[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 170 (Tuesday, October 31, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S16370-S16371]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        THE RECONCILIATION BILL

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Madam President, I thank the Chair, and I will try to 
make this relatively brief. I know the presiding officer has a 
conference luncheon to go to.
  Madam President, when I go back to teaching in 7 years, one of the 
classes that I am going to teach is going to focus on what happened on 
Friday night on the floor of the U.S. Senate. And I say this with a 
slight smile because you have to have a twinkle in your eye, but at the 
same time I say it with a tremendous amount of indignation.
  In the dark of night my State of Minnesota was cut $524 million in 
medical assistance for people in our State. I will come back to that in 
a moment.
  Late afternoon and early evening I kept asking, ``Where is the 
Finance Committee amendment on the formula?'' After all, we are not 
just talking about formula, we are talking about people's lives. At 6 
p.m., one version, 9 p.m., the final version. All of a sudden, back 
room decisions. No chance for review, no chance to talk to 
constituents. Some States come out doing very well. Texas gains $5.2 
billion; that is good for Texas. California loses $4.2 billion; that is 
not so good for California. Then, in a departure from any rational 
allocation formula, the legislative language of the amendment contains 
``additional amounts,'' additional money. We are talking about people 
leveraging their votes for the following States:

  We have $63 million more for Arizona; $250 million more for Florida; 
$34 million more for Georgia; $76 million more for Kentucky; $181 
million more for South Carolina; $250 million more for the State of 
Washington. And then, at 9 p.m., new legislative language is released 
adding Vermont to the list, with an additional $50 million.
  Madam President, in the dark of night, a decision was made by 
somebody, and I came out on the floor at 9 o'clock and said, ``Who made 
this decision? Who were the people that made this decision accountable 
to? What happened to my State of Minnesota? On top of $2.4 billion of 
cuts in medical assistance, you now have cut my State by $524 million 
more.''
  Madam President, the majority leader came out and said, ``But 
Minnesota is doing better than in the House formula.'' That is true. 
There we were being cut $3.5 billion. But we thought we had an 
understanding. We thought there was an agreement and the reductions had 
been reduced by $1 billion and the Senate by $2.4 billion. Then the 
majority leader said something to the effect, ``Well, the Governor 
supports this.''
  Madam President, I am really pleased that the Governor of Minnesota 
does not support this. Governor Carlson is meeting with the majority 
leader. He is coming to Washington, DC, to try and find out what 
happened, and to advocate for our State, which is exactly what he 
should do. Whether we are Democrats or Republicans, we should be 
advocating for our States.
  The most serious part of this decisionmaking process is--actually, 
there is an ``A'' and a ``B'' to the serious part. A, it is in the dark 
of the night, behind closed doors--decisionmaking, cutting deals, 
accountable to nobody, no review, no opportunity to talk to 
constituents. That is problem No. 1, regardless of what happened to 
different States.
  Problem No. 2: My State was cut by $524 million.
  Problem No. 3: Let us translate the statistics in human terms. We 
have 425,000 recipients on what we call ``medical assistance'' in 
Minnesota; 300,000 of them are children. Sixty percent of our payments 
go to elderly and nursing homes. Many people with disabilities rely on 
this support so they can stay at home and not be institutionalized. We 
are projected to grow from 425,000 to 535,000 medical assistance 
recipients in the year 2002.
  Madam President, I intend to fight this all the way. Minnesota was 
shafted in the dark of the night decisionmaking, and a lot of people in 
my State are going to be hurt. I am going to make sure this formula is 
reversed.
  Madam President, I think the more people in the country get a chance 
to see what is in these budget bills, the more they are not going to 
like it. If the President is strong and he vetoes these bills--which he 
should--there is no Minnesota standard of fairness in these budget 
cuts--and the people have a chance to be engaged in this process, I am 
absolutely convinced that we can inject some fairness, some elementary 
basic Minnesota fairness, back into this process. But, for right now, I 
am not letting up. I heard the Senator from Florida give a brilliant 
speech Friday night. I say to my colleague from Florida, I am not 
letting up on this. I am fighting this all the way, 

[[Page S16371]]

until Minnesota gets some fairness in this formula. I am not going to 
let folks, in a back room deal, shaft my State and a lot of the 
citizens in my State.
  I am delighted that the Governor of Minnesota is going to join in 
this effort to make sure we get a fair formula.

                          ____________________