Drug Quality and Security Act - Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. AYOTTE. Madam President, first of all, I want to thank my colleagues, and I will start by thanking my colleague, the senior Senator from Maine, Senator Susan Collins, for the important work she has been doing on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. I also want to thank my colleagues for supporting an amendment that was brought forward recently and passed by this body, the Portman-Ayotte-Heller-Hatch-McCain amendment, to strengthen the protections within the Employment Non-Discrimination Act for religious institutions.

I firmly believe people should be judged based upon the quality of their work. Discrimination has no place in the workplace. In my home State of New Hampshire, we have a long bipartisan tradition of working to advance commonsense policies, and New Hampshire already has in place a State law preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation. I appreciate that the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is legislation that is important in terms of who we are, our values, and making sure people are only judged based on the quality of their work in the workplace. I also appreciate the legislation on the floor right now includes important protections for religious institutions.

I have long been a strong supporter of the rights of conscience, of the rights under the First Amendment of the Constitution to religious freedom, and so these protections are very important within this bill. I was pleased to work with Members on both sides of the aisle to strengthen those protections by passing an amendment that will help ensure religious organizations cannot be retaliated against for exercising their religious freedoms.

Specifically, the Portman-Ayotte amendment affirms the critical importance of protecting religious freedom in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. It ensures that government cannot penalize a religious employer because it qualifies as exempt from nondiscrimination requirements of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The amendment protects religious institutions from adverse actions by the government on the basis of adhering to their religious tenets.

In practical terms, the government may not use activities protected by the religious exemption as a basis to deny a religious employer a government grant or tax-exempt status or any other benefit that may be conferred by the government.

I want to thank my colleagues for passing this amendment which will strengthen the protections for religious institutions within the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and I thank the Chair for the opportunity to speak today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. AYOTTE. Madam President, I rise to talk about the impact ObamaCare is having on the people of my State, the State of New Hampshire. It has been over 1 month since the health care exchanges opened, and in that short time we have already seen so many problems with ObamaCare. Frankly, it is a mess.

The failure of healthcare.gov is a travesty that has revealed deeply troubling incompetence in terms of implementing a Web site that people can use and have access to and is secure and protects their private information. Frankly, we are in a position where the Web site is merely the canary in the coal mine. The flaws in this law are much deeper than the Web site.

Even former supporters of ObamaCare are telling me it is not working. I am hearing from my constituents about this, and frankly I feel very badly for them because so much of what is happening to them is as a result of how the law was drafted years ago.

For example, I heard from Maryanne in Lisbon, NH. She said:

We hope this would be a solution. But instead it will be more of a financial drain.

The American people are the ones who are paying the price right now. They are getting cancellation notices, seeing their premiums go up, and losing their doctors.

Workers are suffering. Many of them have seen their hours cut to 29 hours because of an arbitrary mandate defining full-time workers as those who work 30 hours a week. Others are fearful they will lose their employer-sponsored coverage altogether. Business owners remain reluctant to expand--worried they will trigger the looming penalties from ObamaCare.

Most tragically, we now know that the law was sold to the American people under false pretenses. The President said: ``If you like your insurance plan, you will keep it.''

In fact, yesterday we checked the Web site and that claim is still on there. I am hearing every day from New Hampshire residents who are telling me they are seeing their health insurance policies canceled. In fact, in the newspaper this morning there was a headline in New Hampshire that announced that about 22,000 individuals will see coverage canceled at the end of the year.

Granite Staters have been writing to me. I wish to share their concerns with the entire country because I know this is not just happening to people in New Hampshire, but these are the real people who are being affected by ObamaCare.

Lynn in Greenland wrote:

The President was wrong. I can't keep my coverage if I like it and I can't keep my preferred hospital and his plans are the ones that are subpar ..... it's bringing me to tears on a daily basis. Please help.

Edward in Marlow is self-employed. I feel so badly when I receive letters such as this. He has a rare disease and a high-deductible plan. He wrote:

I received a notice from Anthem last week that they will be canceling this policy. Is this what President Obama meant when he said no one who currently has their own policy and likes it will lose it. ..... I am devastated that I will now have to go out and secure another policy somewhere which could cost me significantly more.

