[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 110 (Wednesday, August 10, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 10, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                           HEALTH CARE REFORM

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I know the hour is late, but I have not 
yet had the opportunity to make opening comments on the health reform 
debate.
  It is with great anticipation that we begin this debate. It has been 
stated already that this is a historic occasion, in part, because it is 
the first time that a bill of this magnitude has reached the floor of 
the U.S. Senate. Never before has health reform legislation been this 
close to enactment.
  I think it is safe to say that for many of us the vote on health 
reform will be the most important vote that we may cast on any domestic 
issue.
  I must say I admire the President and the First Lady, for their 
dedication, their deep commitment, and their leadership on this issue. 
The White House staff and all of those who assisted the President and 
the First Lacy in bringing the bill to the floor also share their 
dedication.
  And as others have done, I commend the senior Senator from 
Massachusetts for his remarkable dedication to health reform over the 
past 25 years, and the majority leader for his tenacity, and his 
willingness to compromise as he crafted this health reform bill.
  Finally, of course, I commend the chairman of the Finance Committee 
for the work that he has done to bring us to this point in the process. 
This legislation has been 2 years in the making, Mr. President, it 
represents 2 years of effort, 2 years of consultation, 2 years of 
hearings, meetings, committee deliberation, debate, and discussion.
  But it is not just for the last 24 months that we have been consumed 
with this issue. The debate goes back 40 times 24 months, back to the 
turn of the century, back to Teddy Roosevelt's time. Teddy Roosevelt 
may have been the first President to propose a national solution for 
American health care. He reminded us then--and I think it is as 
appropriate today as it was at the turn of the century--that the 
measure of the quality of a society is how it treats those in the dawn 
of life, the young; in the twilight of life, the old; and in the shadow 
of life, the sick. For 80 years that test has stood. For 80 years I 
think we could have measured our progress as a society by how well we 
met his test.
  In the 1930's we began to recognize that we needed to treat those in 
the twilight of life, and we passed the most extraordinary piece of 
social legislation in history, the Social Security Program. In the 
1960's, we saw another historic moment with the passage of Medicare. 
And over the decades we have recognized the need to help the youngest 
Americans with passage of the Women, Infants and Children Program, 
school lunches, immunization programs, and enhanced access to prenatal 
care. We enacted these programs with the recognition that this society 
will be judged by how we treat the youngest.
  But it is those in the shadow of life, those who are sick, who today 
are the subject of countless stories of misfortune, neglect, and 
despair. It is those in the shadow of life who have not been given the 
opportunities that we have afforded others. We hear their voices in 
this debate. We see them in the halls as they petition us for help. We 
remember them long after our debates because of their tragic accounts 
of life in America without health insurance.
  For six decades this country has grappled with solutions to this 
problem. Franklin Roosevelt recognized the problem in the 1930's and 
proposed what he called the ``Second Bill of Rights'' for America. He 
called for ``The right to adequate medical care and opportunity to 
achieve and enjoy fundamental good health.'' He called health care a 
right, not a privilege.
  And Harry Truman, his successor, was the first to recommend 
comprehensive health care reform. Harry Truman in a proposal to 
Congress said:

       The health of the American people must ever be safeguarded: 
     it must be improved. As long as people are stricken by a 
     disease which we have the ability to prevent, as long as 
     people are chained by a disability which can be reversed, as 
     long as needless death takes a toll, then American health 
     will be unfinished business.

  Little did he know how long the business would be unfinished, because 
in virtually every decade of this century, especially those following 
President Truman's reign, Presidents have tried but failed to reform 
our health care system. They failed not because of a lack of effort and 
not because of opposition from the American people. These efforts 
failed, Mr. President, one by one, because of the orchestrated 
opposition of powerful special interests who simply fear change. The 
major exception, of course, was the fight for Medicare and Medicaid 30 
years ago.
  The fight for Medicare, frankly, is instructive. President Kennedy, 
referring to the criticism that he had to confront, said very simply: 
These are the same arguments that they used against Social Security at 
the time of Franklin Roosevelt. We overcame them then. We ought to 
overcome them now.
  That was President Kennedy's advice to Congress in the 1960's. That 
has, frankly, been President Clinton's advice to this Congress. We 
overcame the opposition then. We understood the ramifications of 
failure then. And we recognized that we had an opportunity to improve 
the quality of life, not only for those in the shadow of life, not only 
for those in the twilight of life, not only for those who so 
desperately cried out for help today, but for all Americans.

