[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 30 (Thursday, March 4, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H1161-H1165]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2009, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. ELLISON. I will claim the time on behalf of the Progressive 
Caucus, but I have a few boards to put up, so I'm going to grab those 
right now.
  Mr. Speaker, I am Keith Ellison, and I am here to deliver the 
progressive message. I am looking forward to having some other 
Progressive Caucus members join me, but in any event, we'll be here 
tonight for a few minutes to talk to America about the progressive 
vision of America.
  America is a great country because people stood forward and had a 
higher vision of what could be. Yet we came here as a Nation and the 
United States said, you know what? We can have a country where all men 
and women are created equal. We have to make that happen. And so 
Americans set out on path to what? End slavery then exalt the rights of 
workers, then eliminate gender discrimination and have the women's 
right to vote, and then move on forward to spread economic prosperity 
to all people to make sure that working class men and women during the 
Great Depression were able to have the kind of economic wherewithal 
that could see them through a difficult time.
  America is a progressive idea. We saw the end of segregation because 
Americans of all races and colors stood up and said, you know what, 
this Jim Crow offends the basic principles of our Nation, so we're 
going to end this thing. It wasn't easy; it wasn't pretty. It was real 
messy and people gave up everything in order to pursue that ideal, but 
they did. And so America is really, at the bottom, a progressive idea.
  Today, challenges are before Americans again today, none more 
important than the fight for health care, none more important than the 
fight for universal health care. As a member of the Progressive Caucus, 
I come here as a person who really would love to see universal single-
payer health care; it's the right way to go. But single payer did not 
make it into the debate, really, this year, but important ideas like 
the public option did, and we're fighting for those ideas tooth and 
nail to the very last.
  The progressive message tonight, talking about health care, as I have 
so many weeks before, is an idea that is coming to the floor. And it is 
no time to stop talking about health care reform now because Americans, 
we've been through a lot of changes. You all remember when the 
President started off his service, the President started off and said 
we're going to move forward on health care and begin some health care 
summits. We had a number of conversations as we went through and went 
forward, and of course, as so often happens, Members from the other 
side of the aisle, the Republican Caucus, had a lot of complaints, but 
they didn't have many constructive ideas. We moved forward anyway.
  We went through the spring where we had literally tens and tens and 
tens--dozens of community hearings and hearings here on Capitol Hill 
about health care reform. We had witnesses come in and talk about how 
to bend the cost curve down, how to reduce cost, how to expand 
coverage. We literally had well over 100 hearings on health care 
reform. And as I said, we went into the communities. I had a number of 
community meetings myself where we talked health care reform. We had 
this debate right on up until the beginning of August, and people were 
telling us the public option is dead; but the public option, as we 
know, is not dead. We kept fighting for it and kept bringing it up. We 
kept rallying Americans, Mr. Speaker, and we just wouldn't break and we 
just wouldn't bend and we kept the conversation alive. We kept the 
conversation alive even though we had a very tough economy to deal 
with, even though we had to deal with the failing auto industry, even 
though we had a financial catastrophe.
  We understood that getting health care reform right was key to 
prosperity for the poor, for working class people, and for middle class 
people; so we never really gave it up. In fact, even earlier today 
somebody said, Keith, what are you going to talk about tonight on the 
Special Order? I said, You know what I'm going to talk about? I'm going 
to talk about health care. They said, Wow, we're sick of talking about 
that. You know what? We don't have the luxury to be sick of talking 
about health care reform because right now, at this very moment, there 
are people who are facing being rescinded, being cut off health care 
insurance, people whose medical expenses have gone so high they have to 
consider bankruptcy in order to make it and survive economically.

