[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 145 (Thursday, September 27, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12247-S12248]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007--
                               Continued

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I think we are ready for closing 
comments by me as ranking member and Senator Baucus as chairman of the 
committee. Then we will be done with the debate on SCHIP.
  Mr. President, first, I thank my colleagues for supporting the vote 
to move to the consideration of the children's health insurance 
reauthorization bill so we could avoid a lot of turmoil over getting 
here where we are to get the business done because I think everybody 
knows how this is going to turn out.
  I appreciate the leadership of Senator Reid because he was an honest 
broker in helping the House to understand what needed to be done in the 
Senate, and he held a lot of meetings on this subject.
  I thank my good friend, the chairman of the committee, the Senator 
from Montana, Mr. Baucus, for his leadership in forging this compromise 
in a bipartisan way.
  I also have to recognize people who sat in on a lot of these meetings 
and worked hard and are part of this compromise: Senator Hatch and 
Senator Rockefeller. In particular, Senator Hatch has been a stalwart 
through this process because he was the leader in creating the 
Children's Health Insurance Program when it was first inaugurated 10 
years ago. The continued leadership he showed was very good and 
necessary.
  I realize some in the majority want to do more than we do in this 
compromise. I know it wasn't easy for those on the other side of the 
aisle to convince some of their colleagues that this was the right 
course. But we have a bipartisan bill in the Senate, and now we have a 
bill with strong bipartisan support in the House of Representatives. We 
picked up a massive number of Republicans who did not vote for it the 
first time in the House of Representatives.
  Currently, the SCHIP program covers kids at incomes far beyond what 
was considered low income in the original statute. It covers parents 
and, in some States, it even covers childless adults. With this 
reauthorization, this program will return to its original concept: 
helping the lowest income kids and not helping adults as the program 
evolved beyond the perceptions that were there 10 years ago when this 
bill was written.
  Childless adults who are presently on the program will be phased out 
completely because this is a children's program, it is not an adults 
program. States will not be able to get enhanced Federal funds if they 
decide to cover parents. States will only be able to cover higher 
income kids if they demonstrate that they took care of the purpose of 
this legislation, which is to take care of the lowest income kids 
first.
  Every financial incentive in this bill discourages States from 
spending a penny to cover anyone other than low-income children. And 
all the financial incentives are entirely focused on the lowest income 
children. All the rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding, this bill 
does not expand the program to middle-income families. It refocuses the 
program on the lowest income children.
  Some of the speeches I have heard on the Senate floor, I wonder what 
good does it do to make these points over and over because it is just 
that some of my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle don't 
read this bill, don't care what we say. This bill does what they think 
it does, even if it doesn't do it, and they say that on the Senate 
floor. Those who say otherwise than what I just said have not read the 
bill. This bipartisan compromise provides coverage for more than 3 
million children who are without coverage today.
  In closing, I encourage my Republican colleagues to think long and 
hard about what I said as this debate began and throughout this debate. 
If this bill is vetoed--and this is what I would like to have the 
opponents concentrate on--if this bill is vetoed, if at the end of the 
day all we do is simply extend the program that has been in effect for 
10 years, what will we have accomplished? Will adults be gone from this 
program who were not supposed to be included in it in the first place? 
No. Will States have a disincentive to cover parents? No. Will States 
be encouraged to cover low-income kids before higher income kids? No. 
Will the funding formula be fixed so States are not constantly 
challenged by funding shortfalls? No. And finally, will we have done 
anything to cover kids who don't have any coverage today? The answer 
is, again, no.
  I quoted the President making a promise at the Republican Convention 
in New York. I did that yesterday. I want to state again what the 
President said. You can't say it too many times. I hope at some time 
the President remembers what he said:

       We will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of 
     poor children who are eligible but not signed up for the 
     government's health insurance programs.

  An extension of law, which is what is going to happen if the 
President vetoes this bill, will not carry out what the President said 
at the Republican Convention in New York in 2004.
  Faced with that, your answer today on this bill, Mr. President of the 
United States, should be yes. This bill gets the job done that you said 
in New York City you wanted to do.
  I hope the President's answer will be yes because if he doesn't veto 
this bill, then we will do those things he said he wanted to do. It 
will help more than 3 million low-income, uninsured children. About 
half of the new money is just to keep the program running. The rest of 
the new money goes to cover more low-income children.
  It provides better options for families to afford employer coverage.
  It takes even more steps to address crowdouts, so we don't move 
people from private insurance to government-funded insurance.
  It phases adults out of the program because this is a children's 
program, it is not an adults program.
  It discourages States from covering higher income kids.
  It rewards States that cover more of the lowest income kids.
  It puts the lowest income children first in line for coverage.

