[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 157 (Tuesday, October 27, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10748-S10750]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    ADDRESSING AMERICA'S PRIORITIES

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I wish to commend my colleague from Rhode 
Island for his statement on the unemployment situation facing our 
country and also join in his remarks with some concern and dismay over 
the opposition of the Republican Senators to extending unemployment 
benefits.
  Tens of thousands of people in my home State of Illinois and all 
across the United States have been unemployed for long periods of time 
and have now reached the end of their eligibility for unemployment 
compensation. They are still unemployed. They are still trying to keep 
their families together, pay the rent, put food on the table, pay for 
some medical bills, and they need unemployment compensation for that to 
continue. So we have proposed extending unemployment compensation 
benefits--the safety net for America--while they look for jobs and 
while this economy starts ever so slowly to turn around.
  The opposition comes from the Republican side of the aisle. They 
oppose extending unemployment compensation benefits. You think: How 
could they rationalize that in an economy where there are six 
unemployed people for every available job? Their answer is: We have 
other, more important things we want to debate on the floor of the 
Senate.
  Well, let's take a look at what those are. First, they want to return 
to the debate over an organization known as ACORN. ACORN is an 
organization that has not been in business in Illinois for 8 or 9 
years, so I don't know any of the leaders in that organization 
personally. I can't say that I can recall working with them on any 
major issues. But you remember the videos a few weeks ago, those 
alarming videos of some ACORN employees who were apparently conspiring 
with people on how to break the law. Those employees have been fired, 
as they should have been. They should be investigated, and if they are 
guilty of criminal activity, they should be prosecuted. That is clear. 
But that is not enough for those who listen to the rightwing cable and 
TV shows. There has to be more.
  Well, I have called for a full investigation of ACORN. I want the 
Government Accountability Office to find what Federal monies have been 
spent with that organization and make sure it was spent honestly and 
spent well. An investigation is appropriate. It is known as due 
process. But that is not enough for some on the Republican side of the 
aisle.
  One Senator from Louisiana wants to go further. He wants to offer 
another amendment to flog ACORN, and he is holding up unemployment 
benefits in Louisiana and Illinois and across the Nation until he gets 
his amendment, until he can make his speech, until he can beat on ACORN 
again. Well, that may be his idea of serving the public need. It is not 
mine. Let's save that debate for another day, if we have to have it at 
all. Let's not make thousands of people in Louisiana and Illinois--
currently unemployed, desperate to keep their families together and a 
roof over the heads of their children--suffer because a Senator here 
wants to debate whether we can think of some new way to punish ACORN. 
You know, for most people, as President Obama said the other day in an 
interview, there are many more important things in life than this 
organization and the sorry conduct of a few employees. But for this 
Senator, it is enough to hold up unemployment compensation for 
literally hundreds of thousands of American people. That is the 
reality.
  In addition, there is a program called E-Verify. E-Verify is a way to 
try to establish that a person applying for a job is actually a 
citizen. They want to use computers, accessed through telephones and 
computers, to determine whether the identity and the Social Security 
number given to the employer are, in fact, valid or illegal. It has 
been a tough program to get up and running. In fact, it is loaded with 
enough uncertainty and error that some question whether we should 
pursue it until we have worked out the details. Innocent people were 
caught up in the E-Verify early days and identified as not being legal 
when in fact they were. So what we have done is to extend this program 
for 3 years while we work out obvious problems with it.
  One Senator on the other side of the aisle said it is not enough. I 
am going to hold up unemployment benefits, he says, until this program 
is extended permanently. Well, that is a worthy debate and topic, but 
is it worthy enough to deny unemployment compensation benefits to 
thousands of people out of work while we debate whether E-Verify should 
be extended 3 years or permanently? Doesn't seem to rise to the same 
level of importance, in my estimation.
  That is what is holding up unemployment benefits for hundreds of 
thousands of people--amendments like that from the Republican side of 
the aisle which, to my way of thinking, don't really measure up to the 
gravity of the issue we are considering.
  I wish those Senators from the States offering those amendments would 
go back home and meet some of these unemployed people, maybe sit down 
and buy them a cup of coffee, talk with them about what their lives