                              {time}  1745

  There are people who have their children getting ready to turn 22, 
just like I recently had a situation where our health care carrier told 
me, On your son's birthday, which should be a happy occasion, he is 
going to be terminated from your health care policy. This is my own 
son. I'm a Member of Congress, and I'm trying to sit and figure out how 
we're going to get my boy, who is going from 21 to 22, covered because 
he is going to be looking for health care coverage in only a few days.
  Americans are going through this all the time. Some Americans are 
thinking, Wow, I just hope I can get to 65 so I can get Medicare 
because then I won't have all of these problems. I'll be able to afford 
health care like I haven't been able to afford it in so many years. 
Americans are in dire straits. So it doesn't make any sense for anyone 
in this Congress to say they're sick of talking about health care, 
because Americans aren't through fighting these health care nightmares 
that we have to deal with every single day, day in and day out.
  So we are here with the congressional Progressive Caucus. This is our 
email. If you want to contact us and let us know what your ideas are, 
the Progressive Caucus is open to ideas. We believe that progress is 
made through new ideas, and we want to hear about them.
  We are going to be talking about health care tonight, and I'm hoping 
to be joined by some of our colleagues. I just want to start the 
conversation out talking about health care and about the economy and 
how these two ideas are linked together. It's shocking, shocking, 
shocking news. How do you like this one, folks?
  Health insurers break profit records as 2.7 million Americans lose 
coverage.
  Wait a minute. I must be reading this wrong, Mr. Speaker.
  Health care insurers break profit records as 2.7 million Americans 
lose coverage.
  Do you mean they're breaking records and getting more money than they 
ever got before as they're throwing people off coverage?
  Well, that doesn't seem right. You would think that, during this 
time, Mr. Speaker, of reviewing health care policy that somebody 
somewhere would have at least the good sense to say, Well, maybe we 
shouldn't throw all of these people off at the very time we're making 
all this money. Maybe it would look bad.
  Well, these avaricious folks don't have any shame when it comes to 
trying to grab more money. Just like some of these people in the 
financial services industry are giving themselves record bonuses as 
America's banks

[[Page H1162]]

have enough reserves but aren't lending it out so that small businesses 
can help grow our economy. As we're in the middle of a financial 
crisis, they're giving each other bonuses. Then they feel put upon and 
personally attacked because they can't go get a gazillion more dollars 
of American taxpayer money. It's really something.
  Health care insurers break profit records as 2.7 million Americans 
lose coverage.
  Mr. Speaker, I'd just like to show, to whomever is looking, the 
report where I get this information, this report of ``Health Care 
Insurers Break Profit Records As 2.7 Million Americans Lose 
Coverage''--the February 2010 Health Care for America Now! This is 
something very important. It's a great report that I would recommend 
people get. You can get it on the HealthCareforAmericaNow.org website. 
People need to check it out, Mr. Speaker, because it is the kind of 
information that can really help to get you engaged, to get you 
involved and to get you moving toward real health care reform. Let me 
just read a little bit from this report so the Americans who might be 
watching might just get a taste of this important report.
  The five largest U.S. health insurance companies, Mr. Speaker, sailed 
through the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression to set 
new industry profit records in 2009, a feat accomplished by leaving 
behind 2.7 million Americans who had been in private health plans. For 
consumers who kept their benefits, the insurers raised rates and cost-
sharing, and cut the share of premiums spent on medical care. 
Executives and shareholders of the five biggest for-profit health 
insurers--United Health Group, Inc., WellPoint, Inc., Aetna, Inc., 
Humana, Inc., and Cigna Corp.--enjoyed a combined profit of $12.2 
billion--that's $12 billion with a ``b''--in 2009, up 56 percent from 
the previous year. It was the best year for big insurance.
  Wow. Wow. That's amazing to me. These folks are coming down here, 
saying that they've got to have the private insurance go their way so 
they can survive while they are reaping mega-profits. Mr. Speaker, it's 
wrong. We've got to do something about it. It's downright unpatriotic. 
I will continue.
  The outside earnings are a vivid reminder that, without comprehensive 
national health care reform, the gatekeepers of our health care system 
will put the short-term interests of Wall Street before the needs of 
millions of patients and a national economy plagued by joblessness.
  I'm not going to read the whole report, Mr. Speaker, but it's worth 
it to go on a little further.
  The 2009 financial reports from the Nation's five largest insurance 
companies reveal that, one, the firms made $12.2 billion--an increase 
of $4.4 billion, or 56 percent, from 2008. Four out of five of the 
companies saw earnings increase, with Cigna's profits jumping 346 
percent.
  Cigna's profits jumped 346 percent. That's pretty good. Now, this is 
as Americans are losing their health care benefits, as unemployment is 
spiking. As people are in real pain, they're getting more money.
  The companies provided private insurance coverage to 2.7 million 
fewer people than the year before. Four out of five of the companies 
insured fewer people through private coverage. United Health alone 
insured 1.7 million fewer people through employer-based and individual 
coverage.
  That's why I'm an advocate of universal, single-payer health care. As 
long as the private insurance market is a player in this thing, they're 
going to offer the worst at the highest price.
  All but one of the five companies increased the number of people they 
covered through public insurance programs--Medicaid, SCHIP, Medicare. 
United Health added 680,000 people to public plans. That's me and you. 
That's the public.
  The proportion of premium dollars spent on health care expenses went 
down for three of the five firms, with the higher proportion going to 
administrative expenses and to--guess what?--profits.
  I know you're shocked.
  One last paragraph, Mr. Speaker, so that people can really get a 
flavor of this thing. I'm hoping that people will really get a handle 
on this and will look into it so that they can see what's really going 
on. You can't figure out what's going on by some of these talk show 
hosts. Depending on what stations you like to watch, they're not going 
to tell you the truth. They're going to be busy telling you all about 
death panels and school-based sex clinics, and they're going to say 
government is taking over health care. Well, I'd rather have government 
take over my health care than have United Health take over my health 
care. I would. I think a lot of Americans would probably agree. Some 
may not, but I think most Americans expect the government to make sure 
that the private corporations in the health care business play fair 
with the American people. Let's go back to the report.

