[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 76 (Thursday, June 16, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 16, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                    HEALTH CARE: A BIPARTISAN DEBATE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefner). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. For women, I just say, the employer 
mandate has to be off the table and we have to get together and pass 
health care reform that addresses the concerns of our people in a way 
that preserves the vitality of our economy and equality of our health 
care system.
  Mr. HASTERT. I thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to reiterate some of the things that were 
said on the other side of the aisle. I really believe that real health 
care reform has to be bipartisan. We have to work together, we have to 
be for something that is positive. Certainly, the gentleman from Texas 
laid out a very good parameter of how we can get started on health care 
and find the solution to the problems. I think it is time that we quit 
talking and start doing something about it. I would like to start 
tomorrow, incidentally.
  Anyway, it has to be bipartisan. We have to pass something in this 
House that the American people can endorse, and that means it has to 
pass by 320 or 340 votes here, so it is a mainstream bill that 
mainstream America and main-street America can join hands in saying we 
are finding a solution to this problem and we can move forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.
  Mr. GRANDY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to dovetail on his comments. Not only do we 
need bipartisan health care but I think we can conclude from this 
debate and from our actions in Congress the last 9 months that the 
employer mandate is the single greatest obstacle to bipartisan health 
care reform that faces us. There is nothing bipartisan about employer 
mandates. The proponents of the Cooper-Grandy bill, of which many are 
part of this special order tonight, joined together to find an 
alternative to employer mandates, to find an alternative to global 
budgets and price controls and we found it as the gentleman from Texas 
[Mr. Stenholm] pointed out under a program of purchasing cooperatives 
and tax caps, albeit controversial. But certainly more bipartisan than 
the employer mandate that we have gotten up and bipartisanly criticized 
tonight.
  I would just ask, if the employer mandate is so good, if this is the 
source from whence all blessings flow, why prior to this special order 
tonight did the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Hoekstra], take the floor 
and announce that the Committee on Education and Labor that is already 
considering health care reform had decided to exempt Hawaii from the 
national health care legislation because their employer mandate is only 
a 50-50 match, not an 80 percent-20 percent match as is mandated under 
the current Clinton program?
  If an employer mandate of 80 percent to 20 percent is the source from 
which all blessings flow and the yellow brick road to universal 
coverage, why does the Federal Employee Health Benefit plan require us, 
Members of Congress, and you heard it from us, to pay 28 percent of our 
benefits, not 20 percent? Why are we asking people in Federal service 
to pay more, and then turning around to the private sector, to 
employers in the private sector and say, ``You will have to pay more, 
the Federal Government will pay less, but you are going to have to pay 
more.'' There is no consistency in this whatsoever. It is arbitrary, it 
is a cost shift, it is pernicious, and it is wrong.
  Mr. Speaker, I think the only answer to health care reform lies in 
defeating the employer mandate and starting again. I applaud the 
gentlewoman and all of my colleagues for participating tonight, and I 
hope this is the beginning rather than the end of our debate.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. I thank you all for participating 
tonight.

                          ____________________