Jennifer in Canaan wrote:

I received a letter from Anthem Blue Cross stating that my current health insurance plan was being discontinued because it did not conform to the law under the Affordable Care Act. In other words, the plan I was promised I could keep was made illegal by Washington politicians.

Michael in Atkinson said:

Kelly, we have been told this would expand options. The fact is we are now being told what we can and what we cannot do and where we can go. To say that I am upset would not begin to describe how I feel.

Richard in Alton Bay said:

I am a small business owner in New Hampshire and have been with my health insurance provider for over 10 years. I was recently informed that the policy I have had for all of these years (and I like quite a bit) will be canceled due to the provisions in Obamacare. When I contacted the company, they said they are planning to transition me into a plan that costs more and offers substantially less benefits and protection than my original plan. ..... I am outraged at this. .....

Jamie in Littleton wrote:

Today we received a letter from Anthem Blue Cross stating my husband's individual health care plan, which he's had for 15 years, will be changing to conform to ACA laws and will no longer be in effect come September 1, 2014.

Louis in Sunapee wrote:

What just happened? I received a cancellation notice from my insurance company ..... and the coverage I am eligible for is MORE expensive? Help me!

President Obama has made the promise that ``if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period.''

For those who are seeing their plans canceled, we know that is simply not the case. There is another issue that New Hampshire is facing, and that is a matter of choice in keeping not only the doctor you want to keep but also going to the hospital you want to go to. In New Hampshire, there is only one insurer who is going to participate on the exchanges at this point, and to keep costs down, the insurer has decided to limit its network, so 10 of our 26 acute care hospitals are not part of the exchange and are excluded.

For example, the capital of New Hampshire is Concord. One of the hospitals that has been excluded is Concord Hospital. I worked in Concord for years. Concord Hospital is going to be excluded. All the people in that area

[Page: S7850]
who rely on that hospital and had their children and treatments there will now be excluded if they are on the exchanges. This is a real impact on people's lives, and I feel very badly for my constituents.
A doctor in Peterborough said he was once a supporter of ObamaCare. He described the consequences simply. In a letter to me he said his patients have one of three

terrible options now, and that is because the hospital in his area has been excluded from the exchange.

First, they can switch doctors and drive a considerable distance to a hospital that Anthem does include in the exchange; two, they can purchase insurance outside of the exchange at considerably higher rates than they could this year; or, three, they can stick with their current doctor, risk having no insurance and pay the government a penalty for being uninsured.

With the hospital he is associated with excluded from the exchange, he said, it is the ``Less Affordable Care Act'' for his patients. This doctor gave me a troubling practical effect of what his hospital being left out would mean for his patients.

He used this example:

Consider the pregnant woman who has delivered all of her current children at our hospital. She is now expecting in February. She must now either drive our twisty New England roads, in the dead of Winter, to a hospital 55 minutes from her home to deliver her baby, or pay considerably higher insurance premiums to stay where she is comfortable and safe.

He is one of numerous citizens across New Hampshire who has expressed similar concerns about local hospitals being excluded from the exchange. I wish to share some of the other concerns that have been written from my constituents.

Vicki in Seabrook wrote:

The list of doctors and medical facilities that will take my insurance is limited and my Massachusetts doctors are not on the list. ..... The one closest to me, Portsmouth Hospital, is not on the list.

Kathleen in New Castle wrote:

The exchange choice will not allow me to use my docs, including primary care who is affiliated with the Portsmouth Hospital. All oncology physicians are located in Boston, not covered.

Margaret in Strafford currently goes to Frisbie Memorial in Rochester, which is not part of the exchange.

She explained the impact in this way:

I would no longer be able to go to Frisbie Memorial Hospital, which is four miles away. I could no longer see the gynecologist whom I trust. I could no longer use the surgeon who saved my life when emergency surgery was required. I could no longer visit the same internist. If I were to develop heart problems, I could no longer go to Portsmouth Regional Hospital.