[[Page S10749]]

have been like being out of work for 2 or 3 years, what it means to 
have no health insurance because you lost your job, folks who have 
exhausted their life savings and now don't know which way to turn. I 
get e-mails and letters every day from them, people across my State. 
And these are not folks who have drifted in and out of work; many of 
them have worked uninterrupted for 25 or 30 years and now find 
themselves out in the street through no fault of their own. They are 
trying their darndest to find a job, to improve their skills so they 
are more marketable, and we should give them a helping hand.
  Incidentally, the money that pays the unemployment compensation 
benefits comes from a fund to which they contributed. While we work, we 
put a little money away in a fund on the possibility that someday we 
will be out of work, and if it ever happens, then we are given at least 
enough money to get by while we look for a job, from that same fund. It 
is a basic insurance policy. These folks who are caught up in a tough 
recession need an extension of their benefits for some additional 
weeks--20 weeks is what our bill provides.
  So for those who argue that this is some form of welfare, I would 
like to correct them. These are benefits paid out of funds paid in by 
workers across America and employers, and it is a fund that needs to be 
exercised right now, to be used right now for their benefit.
  Mr. President, I am also concerned about some of the debate I have 
heard on the floor this morning from the other side when it comes to 
health care reform. I would like to stand here and compare the 
Democratic proposal for health care reform and the Republican proposal 
for health care reform. Now, that would be a good debate. But 
unfortunately I can't because there is no Republican proposal for 
health care reform.
  One of the elements of our Democratic approach in the Senate will be 
something called opt-out. To put it in a nutshell, we are trying to 
create a not-for-profit health insurance company to compete with 
private health insurance companies so there will be actual 
competition--to keep them honest--and we try to bring costs down. We 
know private health insurance companies are exempt from antitrust laws. 
They can fix prices, they can allocate markets, they can jam through 
increases in premiums, and there is not much you can do about it since 
there is no competition. So a public option, a not-for-profit health 
insurance company, would be competitive.
  There are some who argue against that and say that goes too far. Even 
though it is not government-run health insurance like single payer--it 
is a not-for-profit option--they say it goes too far. So the Democratic 
approach to health care reform says that individual States can decide 
whether they want to have a public option available to the people who 
live there. If the State of Iowa, whose Senator came to the floor this 
morning, decides they don't like a public option, they can opt out of 
the public option. It is their choice. Each State can make that choice. 
That is what opt-out is all about.
  Opt-out is also what the Republicans' strategy on health care is all 
about. They have opted out of this debate. Take an example: The Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee considered over 500 amendments 
to health care reform. Among the amendments adopted were 150 Republican 
amendments, accepted in the committee. Some were technical, some were 
substantive, and in good faith they were debated and agreed to. Once 
150 amendments were added to the health care reform bill in the HELP 
Committee. The vote was called, and when it was called, not a single 
Republican Senator would vote in favor of the bill they had just spent 
weeks amending.
  It turns out there is only one Senator--Senator Olympia Snowe of 
Maine--who joined in the Finance Committee to report out a bill. She is 
the only Republican Member of Congress, House or Senate, who has 
actually voted for health care reform. All of the other Senators who 
have come to the floor criticizing what we are putting forward as our 
draft proposal on health care reform have not voted for it and have not 
produced an alternative.
  The need is still there, and the need is very serious. Let me give an 
example, if I can, about the need in terms of a real-life story back in 
my State of Illinois.
  There is a young man named Marcus Evans. Marcus reached a point in 
life where he couldn't walk upstairs without losing his breath, and he 
knew something wasn't right. He is 17 years old, and he began suffering 
from shortness of breath, which kept him out of pickup basketball games 
but even made it difficult for him to walk around his house. He went 
from doctor to doctor trying to figure out the problem, but he was 
uninsured--one of 47 million Americans uninsured.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's 10 minutes has 
expired.
  Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 5 minutes.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. So Marcus Evans, being uninsured, couldn't find a doctor 
to diagnosis his problem.
  At the time, Marcus's mom was a working mother of two. She worked as 
a part-time dental assistant. She didn't receive health insurance 
through her job and her family did not qualify for Medicaid, which is 
health insurance for poor people.
  For 3 years, Marcus tried to get medical care without success. He was 
repeatedly told that more tests couldn't be done. He was told they were 
just too expensive, and he was basically told nothing was wrong. In 
fact, something was very wrong. Marcus Evans was suffering from t-cell 
lymphoma, a form of cancer that affects the lymph nodes. Do you know 
how he received the diagnosis? After Marcus's aunt called 911 because 
her nephew literally couldn't breathe, he was rushed to an emergency 
room where he received, finally, an MRI--his first MRI after years of 
visits to doctors with no diagnosis. That test revealed a significant 
malignant tumor pressing on his esophagus, which explained the symptoms 
he had been complaining about for more than 3 years.
  Marcus said:

       I nearly died before I got the proper health care. It took 
     a lot for them to actually do the test.

