again, we've only had the White House for a few months and only had this Chamber, been the majority in the House for a couple of years; not long. We haven't been here long, but even though we haven't been here long, we've come up strong, because this bill, the Democratic bill, ends discrimination against Americans with preexisting medical conditions. The Democratic bill finally ends the antitrust exemption. The Democratic bill gives States $1 billion to crack down on price gouging by health insurance companies.

The fact is American consumers and small businesses deserve better than what the Republican bill offers to them. The Democratic bill, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, is a fiscally responsible bill that will reduce the deficit by $104 billion over 10 years; way more, way more, $36 billion more than the Republican bill. And I want to know, if the Democrats can face this very difficult process that we've gone through all summer--I had health care forums in my district and so did the gentlelady from California. Some people came up very upset because they've been listening to some of these radio guys and some of these TV guys scaring them and giving them misinformation, so they come into the meeting upset, loaded for bear. They want to talk to me. I want to talk to you, Mr. Ellison. But when the facts come out, they're like, Oh, okay, I get it now. And we just ask people to keep their minds open.

I just say that if the Republicans have a real alternative around health care, how come they didn't come up with anything in the House from 1994 to 2006? Nothing did they come up with. Oh, they did veto SCHIP. We've got to give them credit for that. Vetoed SCHIP. Vetoed State Children's Health Insurance Program; can you imagine that? Oh, my goodness. I think that that is not good service to the American people.

I do hope we get some Republican votes on this bill because I think there has got to be some Republicans who say, You know what? Skip all the bickering. The Democrats have been open to our ideas when we offered them, but we didn't offer them because we would rather beat the Democrats at the polls than give Americans real health care reform. Think about that. They would rather beat the Democrats at the polls and try to use this as a political thing rather than say, You know what? We're going to do something for the American people. Oh, my goodness.

Let me turn to this poster board I have here. The Democratic bill--let's set the record straight. Here's a myth: The Democratic bill will hurt small businesses. Not true. If you heard it today or if you hear it later today, don't believe it. Small chemical facilities are already regulated by the DHS. The bill requires DHS to assess potential impacts of IST on small businesses. And $225 billion in grant funding is available for small businesses.

This will interfere with business operations. The fact is is that this bill will not interfere with business operations, it will not be a boon to plaintiffs' attorneys, and it will not do any of these things that are claimed by the Republicans over and over and over again.

We hear the Republicans say we need to have tort reform. Let me just say, if you have a loved one who has a medical error, you have a right to go to court over that. Don't let anybody scare you away from your right to go to court when a doctor or a hospital fails to meet medical standards.

Ms. WATSON. Would you yield?

Mr. ELLISON. Yes, I will.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ELLISON. Well, let me just thank the gentlelady for that, because the reality is that Republicans are saying, Oh, we have a plan on tort reform and we want to give tax cuts and tax breaks--they've been talking about fragments of their plan for a long time, but when the reality of their plan came out, it was pretty dismal. I mean, here's what Ezra Klein says, of the Washington Post: Republicans are learning an unpleasant lesson this morning. The only thing worse than having no health care reform plan is releasing a bad one, getting thrashed by the CBO, and making the House Democrats look good.

We want to thank you for that.

The Democratic bill covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. The New York Times, the Budget Monitor says: GOP leaves many uninsured.

Again, the Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday that the alternative health care bill put forward by House Republicans would have little impact on extending health benefits to roughly 30 million uninsured Americans. You can go right down the ranks, but piece after piece shows that this Republican plan that they released is abysmal.

I want to have some conversation about the Republican plan, because they've been beating up on the Democratic plan from the very beginning, yet it has gone through three committees. It has had a merger process. It has been beaten and smashed and attacked, and yet, still, still the Democratic bill is far and away superior to the Republican plan, maintains its public option. The fact is I think the American people are really going to start seeing who is looking out for their health.

Let me turn now to a few health care stories if I may.

A good friend, Amy. Amy says, ``I'm a graduate student working part-time at a restaurant. I applied for individual health insurance through Medica, hoping to pay their nice low rate, $99 a month for a pretty good plan and a fairly low deductible; however, Medica denied my individual application because I marked on my application that I have anxiety and take medication for it. It is a little ironic; not having insurance gives me more anxiety.

``I was recently approved for group health insurance through a company that owns the restaurant I work for. However, to stay on the group plan, I have to maintain a workload of 24 hours a week on average over a year, which can be hard to do as a full-time student. This group insurance is through Medica, and I will be paying $95 each month, which is affordable for me. However, I got a letter from Medica saying that my anxiety is considered a preexisting condition, so any treatment or medication for it will not be covered for a year. After 1 year, I can appeal for coverage. In the meantime, I will continue to pay for my medication out of pocket and not go to therapy because it will be too expensive.

``Please pass Federal health care reform that includes a public health insurance option that is affordable to middle-income families in Minnesota.''

This young lady would not be barred from getting health care insurance because of her anxiety, which the insurance company called a preexisting condition, yet under the Republican plan she still would be.

David from Minneapolis: ``I am a small business owner and do provide health care to my employees, but this is a serious financial risk to my company. It's a moral issue, so I don't want
to cancel health insurance, but I might have to in order to survive. It's scary to think about not being able to provide health insurance for employees or going under as a business. Knowing that I would always have access to reliable, affordable health care would relieve my fears.

``I would like to tell those who oppose health care reform that this is a moral issue. We should be taking care of each other. It's an embarrassment to our country to be one of the wealthiest countries and not have health care for all. Please pass Federal health care reform that includes a public insurance option.''

We've been joined by Jared Polis, who is an excellent advocate for the people's rights. He has been very vocal and has been a strong advocate of health care reform. I want to turn it over and yield to my friend from Colorado (Mr. Polis).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ELLISON. I just want to say thank you, Madam Speaker, for allowing us the time for the Progressive message. I yield back the balance of my time.

END

Source