[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 160 (Tuesday, October 17, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15187-S15188]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                 CHANGE

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, my purpose in requesting an hour was to 
share with my freshman colleagues an opportunity to talk some about 
change, an opportunity to talk about the real chance we have to bring 
about change here in the next 3 weeks. So I intend to take 10 minutes 
and share the rest, then, with other members of the freshman and 
sophomore class. I wanted to talk just a little bit about change. I 
wanted to talk a little bit about the development of policy.
  I must confess, I am concerned we are seeking increasingly to 
formulate public policy in this country based on something other than 
facts, to formulate public policy based on what seems to be a marketing 
technique to oppose change. I want to talk about that just a little 
bit.
  My friend from North Dakota just finished. He just finished talking 
in some areas I think are not factual, that I think probably do not 
represent where we are really going with policymaking in Medicare.
  What we are doing is, those who are opposed to change in Medicare are 
seeking to use scare tactics to cause people to think Medicare is going 
out the window, we are not going to do it, when the fact is if we do 
not make some changes, then we will lose Medicare. Those of us who want 
Medicare for the elderly, for those of us who want Medicare soon for 
ourselves and others, know you have to make some changes. The idea we 
are going to cut and ravage Medicare just is not true. Whether it is 
Phillips or whoever it is, the fact is that the spending is going to 
increase. What we are talking about doing is changing a growth pattern 
that is not maintainable--more than 10 percent--bringing it down to 6.5 
percent.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, inasmuch as the Senator from Wyoming 
mentioned my name, I wonder if I might just ask the Senator from 
Wyoming a brief question. If the Senator from Wyoming believes----
  Mr. THOMAS. The Senator has had his time. I really do not yield to 
him. I would like to go ahead and make my presentation, sir. You have 
made yours.
  Mr. DORGAN. The only reason I ask the question is the Senator from 
Wyoming suggested they were not facts coming from this side; in fact, 
we were misstating facts. I wonder if the Senator would be prepared 
during the hour at some point to discuss specifically 

[[Page S 15188]]
what he means by that, so we can discuss what he means is factual and 
not factual.
  Mr. THOMAS. If the Senator will yield back my time, I will be happy 
to, because I intend to do that. We are talking here that it is being 
done to save taxes. That is not true. That is just not true. If there 
was no budget crisis at all, if there were no tax reductions being 
talked about, you have to do something with part A of Medicare. Kevin 
Phillips and others seem to ignore that.
  The fact is, the money that goes into part A of Medicare is taken 
from your salary and mine, 2.9 percent, and goes into this fund. And 
this fund, according to the trustees, three out of six of whom are 
Cabinet members, they say that by the year 2002 that fund will be 
paying out more than it is taking in. That is a fact.
  The fact is, even if you did not have anything to do with the budget, 
you would have to do something if you want to continue to have Medicare 
based on that premise of paying for part A from what is withheld from 
salary and from the employer. That is a fact.
  So, that is where we are. The people who oppose change do not talk 
about that. They get into this tax thing, which really, really has 
nothing to do with it. And, on the contrary, the opposite is they do 
not have any suggestions. They simply want to complain about the idea 
that people are saying we need to make some changes there. And our 
friends stand up and say ``Oh, yes, we need to make changes,'' and then 
resist every change that is made.
  So, I think we need to start talking a little more about the facts 
and get a little off this idea of a marketing rhetoric that is 
designed, simply, to oppose what it is we are doing. We have a basic 
difference in philosophy. I understand that. That is perfectly 
legitimate. That is what elections are about. That is what two parties 
are about.
  I happen to think we are better with less government and less taxes, 
and trying to find a way to reduce the costs of Medicare, not to simply 
find more money to put in it.
  Do you want to talk about fraud? The Senator mentioned fraud. Most 
experts indicate that there is $30 billion of fraud in Medicare now. So 
I feel very strongly that, if we are going to have public policy that 
is good public policy for all of us, public policy needs to be made 
based on some facts and not simply some kind of marketing technique.
  The other is change. Mr. President, we have a great opportunity now 
to make change. We have an opportunity in the next several weeks to 
finish the job the American voters asked us to start last November, to 
finish the job we said we would do: To have a less intrusive 
Government, to have a Government that costs less, to have a Government 
where the programs that are in place have been evaluated in terms of 
their effectiveness, whether or not the expenditure of taxpayers' money 
is getting to the people it is designed to assist. For a program such 
as welfare, the job is evaluating whether it is indeed accomplishing 
what it set about to do, and that is to help people who need help and 
then to help those people into a position to help themselves. Is that 
happening? The answer is no.
  So, if you would like to have different results, I think it is 
imperative that you change. It is pretty hopeless to look for something 
to happen, to continue to do the same thing and expect different 
results. Mr. President, that does not happen.
  We have a great opportunity in the next several weeks to talk about 
fundamental change for the first time in 40 years; for the first time 
in 25 years, to balance the budget. Who would argue with the idea that 
we need to balance the budget, that it is not morally and fiscally 
responsible to balance the budget? We hear that--yes, yes, that is a 
good thing to do. But, when we seek to do it, all we hear is resistance 
to it.
  We are going to do that. We are going to save Medicare, and Medicare 
has to be changed to be saved. We are going to reform welfare. These 
are the things we are setting about, necessarily, to do.
  It is tough when you talk about change. It is hard to change the 
direction of Government. It is increasingly difficult as the Government 
is in more and more programs, that more and more people are involved in 
lobbying for those programs, that more and more people are involved in 
the bureaucracy that supports those programs. So it is difficult to 
make change.
  Change is what President Clinton talked about almost 3 years ago when 
he was elected. Has he brought about change? The biggest change was the 
largest tax increase we have had in the history of this country. But I 
think change was the basis for the 1994 elections. I think change is 
something that almost everybody embraces, but it is difficult to do, 
and I do understand that. But if we are to have different results, we 
have to change the way we do things.
  Mr. President, we have worked now for a number of months. We are down 
to the critical decision time, when all this work now will result in a 
decision and we will decide whether we are going to balance the budget. 
We will decide what kind of country we want to transfer to our kids and 
their kids, as we go into another century.
  What happens if we do not? In a few weeks we will be talking about 
voting on a debt extension to $5 trillion. In just a year or two, 
unless we change, we will find that all the available tax revenues will 
be used for entitlements and interest on the debt. If we do not change, 
we will not have a Medicare Program by the year 2002.
  So, change is not an option, in my view. Change is exactly what has 
to be done, and, of course, there are different views of how you do it. 
But the idea that you use a marketing rhetoric designed to scare people 
and say change will devastate the programs that the country is 
committed to carrying out just is not the case.
  I think we need to continue to say, here are the good things that 
happen when we balance the budget and ultimately reduce the amount of 
money we take out of families to pay for Government. We can reduce the 
growing inflation. We can create more jobs by putting more dollars into 
the private sector. And we can be more effective in what we do.
  So we are talking about change. We are talking about public policy 
based on facts. We disagree, then, as to the remedy. But we ought to 
start, at least, by recognizing these facts that are there, that are 
described not by the Members of Congress but by the trustees of 
Medicare.
  Mr. President, our time is to be shared among several of our freshman 
colleagues, so I would like now to yield to my colleague and friend 
from Georgia. And he then will be followed by another. I yield to the 
Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.

                          ____________________