Gregory in Rochester said his primary care physician is at Frisbie. He said that means he will have to go to another hospital, he said, ``I do not know and does not know my health condition.''

Robert in Strafford said he has gone to Frisbie for 40 years. He wrote:

I've had multiple different insurance companies but have always been able to keep the same doctors. Now because of ObamaCare, Frisbie is out of the loop. This is totally unfair to all the people who live in the area. What gives?

Teresa in Peterborough said that none of her current physicians, including her primary care physician and her OB/GYN, are in the exchange. She wrote:

The nearest providers in this network are 45 minutes west, 60 minutes east or 90 minutes north. This will be very costly to me in terms of time taken off to attend appointments at these distant offices/hospitals. And since I am self-employed, a day off to go to the doctor is one day without income.

A single mother also from Peterborough wrote:

If my 17-year-old son does get sick this winter, I will be required to take a minimum of 1/2 day off to bring my son to Keene or Manchester to find a primary care physician who will accept the insurance through affordable care (not that I can even afford that route).

I am also hearing heart-wrenching stories from New Hampshire citizens about how their premiums are going up. As you know, when this law was being sold, it was sold as premiums going down, but that is not what I am hearing from my constituents.

Christopher in Rindge wrote:

My insurance is going to double on January 1, 2014. Even the options that conform to the health act are double the amount I am paying today. It doesn't make any sense that my insurance would go up by double when this is called ``affordable'' health care.

Rick in Pembroke wrote:

Last year, the sum total of my family's health care cost $2,300. ..... I have been looking at health insurance for my family. The lowest insurance will cost $566.40 per month. The family deductible will be $11,500. Even if I spend the same as last year on actual health care, I will have to pay an additional $6,800. This isn't fair and it isn't affordable. I don't know many people who can budget for an additional $6,800 a year.

Brendan in Sanbornton said:

I am self-employed and my wife and I pay for our health insurance through Anthem that provides coverage for us and our 15 month old daughter. Presently, we pay about $580 per month for a major deductible plan with a total family deductible of $7,500. A couple of weeks ago, we received a letter from Anthem informing us that our ``old'' policies don't meet the requirements of the new ACA and therefore, we were going to be canceled. When researching new options on Anthem's Web site, we found that our deductible was now going to be $12,000 per year at an increased cost of about $150 per month! We feel as though the country has been misled about being able to `keep their current coverage.'

Holly in Charleston wrote me:

I buy an individual policy to cover myself, but my policy went up 25 percent on October 1st and one of the reasons stated in the letter I received from Blue Cross was to cover the implementation of ACA. As a result, I dropped down to a less expensive plan and guess what? I got a letter telling me I was okay until 2014 when that plan will no longer be available because it doesn't comply with the new rules and regs.

I heard from Patty in New Ipswich and she said that after her insurance company told her to find a plan, she signed up for the least expensive bronze plan available. She says:

Still not only will my premium be $75 a month higher for a total of just under $600 per month for me, but in addition to that, I have a $5,400 annual deductible. Also, the prescription plan that Mr. Obama and Mrs. Pelosi mandated also has a $5,400 deductible, so effectively that is not a prescription plan at all. In fact, this plan is basically a very expensive catastrophic plan and nothing more. It is not affordable and I am disgusted.

Barbara in Merrimack and her husband don't yet qualify for Medicare. Their existing plan is being phased out, so she checked the exchange. She wrote:

The product that was closest to what we currently have is Silver and is just too expensive. The cheapest coverage we could find is in the Bronze category and will cost $1,228.32 per month and will have a deductible of $5,950/individual and $11,900/family. That means that all basic services and medications will be out of pocket. Medications will be covered at 40 percent of the copay. $1,228.32 equals $14,739.84 per year and it is more than my mortgage!. ..... Unlike the government, I can't raise my debt ceiling.

Anita in Sutton wrote:

What was supposed to help people like my husband and I who are self-employed--and he has a chronic illness--only hurts us. Our premium went up $2,287.70 per month and this is now with a $4,000 single/$8,000 family deductible ..... nothing like a 30 percent increase for one year ..... Having to hoist yourself up each day and go to work and try to carry on is hard enough with this chronic illness, now we have to pick and choose what bills we can afford to pay .....