  The shedding of 2.7 million members from private health care plans is 
part of the industry's long-term shifting of responsibility of the care 
of millions of the sick, older, and lower-income customers to taxpayer-
supported government health programs, such as Medicaid and State 
Children's Health Insurance plans. State and Federal programs have 
increasingly been hiring big insurers to manage their care.
  Well, I think we need to not do that. We need to get a plan that 
really provides some real competition for these people, like a public 
option or, better yet, have single-payer health care and just get the 
private market out of the health care business and allow private 
doctors to take care of patients as opposed to private insurance 
companies, which, Mr. Speaker, I will say don't really add value to the 
health care equation.
  What do these people do? They move paper around. They don't see 
patients. They don't diagnose. They don't treat. What do they do? What 
do they add? Do they go get one aspirin? Do they put gauze on or dress 
wounds? They don't do anything like that. I think that they are, more 
or less, parasites on the system. They're taking massive amounts of 
money out and are leaving 2.7 million people behind in the year they've 
made the most money of all. So here is a little bit more from the 
inside of the report.
  Faced with such onerous costs, many customers are winding up 
uninsured. Health insurance premiums have risen so high that experts 
have forecasted that 52 million Americans will be without coverage this 
year.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I know and you know that the number we always toss 
around is 47 million, that 47 million Americans don't have health care. 
Well, if that's what you say, you're wrong. We're approaching 52 
million. There are 52 million Americans who are without health care, 
and this is at a time when we're in the very middle of a debate around 
reforming health care.
  Left alone to purchase a health care plan directly from private 
insurers, many will have no choice but to remain uninsured or to buy 
cheap policies with inadequate benefits that leave them underinsured 
and at financial risk should they have a serious accident or illness.
  Now, one little fact that Americans should know is that 60 percent--
think about 6 and 10--of all bankruptcy filings are directly related to 
medical debt. Think about that. Our broken health care system is 
driving Americans to bankruptcy and to poverty. As that happens, our 
industry doesn't seem to care much at all because they're getting 
theirs, which seems to be their only obsession.
  Well, Mr. Speaker, I may return to this topic in a little while, but 
I want you to know and I want the American people to know that this is 
a problem that must be addressed. This is not a time for cynicism, Mr. 
Speaker; this is a time for action. This is not a time to say what can 
happen; this is a time to make something happen. This is not a time to 
quit; this is a time to act. If Americans act now, Mr. Speaker, we can 
get that public insurance option. We can get that public option.
  You know, last week, when I was talking, we had only about 24 
Senators signed onto a letter saying they were going to support the 
public option. The last I checked, we were up to 35. The question is: 
Is your Senator on the letter? We need every Senator on there. We've 
got to get 50 on there because, if we get 50 Senators on there, on a 
letter, to say they support the public option through reconciliation 
rules, then we will have that. Despite people saying that the public 
option is dead, it

