[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 80 (Wednesday, June 22, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
               LET US HAVE A COMPROMISE HEALTH CARE BILL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, it is really a privilege to be able to talk 
on the floor of the House about health care. As a Member who does not 
serve on a committee that deals directly with this issue but as someone 
who has spent the last 4 years trying to become better educated about 
the issue, I just wanted to make a few points.
  First, it seems to me so clear that both Republicans and Democrats 
believe we need to deal with preexisting condition and to end job-lock. 
There is really no disagreement on our side of the aisle on that issue.
  It seems to me that Republicans in particular want to see major 
malpractice reform stronger than what is in the President's bill, but 
both sides want to deal with the issue of malpractice reform, tort 
reform.
  It seems to me both Republicans and Democrats want to deal with the 
issue of administrative costs and the reduction of paperwork.
  On both sides of the aisle we want to do that. On both sides of the 
aisle we want to allow the small purchaser of health care to have the 
same purchasing power as the larger businesses, allow the individual to 
have the same purchasing power of the large business. So we are 
obviously supportive of some kind of community-type rating with some 
concept of age or area.
  But to allow the small purchaser to have that large purchasing power 
is the key.
  It also seems to me that Republicans and Democrats alike believe we 
should be able to deduct for health care costs whether you are a 
corporation or a private business.
  Those five points are something that we could do tomorrow, I think, 
as a vast majority of Republicans on this side of the aisle also 
believe in universal health care, but our real challenge with the other 
side of the aisle is our concern that we simply cannot afford it and we 
need to phase it in. We need to approve the savings before we can build 
on it.
  But if we are told on this side of the aisle that we have to have the 
Clinton bill, that we have to go the regulated approach, then we will 
have our disagreement. We can agree on these six items, but we cannot 
agree, it seems to me, on these fundamental differences.
  Democrats, for the most part, are willing, and this is not a 
criticism, to have the regulated model, which they believe in and we 
have criticisms of.

                              {time}  1940

  Republicans, on the other hand, have a real desire to continue and to 
improve the market approach to cost containment and with copayments as 
a part of it. Democrats have some disagreements with that. But these 
are two very fundamental difference that we are going to have to find a 
way to bridge.
  I read an article in the New York Times last week that seemed to 
imply that Newt Gingrich, my minority whip, soon to be minority leader 
or Speaker next year, was quoted as saying, leading the fight to 
basically oppose the President's plan, ``Well, we do oppose the 
President's plan. The President's plan was not even voted by Democrats 
when it was brought forward with votes,'' so there are differences in 
agreement on the President's plan.
  For instance, when the President says that we will control the costs 
of health care by $60 billion in the next 5 years, and the 
Congressional Budget Office says that it will add $70 billion, that is 
a difference of $130 billion that both Republicans and Democrats have 
to deal with.
  What I am faced with, as I look at this issue, is that already 50 
percent of our budget is on automatic pilot. It is entitlements. Plus 
we have interest on the national debt that we constantly pay for. It is 
on automatic pilot. We only vote on one third of our budget. At the 
very point that I am trying to find ways to reduce entitlements, we are 
giving serious consideration, and I am one of those individuals who are 
looking to expand an entitlement and provide universal health care. But 
it seems to me this is something we have got to do with a great sense 
of caution.
  I favor the incremental approach. I am not ashamed of it. I favor the 
incremental approach, and so do many Members on my side of the aisle.
  Let us deal with preexisting condition. Let us deal with malpractice 
reform. Let us deal with administrative costs. Let us deal with 
community rating. Let us be able to deduct health care from our taxes. 
Let us do those things now. We can join hands right away.
  The next question is: Do we go the next step, and do we go the market 
approach, or do we go the regulated approach? On those fundamental 
issues we have our differences. Neither side needs to be ashamed of it, 
but there are differences.
  For me, as I look at our Federal budget deficits and know the 
national debt will go up $1.6 trillion in the next 5 years, I want to 
be cautious. For me, when I know that Medicare and Medicaid was 
supposed to only cost what today is the incremental cost in health 
care; in other words, what we add next year to our health care budget 
in Medicare and Medicaid, in fact it was what we thought the total 
costs would be today, we are so off in our estimates. If we are off 10 
percent on our health care cost estimate, we are off a $100 billion in 
a $1 trillion program. If we are off 50 percent, Lord knows the 
problems we are going to have.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage both sides of the aisle to deal with 
what we can deal with and then see how we can get to that point of 
universal coverage which I strongly believe in.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Abercrombie). Under a previous order of 
the House, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Reynolds] is recognized for 
5 minutes.

  [Mr. REYNOLDS addressed the House. His remarks will appear hereafter 
in the Extensions of Remarks.]

                          ____________________