Recognition of the Minority Leader

Floor Speech

RECOGNITION OF THE MINORITY LEADER -- (Senate - December 05, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I want to talk about the breathtaking audacity of this bill, in a takeover of yet another important sector of our economy, at a time when our economy is in recession--and the President was wondering at his job summit just on Thursday, how come the private sector seems to be on the sidelines when they should be back in the game creating jobs. This bill is exactly one of the reasons for that outcome.

This bill is chock-full of avenues that lead to more and more Washington control over our health care system and our economy. The amendment of the Senator from Arkansas would give Washington control over how much money health care executives would make. But we know as a practical matter, in terms of limiting executive compensation, section 162(m) has been a disaster.

Actually, in the past, when Congress has attempted to do this, it has exacerbated the problem by encouraging companies to come up with different ways of compensating their executives that would not be subject to those limitations. This is ineffective in accomplishing the goal the Senator claims she wants.

This amendment also adds to the complexity--it adds mud to the already muddy waters--by imposing complex limitations on just one industry, as has been described.

I listened this morning--amazed--when there were offers to include other organizations such as AARP, which has reaped hundreds of billions of dollars of income from insurance sales, and executives at Walmart in the Senator's home State, who are also involved in the health care industry. Of course, those were rejected. Our favorite game around here is to try to demonize certain parts of the private sector and, of course, if the private sector is not involved in creating jobs, all that leaves is the government.

In health care, all that will do--once there is no private health insurance available because of draconian mandates, taxes, and limitations on compensation--is eventually leave the government as a single-payer provider of health care in this country. I suspect that may be the ultimate goal.

We already know the Reid bill will force millions of seniors to purchase so-called Medicare gap products which, by coincidence, are sold by AARP. We have heard Senators come to the floor and quote AARP as if it was holy writ, and somehow they represent all seniors. We know they have a blatant conflict of interest in supporting this bill, particularly as to stripping out Medicare Advantage benefits so they can sell more of our seniors Medigap coverage, which Medicare Advantage eliminates the need for.

We also know this bill provides more power to Washington and is taking it away from individuals in other ways by limiting individuals to only four different options for what kinds of health coverage they can get. There is no room for innovation or flexibility. We know, ultimately, that drives up the cost for people who have insurance now--their health insurance premiums.

We ought at least be as good to the American people as we are to ourselves as Members of Congress. We have almost 300 different health care plan options under the Federal employees health care benefits. Why should the American people accept less choices when it comes to their health care than Members of Congress? They should not.

These health insurance market reforms are designed to give Washington more power. More and more studies have said new controls by Washington will do nothing but drive up the cost of insurance. The Congressional Budget Office said they will go up by $2,100 for American families. A new study came out yesterday saying that, in Texas, premiums would go up for 61 percent of individuals purchasing their insurance in the individual market.

The President of the United States said his goal for health care reform was to lower the cost of health insurance for the average American family by $2,500. By that test, this bill fails to deliver on the President's promise.

Then there is, of course, the expansion of other government programs that, while they promise coverage, limit access to care by the way they are structured. This bill purports to give 94 percent of the American people health care coverage but does so by putting 15 million more Americans on the Medicaid Program. Of the 31 million newly insured under the Reid bill, the only choice of 15 million would be Medicaid. Of course, we know Medicaid--for example, in Dallas, TX, only 38 percent of doctors will see a new Medicaid patient because reimbursement rates are so low that a doctor cannot see Medicaid patients and leave his or her door open to see other patients. We, in essence, condemn low-income persons to a health care gulag, where they are offered coverage but have no access to health care. For 60 million Americans, Medicaid would be their only choice.

The $120 billion cuts to Medicare Advantage that we talked about earlier gives more power to Washington and takes it away from the individual. By cutting the private part of Medicare under Medicare Advantage, it would result in seniors having no choice but Medicare fee for service. Medicare fee for service compensates doctors at about 80 percent of what private insurance does. That is why, in Texas, 42 percent of the doctors will not see a new Medicare patient under the Medicare fee-for-service payment formula. Frankly, it pays so low that they cannot afford to see new Medicare patients.

That means, again, this fraud is perpetrated on the American people--our seniors--saying we are going to keep our promise to them by providing coverage by effectively denying access to care because the reimbursement rates are so low.

This bill gives the government more power over people, and it takes it away from individuals in a number of other ways. While advocates describe it as a way to create competition and choice, the reality is it would drive out competition from the market and ultimately become the only choice for millions of American people. The so-called public option, which sounds relatively innocuous until people realize the effect of that, and the pay-or-play mandate on small businesses, which kills jobs, creates a rational decisionmaking process, and employers that will drop employees from the current private coverage, only to be left on a government-run plan, the so-called government option, which will end up, in the end, being anything but optional--denying power to the individual to make their own decisions in consultation with their doctor and family, and giving Washington more power over their lives.

There are good reasons the vast majority of Americans don't trust Washington with running our health care system--an issue that so intimately affects all 300 million of us in America. We know Washington has a lousy record at managing spending. We have a $12 trillion national debt and, before the end of this month, the administration and the majority leader will come to Members of Congress and say: Would you please lift the statutory debt limit because we maxed out our credit card and we need to lift the statutory debt limit.

Our entitlement programs are out of control, with Medicare running an unfunded liability of $38 trillion. The majority wants to take $ 1/2 trillion from Medicare and use it not to fix Medicare but to create a new entitlement program. Washington running health care means the personal health care decisions will be impacted by lobbyists and special interests rather than the interests of the American people. That is the reason the insurance industry has been supportive of health care up until now. There is $450 billion in tax dollars that will flow directly to the insurance industry under this bill in the form of tax credits.

The hospital associations cut a deal so they would not be subject to the axe of the so-called ``independent'' Medicare advisory board.

Everyone has heard about the deal that the pharmaceutical industry cut,
in which it would result in them running ads supporting Members of Congress who support this bill because they want to protect their special deal cut behind closed doors. We heard Senator McCain talk about the special deal cut in this bill for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries in Florida--another special political deal in order to secure a vote to support this bad deal--but it left out seniors in Pennsylvania and California.

I believe if there is any special deal to be cut, every senior who is a beneficiary under Medicare Advantage ought to have the same deal, not any more of these behind-closed-doors special deals in order to secure votes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.

Mr. CORNYN. There is just one job-killing policy after another in this bill, and this is the latest.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source