[[Page H1163]]

will be jumping back to life just like the phoenix, and I will be so 
proud of Americans who just never accepted ``no'' for an answer, 
because it is these insurance companies that are doing this that are 
the main opponents of the public option.
  Let me just say this: People who are for the public option, like me, 
and people who are against the public option, like them, have the same 
reason for the positions that we take. They oppose the public option, 
and I support it for the same reason. It's going to cut into corporate 
profits and give more people health care. That's why we don't agree. 
They want to take more from the American people. I want to give more to 
the American people, so we don't agree. This public option can succeed 
if we just don't stop. It passed through the House, and 70 percent of 
Americans support it. We've got a climbing number of Senators getting 
on every day.
  I want to thank Senator Sherrod Brown. You know, I think ``President 
Sherrod Brown'' sounds pretty good. I'd like to see him think about 
that. We've got Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, another great American. 
We've got other Senators joining every day who are just saying, you 
know, We're going to break free of this stranglehold that has been 
around the U.S. Senate, and we're going to really do something good for 
the American people. So I just want to say hats off to them and say I 
appreciate the hard work that they're doing.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. Speaker, I have another chart that I want to show to the people 
here, and this one is quite sobering, quite sobering. It is another big 
number, Mr. Speaker. It is the kind of number that really, really, 
really we almost don't want to mention it, but if you don't mention it, 
you dishonor the memory of the people that are hurt.
  Mr. Speaker, this chart here, I want to bring it real close to me so 
it is in the camera shot, says 45,000--45,000--Americans die every year 
because they are uninsured.
  Now, think about this number, and think about this number: 2.7 
million Americans lose coverage. Because of no coverage, 45,000 
Americans die every year. So people are literally dying because they 
don't have health care coverage. And not one, not two, not somebody 
here or there, but 45,000 people.
  This is a national disgrace, Mr. Speaker. It must be changed. We have 
got to do something about it. It has to be something that is a national 
priority. We have got to extend coverage to people, and we have to do 
it in a way that is cost-effective and so that we can extend as much 
coverage as we possibly can to as many people as we possibly can.
  This is the reality of the situation. We have to fight for this, and 
we have to understand that this fight for health care reform is a life-
and-death fight, Mr. Speaker. It is not just something that one side 
would prefer and the other side kind of would not prefer. That is just 
not what we are talking about. We are talking about a life-and-death 
situation, where unless we are able to move forward on real health care 
reform, Americans die.
  Now, this number, 45,000, it looks like a big number. Here in 
Washington we throw big numbers around all the time, 2.7 billion, 
45,000, all these numbers, and they jumble the mind. One of these 
45,000 is a mother of someone. One of these 45,000 is a child of 
someone. One of these 45,000 is a young man in his prime of life whose 
family is dependent upon his income. One of these 45,000 is a small 
business owner. One of these 45,000 is someone who somebody loves.
  This is a national emergency, Mr. Speaker, and I don't need to tell 
you, if we were talking about losing this many people a year in 
conflict or war, there is no doubt we would have a national debate and 
outrage over what we were going to do about it. It is not less 
important because it happens silently in hospital rooms and bedrooms 
and houses. It is just as important, and we have to do something about 
it.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk more about health care, but I just 
want to just lay out a few other impacts, since we laid that one out. 
Let me put it back up, because it is relevant to what I am about to 
say.
  Not only do 45,000 Americans die every year because they are 