  Because back then we heard some of the same criticisms leveled today 
in the health reform debate. Back in 1963, a Congressman from 
California said of Medicare, ``Let me tell you here and now this is 
socialized medicine.'' A Senator from the Midwest said, ``The cold, 
hard facts are simply that we cannot afford costly and unnecessary 
health care now or ever.''
  Decade after decade on the Senate floor we have heard the same 
naysaying, the same speeches, the same criticisms, the same excuses for 
why we must stay paralyzed. Opponents of reform use the same recycled 
arguments. They call health reform socialized medicine though real 
socialized systems spend half of what we spend on health care. ``Too 
costly,'' we are told, while our health costs have doubled in the last 
10 years. ``It will cost jobs,'' we are told, while businesses now must 
choose between salaries and premiums.
  I had a hope this year, Mr. President, that somehow it would be 
different. Now, because the problems which were bad before are even 
worse now and the overwhelming consensus across America is that we need 
comprehensive change. 80 percent of the American people support 
universal coverage, 65 percent of the American people support shared 
responsibility, 70 percent of all the people in this country today want 
real insurance reform. Yet some, particularly the special interests who 
now feel threatened, want this to be business as usual.
  I was disappointed, frankly, with some of the Republican strategists. 
One of those who was most visible, most aggressive in his criticism, 
most determined to obfuscate the Democratic approaches is Bill Kristol.
  In a recent report to his colleagues on the Republican side, Mr. 
Kristol said: ``Sight unseen, the Republicans should oppose it. The 
appropriate Republican response is to take the noble road of opposing 
any alternative that Democrats offer and insist on starting over in 
1995. We should do so with pride and not a speck of guilt. We should 
send them to the voters emptyhanded.''
  On October 28, 1993, Mr. Kristol's recommendation to the Republicans 
on the Clinton plan was: ``Kill it. We don't want to wound the plan; we 
want to kill it. We don't want to confuse matters or weaken the cause 
by debating whether aspects of the Clinton plan will work or not.''
  In December of 1993, he added: ``Any Republican urged to negotiate a 
less bad compromise with the Democrats and thereby gain momentary 
public credit for helping the President do something about health care 
should be resisted. Republicans must recognize the policy and tactical 
risk involved in near-term advocacy of sweeping change, however right 
it may be in principle.''
  And finally, on March 22 of this year, he urged Republicans that they 
should ``not now or ever seek to work together with this President.''
  Mr. President, I have great admiration for those who have confronted 
Mr. Kristol, for those on both sides of the aisle who have said this is 
not the way to solve problems; this is not the bipartisan approach we 
all say we want.
  And of all of those for whom I have admiration, perhaps the majority 
leader ranks at the top of the list, because of his determined effort 
to reach out. In spite of the attitude expressed by Mr. Kristol and 
others, the majority leader has made a remarkable effort in recent 
weeks and, frankly, to this very day, continues to do so.
  But I have noted with great frustration that every time we move an 
inch their way, they move 2 inches away, finding fault, encouraging 
delay, and pressing partisanship.
  When I first arrived in 1979, I was deeply affected by a man for whom 
I have had incredible admiration and respect, a man that I considered a 
mentor for many years, Congressman Claude Pepper of Florida.
  I remember a wonderful conversation I had with Senator Pepper in the 
early 1980's, when he said: ``Tom, we really ought not look at people 
once they get here as Democrats or Republicans. As hardcore a Democrat 
as I am, I think we really ought to look at people as constructive or 
destructive--C's or D's, not R's or D's.''

  He said, ``All to often, I see people who do things for short-term 
political gain, and they have an incredible destructive power to change 
the course of good in Washington. But then I see the constructives, who 
continue to reach out and build bridges, who recognize the short time 
we are here and the opportunities we have to make things better. I hope 
you will be a constructive.''
  I have thought about that a lot during this health care debate. If 
ever there was a time for constructive leadership, if ever there was a 
time to reach out and build bridges, this is it.
  I remember a conversation I had just in the past couple of months 
with a South Dakotan. We talked for about a half hour. As I was walking 
away, he said, ``Tom, prove to me you can govern. Prove to me that 
Democrats and Republicans can put it all aside, recognize the problems 
we are facing in health care, and govern.''
  It is not just a question of whether we are going to achieve 
meaningful health care reform this year. In my view, Mr. President, it 
is a test of our ability to govern, a test of whether we are going to 
learn from history.
  In the next 2 weeks, I am absolutely determined that we pass a health 
reform bill that achieves universal coverage, that achieves meaningful 
cost containment, that achieves real access in rural and urban America. 
And I am absolutely convinced that this will be the last time this 
century that we have the opportunity to pass comprehensive health care 
reform--the last time.
  These may be the 2 most important weeks many of us will ever serve. 
Let us use them wisely to pass real reform--not as Democrats, not as 
Republicans, but as Americans who recognize, as Teddy Roosevelt said, 
that we will be judged by how we treat those in the dawn of life, the 
twilight of life, the shadow of life.
  Improving the quality of our society and the opportunities that all 
Americans have is what this debate is all about.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________