[[Page S12248]]

  Here is what the bill does not do:
  It is not a government takeover of the health care system.
  It does not undermine our immigration policy.
  It is not expanding the program to cover high-income kids.
  It is not everything that people on my side of the aisle said it is 
in debate on the floor of the Senate. It is, in fact, a good bill. It 
is a compromise. I urge my colleagues to support this bill for kids.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, a lot has been said in this debate. Much 
of it is not true, but much of it is true. One way to determine what is 
true and what is not true is, frankly, to listen to the Senator from 
Iowa. I know of no man or woman whom I believe speaks straighter, more 
honestly, and calls it like it is than the Senator from Iowa. I guess 
that is why he is elected by such large margins every time he is up for 
reelection. It has been such a pleasure to work with the Senator from 
Iowa because he is so straight, so modest. He tells it like it is, and 
he has no ulterior motives.
  All Senators, especially those on this side of the aisle, should 
listen to him because what he says is true. When he describes what this 
bill contains and does not contain, he is accurate. So if a Senator is 
trying to figure out who is right--because we have heard all kinds of 
claims on both sides--it is my judgment that what you hear from the 
Senator from Iowa, you can take to the bank because that is the truth 
as to what is and is not in this bill.
  As we close out this debate on the reauthorization of the Children's 
Health Insurance Program, I wish to take the time to remind us all what 
our goals are--and not just our goals but what our duty is as Senators.
  Today, the health of many of our Nation's low-income children is in 
our hands. It is that simple. We hear lots of stuff around here, but 
the bottom line is, the basic point is, the health of many of our 
Nation's low-income children is in our hands.
  We are here today not only to make sure children who currently have 
health insurance keep it, but also to make sure that many more low-
income children get coverage. This is important because not having 
health insurance affects a child's life. Uninsured kids do not go to 
the doctor. They do not have checkups. Uninsured kids remain 
undiagnosed for serious childhood conditions such as asthma and 
diabetes. Uninsured children are not diagnosed with learning 
disabilities, and they struggle through their classes. Kids who do not 
have insurance do not see a dentist. They don't get cavities filled and 
risk serious illness due to poor dental health.
  Adequate health care is a critical foundation for a healthy life. 
Insuring our children is a smart economic investment for our Nation's 
future. It is the only choice if we wish to imbue future generations 
with strong minds and healthy bodies. It is quite simple. Health 
insurance has a direct effect on a child's performance in school. 
Healthy children are more likely to go to school, they are more likely 
to do well in school, and they are more likely to become productive 
members of the workforce.
  Parents of children with health insurance are less likely to miss 
days of work to care for their sick children. When America insures our 
children, we all benefit.
  The bill before us reflects a lot of hard work. It represents 
Democrats and Republicans working together, and I mean that. That is 
not an idle statement. That is not a throwaway. Both sides are working 
together. This is one of the few times when both sides, on very 
important legislation, worked very well together. Why? Because it is 
the right thing to do.
  We worked together to craft legislation that will give millions more 
American children the healthy start they need for a long productive 
life.
  I hope the President finds it in his heart to reconsider and make the 
right choice, the only choice. I hope he will join Congress in making 
our children's future and America's future a brighter one. I hope he 
thinks, reflects about our country, the greatness of our country when 
he is trying to decide whether to sign the bill or to veto it.
  I have faith, I have hope that when the President of the United 
States makes that decision, he will realize discretion is the better 
part of valor; that he will realize the right thing to do is to help 
our Nation's low-income kids. Further debate about health care reform 
can be pushed off into the future. That is a separate issue. That has 
nothing to do with this question.
  This country will engage in national health reform. We have to. The 
President is talking about it. We in the Congress talk about it. That 
is an entirely separate issue. This is only maintaining a current 
program enacted in 1997, totally bipartisan. Senator Chafee from Rhode 
Island and Senator Hatch from Utah worked together to get this bill 
enacted because it was the right thing to do.
  It has been very popular. Nobody has had any questions about 
children's health insurance. It has worked. Now it has expired. The 
question is, what do we do about it? This legislation does not change 
current law in any way. It just maintains the program and provides a 
few more dollars for more low-income kids to get health insurance, and 
it does not do anything more than that. That is what this is. It is a 
separate issue from the national health insurance reform debate, which 
we will get into and must get into at a later date.
  I hope the President of the United States, when he is faced with that 
decision, will sign this bill and realize this is the right thing to do 
for kids, and tomorrow is another day when this country appropriately 
will debate national health insurance reform. But right now, let's help 
some kids.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa has 11 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I yield back that time, Mr. President.

                          ____________________