uninsured, but this year alone an estimated 1.5 million Americans will 
declare bankruptcy because of a lack of health care or because of 
health care expenses. Studies in recent years suggest that more than 60 
percent of people who go bankrupt are actually capsized by medical 
bills.
  Bankruptcies due to medical bills increased nearly 50 percent in a 6-
year period, from 44 percent in 2001 to 62 percent in 2007. Sixty 
percent. We wish it was only 60 percent. It is probably 65 percent by 
now, Mr. Speaker, because this is a 2007 number.
  Most of those who filed bankruptcy were middle-class, well-educated 
homeowners, according to a report published in August 2009 by the 
American Journal of Medicine. Unless you are Warren Buffett or Bill 
Gates, you are one illness away from financial ruin in this country. 
That is what the author of this report said, Dr. Stephanie Woolhandler. 
If an illness is long enough and expensive enough, private insurance 
offers very little protection against medical bankruptcy. That is the 
major finding of the study.
  Overall, three-quarters of the people with medically related 
bankruptcy had health insurance. Let me tell you that again. As we 
know, this is the most generous, giving country. There are a lot of 
people who have the best of intentions. But as all Americans know, not 
everybody is like that.
  There are some people who think, Well, I don't really care about 
those people. I only care about myself and my family, and if those 
people don't have insurance, well, that is just their problem. There is 
probably something they did to deserve that. Shocking as it is, there 
are a lot of people who think like that. The fact is, this statistic of 
all these people going into bankruptcy because of medical debt is 
talking about folks who are middle class and who have jobs.
  This is a shocking statistic. Three-quarters of the people with 
medically related bankruptcy had health insurance. They had health 
insurance, and they still went down. Why? Because of lifetime caps, 
because they got dropped, because of copays and escalating premiums, 
all these things going on. Those were actually the predominant problems 
in patients studied. Seventy-eight percent of them had health 
insurance, but many of them were bankrupted anyway because there were 
gaps in their coverage, like copayments, deductibles, and uncovered 
services.
  Other people had private insurance but got so sick they had lost 
their job and lost their insurance. We will return to that in a moment.
  Health care cost, as a percentage of gross domestic product, has 
significantly increased. From March 2008, the number has grown since 
then. I have a chart here which I will explain to you, which I don't 
actually have a blowup of, which illustrates that we pay more than any 
other country for health care, and the other countries cover the entire 
population.
  So, for example, in the United States, in 1970, health care was 7 
percent of gross domestic product. Today it is 15.3. In Canada, 1970, 
it was 7 percent of gross domestic product. Now it is 9.9, more than 5 
percentage points lower than ours. In Germany, health care was 6.2 
percent in 1970 and grew to 10.6, about 5 percent lower than us. In the 
U.K., in 1970, health care was about 4.5 in 1970, and now it is 8.1.
  We have expanded this because it makes somebody a whole lot of dough. 
We have got to think about this, and we have got to do something about 
it.
  From 2000 to 2008, workers' health insurance premiums shot up more 
than five times faster than their wages. The average cost of family 
coverage in the workplace went from $6,672 in the year 2000 to $12,000 
in 2007. That is a 78 percent increase. So it has eaten up family 
income. At the same time, average wages rose only about 15 percent, 
which means that the cost of health care significantly outstripped 
American pay.
  I just wanted to speak a little bit, Mr. Speaker, about the important 
financial choices that Americans are having to make, bankruptcy or not 
bankruptcy, get the coverage or not. What are you going to do? Now that 
you are out of work, what are you going to do? Difficult choices.
  But I wanted to spend a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, talking about the 
important issue of the public option, because

