Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations For Fiscal Year 2010
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today, as I have done each week for over a month now, to give a doctor's second opinion about the health care bill that has now been signed into law. I do this as somebody who has practiced medicine, taken care of families in Wyoming since 1983. During that time, I was medical director of something called the Wyoming Health Fairs, offering low-cost blood screening for people all around the Cowboy State, giving them an opportunity to take more personal responsibility for their own health, to learn about their health, to help get their blood pressure under control, get their cholesterol down, and get their blood sugar under control, and diagnose cancers early.
All of this is aimed at early prevention, meaning better care, better survivability, which is what we need to do in this country--work on patient-centered health care.
Today, I bring to the floor of the Senate my second opinion because I think the bill that was passed into law has failed. It has failed and gotten the diagnosis and the treatment wrong.
The goal of health care reform should be to lower costs, increase quality, and increase access. I continue to believe the new health care law is bad for patients; it is bad for payers, the American taxpayers who are going to be footing the bill, and it is bad for providers, the nurses and doctors of this country who take care of those patients.
Fundamentally, I believe, unlike what the President said, this whole law is now going to increase the cost of care. The American people believe that overwhelmingly, that this is going to increase the cost of their care and it is also going to decrease the quality and availability of the care, to the point that a national poll released just this Monday shows 62 percent of Americans would like to repeal and replace the bill that has now been signed into law.
As the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, said: First you have to pass the bill to find out what is in it. As more and more Americans are finding out what is in the bill, they are finding there are more and more broken promises.
The President gave a speech, and he said: If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan, period.
He then went on to say: No one will take it away, period.
He said: No matter what, period.
But the Chief Actuary of Medicare and Medicaid says that 14 million Americans will lose their employer-sponsored health coverage under this law. The President is saying one thing, but the Chief Actuary for Medicare and Medicaid is saying something very different. That is why the American people do not feel this bill--now the law--was passed for them. It is for somebody else.
Most Americans have health insurance they like and are happy with, except for the cost. Unfortunately, what this body passed and what the President signed is going to increase the cost and decrease the availability. For people who like what they have, they are not going to be able to keep it.
One might say: Where do you come up with that? There was a lengthy article written called ``Documents reveal AT&T, Verizon, others thought about dropping employer-sponsored benefits.'' Why would that be? Because of a very different regime, it says, a ``radically different regime of subsidies, penalties, and taxes.'' That is so much of what is involved in this health care law--penalties, subsidies, and taxes.
``Many large companies,'' it goes on to say, ``are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for just paying penalty fees to the government.''
It goes on:
In the days after President Obama signed the bill on March 24, a number of companies announced big write downs due to the fiscal changes it ushered in. The legislation eliminated a company's right to deduct the federal retiree drug-benefit subsidy from their [companies].
As a result, AT&T, Verizon, and others ``took well-publicized charges of around $1 billion.'' This annoyed Henry Waxman, Democrat from California, ``who accused the companies of using the big numbers to exaggerate''--that is what he said, ``exaggerate''--``health care reform's burden on employers.'' So he summoned top executives to hearings and he requested documents.
The bottom line is, taking a look at 1,100 pages of documents from four major employers--AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar, and John Deere--``No sooner did the Democrats on the Energy Committee read'' the documents ``than they abruptly cancelled the hearings.'' Why? Because they found out that what the companies had said was true, and it was proper in accordance with the rules and the laws within which they have to operate.
All four of these companies are taking a look at the costs and the benefits of dropping health care coverage of people who like the coverage they have. What are the alternatives if you do not want to provide health care? You pay a fine. You pay a fee.
AT&T, a major company, employs up to 300,000 people with health care coverage they like, and they are in a situation where the company is saying: If we drop their coverage and pay the fine, we as a company can save $1.8 billion.
Is that what this Congress intended? Is that what this Congress imagined? Is that what the people of this country deserve? No.
What this shows is a bill that was crammed through and down the throats of the American people by an administration desperate to have something passed into law, something that many people never even read before they voted in favor of it. And the people who read the bill carefully could see what was coming down the line, came to the floor, and pointed out these things to the American people. The American people heard, but the Members of Congress did not.
There is a new study out that was reported today in the Associated Press. It talks about what other businesses are doing. It was a poll of 650 leading corporations talking about, what do you think this is going to mean for your business? What is this going to mean for the employees? What is this going to mean in terms of health care for those folks and the cost of doing business?
Here it is. What do the employers want? They want to have three goals, and they are the goals all Americans would have. They want to bring down the cost of care, whether you are an employer or an employee. No matter who you are, they want to bring down the cost of care. Contain costs--absolutely, at a minimum. They want to contain costs. Good. They want to encourage healthier lifestyles. Good. This bill hardly does that at all. There are very few, if any, individual incentives. And they want to improve quality of life.
A mere 14 percent of all responding--650 companies--think health care reform will help contain health care costs. An overwhelming majority--90 percent--of employers believe health care reform will increase their organization's health care costs. Why should they be any different from what the government Actuary says? The government Actuary, who took a look at the bill, also said the cost curve is going to go up. The cost is going to go up. The amount Congress promised the American people this would cover in terms of the costs--Congress said: Oh, we are going to save money. No, that is not what the people who actually added up the figures said. They said this is going to cost money.
Yesterday, when the President visited with the Republican Members of the Senate, I specifically asked him about this point. He still takes the tact that ultimately the cost curve will go down. The American people, and certainly someone who has practiced medicine now since 1983, and the Actuary, who takes a look at these issues, who actually does the addition and puts a line and puts the total numbers at the bottom, all say: Sorry, Mr. President, that is not true. The cost is going to go up. Insurance costs are going to go up. Quality of care and availability of care will go down.
