[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 8 (Thursday, February 3, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: February 3, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
HEALTH CARE CRISIS
Mr. RIEGLE. Madam President, following my good friend and colleague,
the Senator from Arkansas, I want to now address some remarks to the
health care problem facing our country. I do so because there is a
clear issue that is before us. It is an urgent matter, and we have
heard a lot said and have seen a lot written just in the last several
days about it.
Frankly, our country has been facing a health care crisis now for
many years. Based upon my own experience from holding now over 40
public hearings on the issue of health care reform and, in the course
of doing those hearings, testimony from hundreds of individuals, I can
state on the Senate floor that a crisis does exist and that we must
pass comprehensive health care reform and we must pass it this year.
I am pleased that we finally have a President and a First Lady who
have brought this issue to the forefront and who are leading the effort
to deal with it.
As this debate goes forward, I think we have to stay focused on why
we need reform. We have to stay focused on real people who are everyday
being hurt by the problems in our health care system and who cannot
solve those problems by themselves and who need our help.
The number of Americans that did not have health insurance sometime
during the year of 1992 is said to be 38.5 million people. Of that
number, 24 million did not have any health insurance coverage at any
time during that year.
Millions of Americans who do not have health insurance coverage
through their employer simply cannot afford to buy private insurance on
their own. It is just too expensive and it becomes more expensive
everyday.
Let me tell you the case of Veronica McClellan who lives in Westland,
MI, who cannot afford to buy health care insurance. Veronica is a 55-
year-old widow who had never worked outside her home. Sadly, her
husband died this last year, leaving her with no income and no health
insurance.
Veronica is not eligible for Medicaid because she does not meet the
eligibility criteria which generally require that a single woman be
very disabled or on welfare. She is also not old enough to be eligible
for Medicare.
Last year, Veronica was diagnosed with breast cancer, and just last
month she underwent a complete mastectomy. But she has no income or
health insurance to pay for the cost of this surgery which she needed
literally to save her life.
The bill for her hospitalization is so far beyond her means that
right now she does not even know how much the final cost will be, how
many multiples of thousands and probably tens of thousands of dollars
that it will be. She knows, moreover, that she cannot afford to go to a
physician for the kind of proper followup care that she should get
after major surgery because of the cost involved there, and again no
health insurance in place.
Without health insurance or outside income, she has had to rely upon
her daughter to pay all of her medical bills, and this, of course, has
become an enormous strain on her daughter.
Many more of those who lack insurance are unable to get insurance
simply because they need it. They cannot buy insurance even if they
have the money. Our current system allows people who need coverage the
most to be denied the health insurance coverage because of what the
insurance companies call preexisting conditions.
Last October, I told the Senate about Joan Kachadourian from
Gibraltar, MI. Joan can no longer work because of a heart condition.
Her husband, Lesley, does work but his company does not offer health
insurance. Joan has been denied health care coverage by insurers
because of her preexisting health condition. So the simple fact is she
cannot get the insurance precisely because she needs it. She needs it
and therefore she cannot have it. Unfortunately, her condition is
getting worse because she cannot afford the treatment.
That should not happen in this country, and that is a crisis for her.
It is a crisis for countless thousands, tens of thousands of other
people like her across this country. They are waiting for action. They
are waiting for action by us, and they deserve to have action taken.
The health care crisis is also hurting American businesses because of
the skyrocketing premiums that they are paying to cover their
employees. Health care costs to businesses are rising an average of 15
percent each year. Some large companies such as the auto manufacturers
in my home State of Michigan are hurt even more because they have on
average an older work force with greater health care needs and because
they also pay the health coverage for their early retirees until they
reach the age of Medicare.
Small businesses are hurt because they have to pay significantly
higher rates for the same coverage, and their rates go up even if just
one employee should get sick and file a claim.
I took the Senate floor before to give an example of a small business
owner who was being crippled by health care costs. I described that
last summer. Douglas Erwin owns a small fruit and vegetable market in
Novi, MI. He has 15 employees and provides coverage for his full-time
workers and their families. Douglas provides insurance because he
understands how important the coverage is. Two of his own sons have had
very expensive health problems. But his costs of providing that
coverage has doubled over the past 5 years. In 1988, his business had a
profit margin of $39,000, and that was after a year of very hard work.
But last year his profits were only $5,000 because his health care
costs had risen so high. Small businesses like this cannot afford to
keep paying these exorbitant costs and hope to stay in business.
So it is a crisis for him as well as many other small business owners
across the country who are trying their best to provide health
insurance for their workers.
So we have to reform our health care system because of the lack of
security and the high costs of our present system, and that is hurting
everyone in the end. As I say, we have to do it this year.
I have cosponsored President Clinton's reform plan because I believe
it establishes the right goals. I do not say that it is perfect in
every respect, nor does he. We will make changes in it as we go along.
But that bill would make certain that everybody in this country had
coverage, that it was coverage they could afford and it would never be
taken away. It would mean people like Veronica McClellan, instead of
now being in this terrible situation, would have some economic security
with her health problems. And Joan Kachadourian the same thing; she
would have the security of guaranteed health coverage that she needs
and I think deserves to have, and it would control the costs of
businesses providing coverage to their workers. So I am going to do
everything I can this year as the chairman of the health care
subcommittee for families and the uninsured on the Finance Committee to
see this gets done.
I wish to add one other comment.
I have noticed, as have others, in the last 2 days some of the
business organizations in the country that have come out against the
President's plan--I was very disappointed to see that--the chamber of
commerce today, the Business Round Table yesterday.
Frankly, I think a mistake in strategy was made in allowing the NAFTA
proposition to go forward ahead of health care reform. Now, I happened
to be on the other side of the NAFTA issue. I thought it was a mistake
then, and I think it is a mistake now. I think future events will prove
that to be so. Nevertheless, the administration was very much in
support of NAFTA.
But I think by giving that issue to the business community, which
wanted it very much, a top priority of the business community because
they saw it as a way to make money in many cases by moving jobs to
Mexico, despite claims to the contrary, but once they got the dessert,
then all of a sudden they did not want to have to eat the spinach which
is required to do serious health care reform with the kinds of cost
controls that could work.
The fact that those things were put in the wrong order is nothing we
can change now, but there is a powerful lesson there, and it ought not
to be lost on anybody who is thinking about how to sequence these
legislative items. We should have taken health care first, and after
health care then we could have dealt with NAFTA. I think I can, based
on the logic and the common sense of it, pretty much guarantee that we
would have had a lot more people out of the business community if
health care had come first with the prospect of NAFTA coming second
than having done it the other way around. It is too late to change that
now except to draw a lesson from it so that we do not make that kind of
mistake again in the future.
I thank the Chair. I thank my colleagues. That completes my statement
on this issue.
____________________