[[Page H1164]]

I think that a lot of people are thinking, well, you know, now that the 
public option seems to be back in play, more Senators are supporting 
it, and it already passed through the House, the American people like 
it, the President said he was in favor of it, and people are thinking, 
well, maybe it will happen now.

  Well, you know what? This is no time to quit the fight for the public 
option. In fact, it is time to accelerate your energy around the public 
option. It wouldn't be a bad thing if people had rallies and community 
forums and petitions for the public option.
  The public option is a great choice. I am an advocate of universal 
single payer health care, but the public option is a good choice if we 
can't get that far.
  Currently, in 34 States, 75 percent of the insurance market is 
controlled by five or fewer companies, Mr. Speaker. Many areas of the 
country are dominated by just one or two private organizations. What 
that means is Americans don't have much choice. We are dealing with 
highly concentrated markets, and the public option would give people in 
these highly concentrated markets more choice.
  Competition. Again, in 34 States, 75 percent of the insurance market 
is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent 
is controlled by only one company. Now, is that a monopoly or what? In 
addition, a public option would provide competition for private 
insurance companies to keep them honest.
  So the public option offers choice and competition. It also lowers 
cost. That is the funny thing about it. You would think you would have 
a lot of Republican support, because it reduces costs. But we know that 
existing public options, like Medicare and Medicaid, consistently have 
lower administrative costs than their private insurance counterparts 
because they don't have competition. Why should they worry about 
lowering costs?
  According to the Commonwealth Fund, the net administrative costs for 
Medicaid and Medicare were 5 percent and then 8 percent; 5 percent for 
Medicare, 8 percent for Medicaid. If you look at the top five health 
insurance companies, their administrative costs were over 17 percent. 
Triple. It is crazy.
  With the insurance market controlled by fewer and fewer companies and 
more and more States, there is little incentive to lower costs. Also, 
as one former insurance executive testified before Congress, insurance 
companies are not only encouraged to find reasons to drop seriously ill 
people, they are rewarded for it. Bureaucratic overhead costs coupled 
with multimillion dollar CEO salaries and bonuses make high costs for 
American families and a lack of competition, and it provides no 
incentive to change their practices.
  The public option, Mr. Speaker, would provide higher quality for 
Americans' health care. Competition always improves--well, it doesn't 
always, but it often improves quality, and therefore the public option 
will help consumers get a better coverage for the same amount of money 
as their private insurance.
  There are some things, Mr. Speaker, people have been saying about the 
public option that are not true. One of those things is the idea of the 
public option being a government takeover or even a government-run 
program. Well, you know what? The fact is that the public option would 
be administered by the Department of Health and Human Services, but it 
would be with private doctors and providers out there, so it would 
still be people dealing with their own private doctor.
  The idea that the mandated health insurance is a new tax is also 
false, is not true. What a public option really means is that the 
government would help to cover the high cost of insurance for 
Americans, while bringing those costs down through competition, access, 
and choice. Without health care insurance reform, however, we can 
expect the problems that exist today only to get worse.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I want to now just talk about the fact that we have 
been hearing a lot about this idea of reconciliation. There might be 
some Americans out there saying reconciliation, what is that about? Is 
that about how my neighbor and me who have been feuding are finally 
going to try to get along? Not really in this situation, although it 
would be a good thing.
  The fact is, Mr. Speaker, in this case, reconciliation is just some 
special budgetary rules that are passed through Congress that allow 
Congress to pass laws by getting around the filibuster rules that are 
in the Senate. That is what it is. There are reconciliation rules in 
the House and the Senate, but in the Senate they have these rules that 
you have to have 60 people to end debate so you can then vote on 
something. Reconciliation allows us to get around those rules, and so 
it is a good thing.
  A simple up or down vote by more than half the House and Senate 
should be enough to send the President the final improvements to the 
health care reform measure that we have been talking about for a year. 
A simple majority vote would not be used to reform the health care 
system, just to clear limited improvements to the comprehensive health 
reform bill which has already passed the Senate and in a similar form 
in the House, but not exactly the same.
  Reconciliation is part of the normal legislative process, Mr. 
Speaker. It has been used 22 times over the last 30 years, 16 times by 
a Republican-led Senate, and nearly two-thirds of the time Republican 
Presidents have signed the reconciliation bills. Not all the time. 
Democrats have used it, too.
  Certain times the reconciliation was used, for example, to enact a 
health reform bill called COBRA. Everybody knows what COBRA is. COBRA 
is what allows you to maintain your health insurance after you lose 
your job. This is a law that lets employees just keep their employer's 
health insurance after they have left their job. This bill was passed 
through reconciliation in 1985 and passed into law under Ronald Reagan. 
In fact, the R in COBRA actually stands for ``reconciliation.'' Isn't 
that something?
  SCHIP, the bipartisan State Children's Health Insurance Program, 
passed through reconciliation in 1997. Medicare changes done through 
reconciliation include a hospice benefit, HMO preventative care, like 
cancer screenings, added protection also for patients in nursing homes, 
and the way Medicare pays doctors and health care professionals.

