Commerce, Justice, Science, And Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Florida for coming to the floor and expressing his point of view on the issue of health care, and I would like to have a few minutes to express my own.

Let me explain our health insurance, the health insurance we have as Members of Congress. It is a government-administered health insurance plan. It has been around for 40 years. It is called the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. It is a government plan that provides health insurance for most of the Senators in both parties and their families, and it establishes minimum standards for the health insurance we receive as Members of Congress so we do not end up buying health insurance that is worthless when we need it. The government picks up a share of the cost--70 percent or so, I believe--and we pick up the rest. If you decide in the open enrollment period of each year that you want to change your insurance company, you want more coverage, then you are going to pay a higher premium out of your paycheck. The government pays a share of it, but you will pay a higher premium. that is something like an insurance exchange. In Illinois, my wife and I, through the Federal employees program, can choose from nine different private health insurance plans. It is a dream come true that most Americans never, ever experience: competition and choice.

That is at the heart of health care reform. We want to give to people across America the same thing we have as Members of Congress. I have yet to hear the first Senator come and stand in this well or stand before a microphone and say: The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program is socialism. It is a government-run health care program and it mandates benefits, and therefore I cannot in good conscience insure my family with it, and I am turning in my Federal employees health insurance. Not one. Yet when we suggest that for the rest of America, they say: This is an awful idea. It will never work.

It has worked for 40 years in providing private health insurance for Members of Congress and Federal employees. It is what we want to make available for small businesses, which have no choices. If Members on the other side think this is such a bad idea, I want them to march down the middle of this aisle and say: We are giving up our Federal Employees Health Benefits Programs today; it is such a bad idea. But they will not because it is a great program and it works and it gives us choice and it empowers us as consumers. If we do not like the way we are treated by an insurance company, we can shop for another one next year in open enrollment.

So to argue insurance exchanges are some radical notion--really? We live with it every day as Members of Congress. Don't the people of America deserve as good of insurance as their Members of Congress? That is the starting point in this debate. I think they do.

Secondly, when it comes to whether health care reform is going to add to the deficit, we can debate that for a long time. But the people who are the experts, the umpires, and referees, are from the Congressional Budget Office. They came back and told us: If you do this health care reform, you will reduce the deficit by over $100 billion in the first 10 years and by over $1 trillion in the second 10 years. That is it. They looked at it. They analyzed it, and they concluded it. I hear Members come to the floor and say: Oh, this is just going to run the deficit up to higher levels than we have ever seen before. There is no evidence of that. The CBO analysis comes out with exactly the opposite position.

This argument about heaping a new burden on Governors because there will be more people on Medicaid--Medicaid is health insurance for the poor and disabled in America, and the Federal Government pays at least 50 percent of the cost of it. It is true the States have to assume a burden. But it also says to the State of Illinois, with 11 percent unemployment, when people lose their jobs and lose their health insurance and go on Medicaid, the Federal Government is going to pick up, in this case, 62 percent of the cost of these Medicaid recipients in my State of Illinois, and 38 percent is going to be picked up by the State. So Governors can say Medicaid is a terrible thing. What is the alternative? More uninsured people in your State showing up seriously ill and needing treatment, being treated as charity patients? Is that the alternative?

I have listened carefully while the people on the other side of the aisle for over a year have criticized every idea we have come forward with on changing the health care system and making it more affordable. I have yet to see them come forward with any kind of comprehensive bill. They have ideas, and some of them are not bad, but they have never put them together in a bill and brought them to the floor. We have. That is the responsibility of governing.

There are other elements here too.

The Senator from Florida is naturally concerned about senior citizens, and he should be. His State has a lot of snow birds from Illinois going down to Florida who spend their winters there and some of them end up becoming permanent residents. They love the nice climate in your State. We miss it. We go visit too, I might add. But the point is if we do nothing about Medicare, it is going to run out of money in 9 years. It will run out of money and 40 million people plus will wonder why Congress didn't act.

The health care reform bill adds 10 more years to the life of Medicare. It closes the gap known as the doughnut hole in prescription drug coverage under Medicare, and it gives every senior citizen a free annual checkup so they can at least get in to see a doctor and find out if something has happened that might be stopped early and avoid a major expense or major illness. Those are dramatically positive improvements in Medicare.