Jane in Troy said she tried to enroll her son in the Federal program, and this is what she wrote to me:

The quote was $600 a month! Do you know of any 20 year old who can afford $600 a month?

Tim in Merrimack wrote me:

Contrary to the original intent of the Affordable Care Act, individuals who obtain insurance on their own are paying radically escalating costs based on individual coverage for a healthy, non-smoking 51-year old male available for January 1, 2014, on the healthcare exchange in NH, the results are as follows: Premium--25 percent increase from $4,200 to $5,300. Deductible--20 percent increase from $5,000 to $6,000. 82 percent increase in less than 2 years--$2,900 in June of 2012 to $5,300 in January 2014.

Then I heard from Erik in Hancock. He said he has seen a 46-percent premium hike. He wrote to me:

What has been done to our health care system? This is the Unaffordable Care Act.

In some cases, the cost of insurance is rising because plans must include coverage for services that consumers don't want based on their individual situation or don't need based on their individual situation. For example, Jeff in Hudson says that his premiums will go up nearly 40 percent because of ObamaCare. He said:

It seems that some of the cost drivers are for coverages which my wife and I do not need or want, but are required to have due to the law. For instance, we must have maternity coverage even though we do not plan on having more children. (We are in our early 50s.) We must have pediatric dental insurance, even though we have no children under the age of 18.

Doug in Bedford wrote me:

The maternity issue is a trap for seniors.

Carol in Newport wrote:

Can anyone please explain to me why at 60 years of age I need an insurance plan that requires maternity provisions? Can anyone explain to me why I would be required to pay for pediatric standalone dental when I have no children? Since this is mandated by the government, why would I have to pay an insurer fee, exchange fee, and reinsurance fee?

She said the most affordable plan she has seen has been $504.15 a month--which she can't afford--and a $6,350 out-of-pocket deductible. Carol asks:

If I cannot afford the premium, how can I afford the deductible?

Others I have heard from are worried that their employers will drop their coverage, finding it cheaper to pay the fine than to provide coverage for their workers.

Benjamin in Greenville wrote:

My portion, currently about $5,000 a year will jump to $20,000+ per year to maintain my current coverage. I make ``too much'' money to be subsidized. Tell me senator, where do I find $15,000 a year, $1,250 a month, $288 a week in my already tight budget?

He wrote me:

No more vacations. No more dance lessons for my kids. No more family date night once a month. No more Christmas presents.

Another theme I have heard in the letters I have received from my constituents is a feeling that those in the middle are being squeezed the most.

Donna in Newport wrote:

My employer is now canceling the company sponsored health plan as of January 2014, which costs me $2,288 per year. In shopping for a new plan, I am seeing the possibility of a $22 subsidy to help me with a monthly cost of $400, an increase in my health care costs I cannot afford. I am the middle class, a tax paying and proud American that did not ask for this Act and now suffering because of it.

Cheryl in Acworth wrote:

Not only do I have to pay twice the premium, but it will be post-tax--a double hit. If I was poor, I would be okay or if I worked for a large employer I would be okay but for those of us trying to make a good living and be responsible productive citizens, we end up carrying this ..... This is not the American dream at all.

Joseph in Salem wrote to me:

On September 30th I received a letter from Anthem informing me that my new payment to keep my current plan which I have had for over 8 years will increase $212.47 on January 1st. That is a $2,548.80 increase for 2014. This is what ObamaCare is doing to the middle class.

Roberta in Nashua is like many of my constituents pleading for help. She wrote:

Please hear my plea and see what you can do to allow people like me and my husband to keep our care and not be forced into purchasing exchange insurance which is so costly and will be a financial hardship for us. IT IS NOT AFFORDABLE!

In addition to canceled policies, patients losing their doctors, and higher premiums, I have also heard about another aspect and consequence of ObamaCare from people who are working hard, trying to make ends meet, and those are workers who are seeing their hours cut. Under the law, employers must provide coverage for employees who work 30 hours or more per week. Many of these employers, not surprisingly, have decided to reduce hours rather than comply with this new mandate. So this is what my constituents are writing me about--these hard-working people trying to make a living.