I come to the floor as a physician offering my second opinion just to tell my colleagues and to tell the American people what I have been hearing from talking with people all around the country. A majority of Americans are pleased with the health care coverage they get from their employers. But now, because of the President's new law, companies are considering canceling employees' coverage because it would be cheaper for them to pay the government's penalty than to provide health care coverage for their employees. This is not the change Americans want. This is not the change Americans can believe in. This is the change that makes Americans lose sleep at night. In this economy, with 9.9 percent unemployment, the last thing Americans need is a new law that makes it easier for companies to pay a penalty instead of providing health coverage for their employees.
This is not the companies' fault. It is the administration's fault. It is misguided incentives, and that is why the American people are sick of Washington. What we have seen now with regard to the incentives, if you are a big company, is to drop insurance and pay the fine. If you are a small company and you want the tax relief and a tax credit that has been offered, the incentive is to actually fire workers and pay those workers who are still working with you less. That is the way to get a better tax credit.
If you are an individual with a preexisting condition and you have been living by the rules, paying those higher insurance rates through some of the State-authorized funds that have been set up, programs that have been set up to help people with preexisting conditions, to help people who need extra help, so they get their health care covered and even pay more, if you are one of those individuals, the incentive is to drop that coverage, stop paying, and basically go uninsured for 6 months. And if you take that risk of being without insurance for 6 months, only then do you qualify for what is included in this new health care law.
We need a health care law that actually lowers the cost of health care and allows Americans to keep the coverage they have. That is why I come to the floor every week to tell the American people it is time to repeal this legislation and replace it with legislation that delivers more personal responsibility and more opportunities for individual patients; that is, patient-centered care that allows Americans to buy insurance across State lines; that gives people their own health insurance and the same opportunities and the same tax relief for people who get insurance through their jobs; that provides individual incentives for people to stay healthy, exercise more, eat a little less, get their blood sugar under control and blood pressure under control and deal with health care needs as they come along; that deals with lawsuit abuse and the incredible expense of all the defensive medicine practiced in this country; and that allows small businesses to join together to provide less expensive insurance to their employees. Those are the things we need. Those are the things we need to allow us as a nation to deliver high-quality care, available care, at a more affordable cost.
This health care bill that has been crammed through the Senate with a lot of gimmicks and things such as the ``Cornhusker kickback'' and the ``Louisiana purchase'' and ``Gator aid''--those are the things that make the American people look at this city and say: We have had enough. That is why today I come to the Senate floor and offer, again, my second opinion that it is time to repeal and to replace this health care law with something that will actually work in the best interest of the American people.
Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, it is with great pride as well as regret that I rise today in the Senate to recognize a great son of the State of Wyoming. He is my chief of staff, Shawn Whitman. He joins me today on the Senate floor. Shawn is leaving the Senate this month after a consummate career working for our State and for our country.
Many in the Senate know Shawn. To know him is to like him. He was the chief of staff for our late Senator Craig Thomas. For nearly 3 years, he has continued in that role serving me. In all of that time, he has demonstrated what it means to be a loyal and trusted adviser, a superior manager, and a terrific friend.
I know that all in the Senate will want to join me in wishing Shawn well and to thank his wife Kristen and his two daughters, Lauren and Katherine, for sharing their dad with us. All of us are sorry to see him go, and we will miss him.
Shawn has actually served three different Wyoming Senators. He began in 1994 right after he graduated from the University of Wyoming. He came to work as an intern for Senator Al Simpson. Later he joined Senator Thomas's staff and filled just about every role, every position that a congressional office can have. He was actually a receptionist. He was a press intern. He was a staff assistant. He was legislative correspondent, legislative assistant, senior legislative assistant, legislative director, and finally chief of staff.
It is the example of Shawn's career path that defines the character of who he is. He completed every task, whatever was asked of him, equally well. He brought enthusiasm, smarts, and good humor to every job from the front desk to the corner office.
It is his willingness to do whatever is needed and to take on any task. That is what makes him so valuable and such a great friend.
Shawn was truly tested. In June of 2007, Wyoming lost a great friend when we lost Senator Craig Thomas. As some of my colleagues know, after Senator Thomas's passing, Shawn led the staff alone. He kept them together in serving the people of Wyoming, even while the Senate seat remained empty.
In the face of this extraordinary challenge, at a time of great sorrow for our State, Shawn continued to lead. Despite his own sorrow and his own grieving, he led others. Shawn showed grace and confidence through it all.
Perhaps it was his early years working the family ranch outside Laramie, WY, that made him so tough. It is his sense of duty, once again doing the job that needed to be done and completing the task, any task that was required.
It was my good fortune to inherit Shawn Whitman. We hardly knew each other when I was sworn into the Senate. It did not take me long to understand his value and to appreciate--fully appreciate--his indispensable leadership.
President Eisenhower once talked about the many jobs he had throughout his private career, his military career, and finally as President. He said his goal was, whenever he was leaving a job, the people there were sorry to see him go. Shawn Whitman personifies that. Everyone in our office--everyone--is sorry to see him go. All who have had the pleasure and the privilege to know Shawn Whitman in the Senate will miss him as he starts a new chapter in his life.
Shawn leaves the Senate with a wonderful reputation--a reputation for integrity and a reputation for leadership, and not just for Wyoming but for the entire Senate, as Shawn led not just my office, but he also led the organization of the Senate chiefs of staff. He was the chief of all the chiefs.
Shawn has been a trusted adviser, manager, a confidante, and a friend to me and to my wife Bobbi. His service has been invaluable.
While I am losing a very important member of my staff, I know I will not be losing his friendship, his advice, and his counsel for the future.
It is here today on the Senate floor that I say: Thank you, Shawn. Thank you for your service to the Senate, to the country and, most importantly, to the people of Wyoming. I wish you well in all you do.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source