                              {time}  1815

  Also, the law requiring emergency rooms to screen Medicare and 
Medicaid patients, regardless of their ability to pay, was part of the 
1985 reconciliation measure. So don't think that reconciliation is 
something new. There are people on the radio and television saying, Oh, 
my God, the Democrats are using reconciliation. Well, of course we are. 
It's a normal legislative tool used many times before and there's 
nothing unusual about it. Of course, reconciliation has been used for 
things that were not good for the American people as well. But this is 
not one of those occasions. This is an occasion where it's being used 
for something good.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to wrap up now. So if any of my Republican 
colleagues are thinking they want to get ready to get started, it would 
be a good idea to start thinking about that.
  I just want to talk a little bit, as I begin to wrap up, about our 
economic situation. Because so much of the pain people are suffering 
through lack of health care and lack of health care reform is related 
to the fact that they're not working now. You lose your job; you lose 
your health care. I mentioned COBRA. Yeah, you can pay out of your own 
pocket COBRA if you lose your job, but you've still got to have some 
money to pay that.
  So I just want to say that last Thursday, Mr. Speaker, the House 
unanimously passed the emergency legislation to extend a range of 
programs that expire this weekend. And some of these things were 
including unemployment benefits, help with health insurance for 
unemployed, a highway bill, satellite TV, delay in cut in Medicare 
physician payments, flood insurance, and things like that. Mr. Speaker, 
it just concerns me that we have had one Republican Senator who, up 
until a few days ago, was single-handedly blocking the passage of an 
emergency measure despite serious consequences for families.
  Last week, Mr. Speaker, I actually went to my own district and asked 
people to raise their voices about the action that Senator Bunning was 
taking

[[Page H1165]]

because it was inflicting a lot of pain around the country. According 
to the Department of Labor, the expiration of unemployment benefits 
caused 100,000 people to lose their benefits immediately, and about 
400,000 people will lose unemployment benefits, including 4,300 people 
in Kentucky, and the next few weeks, if Senator Bunning does not drop 
his opposition.
  An estimated half a million jobless Americans will lose access to 
COBRA subsidies to them to help them buy health care insurance. Letting 
the highway and transit programs lapse would temporarily shut down a 
total of $925 million worth of projects this week in highway 
reimbursements and transit grants to States and urban areas, 
endangering more than 32,000 jobs, national anti-drunk driver efforts, 
and multimillion dollar construction jobs. With the Bunning 
obstruction, 41 highway projects have been forced to shut down.
  Now, history knows that he came to an accommodation--and that's good. 
But the fact that the Senator held it up, to me is an example of how 
important it is to really, really understand who is not working for the 
American people and who is. Democrats are here trying to extend 
unemployment, extend COBRA, help Americans make it through tough times; 
and other people are obstructing and holding things up. I think it's 
important for the American people to know that because the American 
people deserve to know who's fighting for their economic livelihood and 
who's not.
  The fact is, Senator Bunning actually said, It could be argued 
unemployment insurance is a disincentive for work because people are 
being paid even though they're not working. It could be argued that 
unemployment insurance is a disincentive for work because people are 
being paid even though they're not working. That's pretty sad. The fact 
is that is Senator Jim Bunning, Republican, Kentucky. I just want 
people to keep it in mind, what they're dealing with and what they're 
up against and who they're up against.
  So the Senate ended up passing the bill; voted 78-19 Tuesday night to 
pass legislation extending unemployment benefits, highway funding, and 
other programs for 1 month, bringing an end to the one-man crusade to 
filibuster the bill. The fact is, the filibuster resulted in thousands 
of Federal workers being furloughed and an interruption in unemployment 
benefits. It happened. People were hurt. People were without money 
because of this. And that was incredibly unfortunate. But I think 
Americans in this great democracy of ours can express yourselves 
through the ballot box, and you should let people know that. And I 
think people should know what happened and how it happened and who did 
it.
  So I also just want to mention, Mr. Speaker, that over 200,000 
jobless workers were scheduled to lose unemployment benefits last week; 
and it didn't happen because we narrowly avoided it, but it certainly 
could have happened. And there was a break; there was a lapse. Federal 
employees were furloughed. I just want to keep that in mind and have 
people remember that.
  So, Mr. Speaker, as I begin to wind down, I just want to say that 
there is a group of Members of Congress who have a progressive vision 
for America. The progressive vision for America is an America where the 
government actually takes responsibility for making sure the economy 
works for everybody; the progressive vision for America is where we 
have civil rights and human rights for women, people of color, working 
people, people who live in rural areas; where the country literally 
works for everyone and not just a few; where we really believe that all 
men are created equal and created with certain inalienable rights; 
where we really want to see our country reach its highest potential by 
offering educational opportunity, by saying that the military budget 
has expanded way out of control, that we need to put more energy into 
diplomacy and development around the world; a progressive vision in 
which we say that America should use its awesome blessings and strength 
to help confer those blessings for other people and people within.
  With that, I yield back.

                          ____________________