I heard from an EMT from the Monadnock region who wrote to me and said:

My employer notified the 75 of us who work there that effective January 1st, our hours will be cut due to ObamaCare. So our incomes will drop and make it harder for us to buy our own insurance.

An educator from the Upper Valley wrote:

Our school district and surrounding ones are cutting back para-professional jobs to 29 hours. Many of these people were full time. Instead they hired several part-time people to cover the once full-time positions ..... Now they are no longer entitled to any benefits. Many of these individuals have worked 15 or more years with a school district as full-timers.

I have heard from business owners as well. They have told me that the looming mandates in the law are causing them to think about eliminating coverage for their employees even though they don't want to do it. They want to do what is right for their employees.

Steven in Nashua wrote me:

I am a small employer. I would be very tempted to dump my plan for my employees, give them a few extra dollars and just get out of the health care business.

I have also heard time and time again about how looming penalties under ObamaCare are causing businesses to think twice about growing and adding new workers.

I heard from Matt on the seacoast. He wrote to me and said:

On a business level, I don't know if I will expand because I would not be able to pay the penalties or the health insurance for my staff members.

These are just some of the stories I am receiving from New Hampshire about hardships ObamaCare is causing for people who are working hard, who want to make ends meet, who want to keep the health care plans they have now. I feel terribly bad for these people. It breaks my heart.

I have worked hard. I have sponsored many efforts and voted to repeal this law. I have called repeatedly over the last several days for a timeout from ObamaCare. We do need a timeout because of the concerns I just talked about in this Chamber that I am hearing from my constituents and that I know many Members in this Chamber are hearing. We need the President to call a timeout.

I came to the floor several times during the government shutdown and I said it was wrong to shut down the government to try to defund ObamaCare because of the harmful impact of a government shutdown. I even took the step of calling on Members of my own party: Please, do not go forward and shut the government down.

Now it is time for the President to see the impact of this law and understand from someone who in some instances has stood up to her own party on the government shutdown--I am asking the President of the United States to hear from the people of this country who are being impacted negatively by the health care law, and I say: Call a timeout, Mr. President. It is not working. They are having difficulties with the Web site. They are worried that their personal information will not be protected on the Web site.

But, as I talked about today, the problems are much deeper, with people receiving cancellation notices, with people receiving premium hikes they cannot afford, with hours being cut for workers who want to work and make a living in this great country.

I would ask the President to call a timeout, to bring people together. This law was passed out of this Chamber on party lines. I would argue the best way to address health care in this country and to address real concerns I know people had with the status quo as well is to bring a bipartisan group together because what we are seeing now is not working.

My constituents have also taken the time to point out to me--in addition to the major problems they see with ObamaCare, they have shared a few ideas with me as well about where they think we should go from here instead of ObamaCare. I want to share those ideas as well.

Many of them agree that competition in New Hampshire is effectively nonexistent. Let's face it. We have one insurer on the exchange. One suggestion I saw--and it is one I agree with--is to allow for the purchase of insurance across State lines. Why shouldn't insurance companies have to compete on a national basis?

I also agreed with a constituent who said we need to place our focus where it belongs: crafting legislation that reduces health care costs rather than trying to create an artificial health insurance marketplace.

Another constituent wisely pointed out that there should not be a cookie-cutter set of policies, such as the ones that result in seniors purchasing coverage that includes maternity care. Instead, people should be able to shop for coverage that suits their particular needs, and we should respect that different people have different needs in health care.

There are many other ideas that I know we could work on together. These are just some of the ones my constituents have written to me, and I know they have written me other great ideas as well.

Finally, an overarching theme I have heard is that Americans are tired of being victims of partisan gamesmanship, and I agree with them. We have had too much partisan gamesmanship on so many issues in the Congress. They are tired of the politics. They want us to work together to solve tough problems, and I agree with them.

On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I renew my call for a timeout on ObamaCare. Let's have both parties come to the table and find health care solutions that work for the American people.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source