Are we going to have to take some money out of Medicare spending? Yes. Why? Because we have waste in the system and things that need to be reconciled. For the Senator from Florida, let me give a couple of illustrations. I lived in Springfield, IL. The average expenditure annually for Medicare recipients in my hometown is $7,600 a year average. The average in Chicago, IL, for Medicare recipients is $9,600 a year. The average expenditure for Medicare recipients in Miami, FL, is $17,000 a year. Miami may be a little bit more expensive than Chicago--we can argue that point--but is it twice as expensive? I don't think so. I want to know why. Why does it cost so much more in Miami, FL, and in McAllen, TX, for Medicare patients than it does in Chicago or Springfield or Rochester, MN? And are there ways to save money without compromising quality?

Senator MICHAEL BENNET of Colorado offered an amendment adopted on the floor that said when we get done cutting waste and fraud, we are not going to cut the basic benefits under Medicare. We are on record. That is part of the bill. That is part of the health care reform bill. We could make Medicare better and stronger and save money. There are a lot of things being ripped off in Medicare. Turn on late-night TV and watch all the come-on ads for people to come and get something they may or may not need and Medicare is going to take care of it. Those are the things we ought to take a look at and I think it is well worthwhile.

Let me also say this: We cannot as a nation address the problems of health care with 50 million people uninsured and the numbers growing dramatically. Our proposal will put 30 million of those under the protection of Medicaid and health insurance through exchanges. We will provide, thanks to the leadership of Senator Nelson of Nebraska, up to 2 or 3 years with the Federal Government picking up every penny of the cost for the new Medicaid recipients; then, beyond that, high amounts--90, 95 percent--for several years. It is a reasonable transition for the States to absorb people who are now uninsured presenting themselves for care.

We end up with 30 million people with coverage. The Republicans' best effort addressing the 50 million uninsured in America covered 3 million. We can do better. We need to do better as a nation. Uninsured people show up at hospitals, incur costs, and pass them along to other people. I think we need to move forward on health care reform.

I had a call in my office on a Saturday. I was sitting around doing a few things at my desk by myself in my office and the phone rang in Springfield and a lady was calling from Nokomis, IL, which is not too far away from Springfield, in Montgomery County. It is a small town with a lot of retired farmers and a lot of conservative folks I have represented in Congress for a long time.

She said: Senator, whatever you do, don't vote for health care reform.

I said: Do you have health insurance?

She said: We do. My husband and I have health insurance.

I said: You can keep it. If you want to keep it, you can keep it. We are not changing that.

Well, I just worry about the government getting involved in it, she says. She says, When government gets involved in insurance, I am not sure it is a good thing.

I said: Is anybody in your family on Medicare?

Well, sure. We have all signed up for it and my mother who is 85 is on Medicare and recently had a surgery, major surgery at Memorial Medical Center in Springfield.

How is she doing?

Just fine.

I said: I am glad your mom could depend on Medicare to pick up the bills for the surgery and didn't have to exhaust her savings or sell whatever property she has left in this world. But that is a government health insurance plan, ma'am. It has been there for all of us. My contributions out of my paycheck help pay your mom's medical bills and that is just fine with me, because I think we are all in this American family and we should watch out for one another.

Well, she didn't see it that way and I am sure I didn't convince her. The phone is ringing off the hook in all the offices of Senators and Congressmen for and against this idea. There is a lot of misunderstanding out there. I think this is an important step forward for America. We have put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears in this effort and now we need to get it done. We need to give the American people an alternative, because watching health insurance premiums go up the way they are going up is unsustainable. Businesses can't afford it; individuals can't afford it; our Nation cannot afford it.

For those who stand on the floor and have different ideas, that is your right. As a Member of the Senate, that is your right--maybe your responsibility. But I also think you have a responsibility to come forward with your plan, with your idea, unless you think everything is fine and we ought to leave it the way it is; we shouldn't worry about the uninsured; we shouldn't be concerned about the increases in health insurance premiums; we shouldn't worry that Medicare is going to go broke in 9 years. If you think those are things that we should push aside and, as some say, let's start over, let's do baby steps, let's think about it later, let's go back to it next year, that is a point of view, but I don't think that is the responsibility we have as Members of the Senate to address the issues facing our Nation.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source