Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act Of 2009--Motion To Proceed

Floor Speech

SERVICE MEMBERS HOME OWNERSHIP TAX ACT OF 2009--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - November 21, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I appreciate the great job done by my colleagues from Missouri, Alabama, and New Hampshire in pointing out many of the concerns we have with regard to this bill and why we think this is a bad direction to go.

You have heard my colleagues talk about a massive expansion of government, tax increases, premium increases; obviously, the very serious problem we have with our national debt and the deficits we are racking up every single year, to the tune of about $1 trillion or north of there, $1.4 trillion last year, on a pathway to hit that target this year.

I have heard my colleagues on the other side talk repeatedly about Republicans not having their own solution. I have to say, maybe the reason they haven't been seeing the Republican solution is because they have been hiding behind this voluminous 2,100-page bill at a cost of $1.2 billion per page. Republicans--hundreds of times, if not thousands--have come to the floor and outlined a step-by-step solution to dealing with the health care crisis and the concerns most Americans have which is the high cost of health care. Unfortunately, many of my colleagues on the other side perhaps have not been able to see that because they can't see around this $2.5 trillion expansion of the Federal Government they seem intent on pushing through the Senate. Republicans have talked about buying insurance across State lines, small business health plans, tort reform, incentives for wellness and chronic disease management. There is a whole range of things that could be done to address the concerns of the American people about the high cost of health care that do not involve a $2.5 trillion expansion of the government, a 2,100-page bill, at a cost of $1.2 billion per page.

The other thing I have heard my colleagues say is we have to do something. People in this country are dealing about the high cost of health care. They are. We all hear it. We hear it from small businesses, from families, and from individuals. Everybody is concerned about the high cost of health care. In fact, a number of my colleagues on the other side have said of all the bankruptcies that occur every year, most occur because of the high cost of health care. Get this, America: Under their proposal, you will go bankrupt sooner. Because they drive the cost of health care up. They don't do anything to bend the cost curve down.

I want to show a chart which points out what happens to the cost curve under the Democratic plan we are talking about. The blue represents the current cost curve. That is the increase in health care costs we would see if nothing is done, year-over-year increases into the future. What we would expect, if we were going to reform health care, is that line starting to bend down a little bit so that health care increases go down over time instead of up.

What happens? Under this proposal--and this is the CBO; this isn't what I am saying or any of my Republican colleagues, this is what the Congressional Budget Office says--the Democratic plan we are talking about increases the cost of health care. It bends the cost curve up; $160 billion more will be spent on health care if their plan gets enacted. All those people who are concerned about the high cost of health care today are not getting any relief under the Democratic plan. In fact, their lives will get much worse--in particular, those who already have health care.

There are some in this proposal who will get some subsidies to buy insurance in a health care exchange. That affects about 19 million Americans. But there are 182 million Americans who currently have health care who, if this bill passes, are going to be faced with higher taxes and higher premiums. That is the way it works. They are ineligible to get any subsidies to buy insurance. In fact, they don't have any more options available to them. What they are facing is higher taxes that they will be faced with under this bill, as well as higher premium costs.

If you are the average person who is worried about cost, which I think most Americans are, and you are watching what is happening here in Washington, you have to be asking yourself: What is the whole purpose of going through a health care reform debate if, in fact, it doesn't do anything to drive down the cost of health care?

My colleagues have pointed out that when you spend $2.5 trillion, when you expand the Federal Government by that amount, when you raise taxes on medical device manufacturers, on prescription drugs, on health plans themselves, and when you cut Medicare providers and, if you believe this, this is something that seems hard to fathom, that any of this would ever take effect, but this $2.5 trillion is paid for in the form of Medicare cuts and tax increases, tax increases when it is fully implemented over a 10-year period, as the Senator from New Hampshire pointed out, about $1.2 trillion, about $1.1 trillion in Medicare cuts--who in this Chamber believes that $1.1 trillion in Medicare cuts is going to occur? There was a discussion between the Senator from New Hampshire and the Senator from Missouri about what happened a few years ago when the Senator from New Hampshire was chairman of the Budget Committee and proposed cutting $10 billion out of Medicare over a 5-year period, which amounts to $2 billion a year. What we are talking about here is $1.1 trillion over 10 when fully implemented or $100 billion a year. When he proposed cutting $2 billion a year over 5 out of Medicare, there wasn't a single Democratic vote in support of that. In fact, the Vice President had to come back from a trip to Pakistan to vote on it to try and reduce Medicare by $10 billion. They are talking about, when it is fully implemented, $1 trillion in Medicare cuts. Do you know who that hits?

Mr. GREGG. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. THUNE. Yes, sir.

Mr. GREGG. It is important to know where that cut is proposed to primarily fall. Is Medicare Advantage used by a number of seniors in South Dakota?

Mr. THUNE. It is. I assume it is in New Hampshire.

Mr. GREGG. Under this plan, it will be eliminated for all intents and purposes.

Mr. THUNE. That is where a big share of the savings is going to hit, senior citizens, right squarely between the eyes, if they get benefits under Medicare Advantage. In addition, $135 billion comes from hospitals; $15 billion from nursing homes; $40 billion from home health agencies; $8 billion from hospices. Does anybody believe all that will happen? And if it doesn't happen, guess what, it all goes on the Federal debt.

I thought it was interesting that last week when the President was in Asia, the Chinese raised the issue with him about what happens if health care reform passes. They weren't worried about universal coverage or a public option. They were worried about what impact it is going to have on the deficit.

According to the New York Times and their reporting on his trip:

The Chinese wanted to know in painstaking detail how the health care plan would affect the deficit, said one participant.

They are worried about their investment because they are the biggest buyer of American debt. What happens to all these Medicare cuts that are proposed? We couldn't get 51 votes to cut $2 billion a year out of Medicare a few short years ago, and they are talking about cutting, when it is fully implemented, $100 billion a year. Does anybody believe we will cut $15 billion out of nursing homes? I don't think so. Here we are. How do we pay for it?

If it isn't paid for in Medicare cuts or tax increases, it all goes on the Federal debt which is growing at over a trillion dollars a year.

This is a bad deal for the American taxpayer. It is a bad deal for the 182 million Americans who already have insurance. They don't get anything out of this. What do they get? Higher taxes and higher premiums.

Listen to what CBO says: $160 billion in additional health care costs over this time period. It bends the cost curve not down but up. That is what we get. That is why so many business organizations have come out opposed to this, because they know the impact it will have on small businesses. The best way to get health care coverage to more people in America, as long as we continue to have an employer-based health care system, is to get people a job. People who are struggling with the economy right now and losing jobs, the thing we ought to be doing is figuring out how can we provide incentives for small businesses to put people back to work, not how can we kill jobs by raising taxes on small businesses.

That is exactly what we are doing right here. That is why every business organization--the National Federation of Independent Businesses, to the Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, right on down the list--is opposed to this bill. They know the impact it would have on small businesses and their ability to create jobs. The best way--best way--you can get health insurance today in America is to get a job. This bill kills jobs.

I yield to the Senator from Louisiana.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source