  Well, that is the situation that is familiar to millions of 
Americans--people who either don't have insurance or don't have much 
insurance. They are unable to afford health care premiums for 
preventive care out-of-pocket, and it takes a severe complication and a 
trip to an emergency room before they receive any appropriate medical 
care. They earn too much money for public aid and too little money to 
afford private health insurance.
  For Marcus, a disease that could have been caught and treated when he 
was a high school student went undiagnosed for years as he tried and 
failed to get quality treatment. Instead of going away to college after 
graduating from high school, Marcus found himself stuck at home too 
sick and too scared to leave home.
  Today, after chemotherapy and successful surgery, Marcus is in 
remission and working to put his young life together. His struggles 
aren't over. Most of his friends have debts from student loans; Marcus 
owes more than $100,000 in medical bills at the age of 21--$100,000--
even after the hospital forgave him $40,000 for his hospital stay.
  Still, he is trying to move forward. He is enrolled as a part-time 
student at Chicago State. He has a little job with the city, a job that 
provides him at least some health insurance. It could have made a 
difference in his life many years ago.
  Here is what he said:

       I see the difference when you have insurance and when you 
     don't. It's like night and day. When I didn't have insurance, 
     they just pushed me aside.

  Marcus doesn't blame the doctors who told him he was suffering from 
nothing more serious than asthma. He said he understands doctors were 
faced with an impossible choice caused by our Nation's dysfunctional 
health care system.
  He said:

       Doctors shouldn't have to worry about whether a patient has 
     insurance. No decision should have to be made except let's 
     take care of this person.

  It is simple logic, common sense. That is what health care reform is 
all

[[Page S10750]]

about, and it poses very fundamental questions for us in this country: 
Who are we? What do we stand for? Are we going to change the current 
system?
  There are those fighting change in the system, and those leading the 
fight are health insurance companies. They are making plenty of money 
under the current system even though causes such as Marcus Evans' end 
up being untreated, and young men end up suffering as a result of it.
  That is why this health care debate is so important. I hope at some 
point, a couple, maybe even three Republican Senators would step up and 
say: We want to be part of this historic debate. We don't want to stand 
on the sidelines and complain about the plays that are being called. We 
want to be into the actual field of battle to help craft a bipartisan 
bill.
  So far they have turned us down every step of the way except for one 
Senator, Ms. Snowe of Maine. I hope that can change, and I hope those 
who come to the floor every day and complain about health care reform 
will take 1 day to propose their suggestions. What do they want to do? 
If they want to stick with the current system, if they do not want to 
change health care as we know it today, have the courage to stand up 
and say just that. But, unfortunately, they have said over and over 
again: We want to criticize. We want to opt out. We don't want to be 
part of this debate.
  That doesn't solve the problems our Nation faces.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from North Dakota is 
recognized.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, first let me compliment my colleague from 
Illinois. He is right that the health care system in this country is in 
need of repair or reform. He is right also about the people who are out 
there believing they are insured when in fact they are one serious 
illness away from bankruptcy.
  Ten years ago in Fargo, ND, I met a woman who had $600,000 in the 
bank. She said she had a job, she had health insurance, and she had 
equity in a home. Ten years later it was gone. She has a very serious 
illness. She is a quadriplegic and needs a substantial amount of care, 
and all those assets are gone. She had insurance and all those assets 
are gone because her insurance had a cap.
  A lot of people don't know that. They say: I have health insurance. 
Their insurance often has a cap on how much the insurance company will 
pay in the aggregate, which means they are just one serious illness 
away from bankruptcy. That is just one among others of the reasons 
there needs to be some change with respect to the health care issue.
  I think this will be difficult. I commend the majority leader for 
trying to put a bill together. It will come to the floor of the Senate. 
We will have an opportunity to review it and offer amendments, which is 
the way it should be. My hope is at the end of the day we will be able 
to advance the issue of health care and improve the health care system 
in this country.

                          ____________________