[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 118 (Thursday, August 5, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6837-S6838]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             SECOND OPINION

  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today, as I have 
week after week since the health care bill was signed into law, with a 
doctor's second opinion of the health care law. I do this as someone 
who has practiced medicine, taking care of the families in Wyoming as 
an orthopedic surgeon for 25 years; as someone who has been the medical 
director of the Wyoming Health Fairs, to give people low-cost blood 
screenings so they can have early detection of medical problems to help 
them find problems early. And early treatment following early detection 
is something that always works to keep down the cost of their medical 
care.
  I wish to talk about the fact that we have seen again this week a new 
development, and the development this week is that the American people 
have spoken. They have done it in the Show Me State of Missouri. The 
Show Me State has shown Washington that they have rejected the 
President's takeover of the health care system in this country.
  Like so many Americans, voters in Missouri are sick and tired of 
Washington forcing things upon them, telling them what they need to do, 
and now telling them what they need to buy--specifically in terms of 
the Federal mandate that people have health insurance, that they must 
go out and buy that or face penalties, taxes, fines related to the fact 
that they make a choice to not buy health insurance.
  I think the voters are also tired of being ignored by Washington. 
That is why 71 percent of the voters in Missouri on Tuesday--71 
percent, over 7 out of 10--who went to the polls rejected the demand by 
Washington that they be forced to buy a product, to buy health 
insurance. It is part of the law. It is a mandate. They have to have 
health insurance, have to buy it.
  So how did the White House respond to this rejection of what has now 
been forced down the throats of the American voters? Well, Robert 
Gibbs, the White House Press Secretary, was questioned on this during 
the White House press conference, and he was asked what it means that 
voters in Missouri would vote against this Federal mandate, and Gibbs 
said ``nothing.'' It means nothing. Well, to the voters of Missouri 
whom I have talked to, this is an insult. It does mean something. They 
expressed their opinion, and the White House said: Your opinion means 
nothing to us.
  So instead of trying to address the concerns and fix the new law, 
right now the White House seems to be more focused on a slick public 
relations program. They have a whole campaign going.
  It is interesting because the people of Missouri are not the only 
ones who are opposed to this law. Later this year, voters in a couple 
of other States will be voting as well on the impact and the mandate.
  A new Rasmussen poll out just this past week says that 57 percent of 
Americans--I am talking about likely voters; that is how they polled 
this, likely voters--said this recently passed health care law, in 
their opinion, is bad for our country. So 57 percent of Americans feel 
the law that was forced down the throats of the American people, with 
the American people screaming: Do not pass this law--even today, 57 
percent of Americans, as they learn more and more about what is in the 
law, believe it is bad for the country. That is actually the highest 
level of pessimism about this law since the law was passed in March.
  Support for the law continues to erode. So what happens? Well, the 
White House comes out with a public relations campaign, and once again 
they are setting their sights on America's seniors. They did it with a 
very expensive glossy mailer that went out to the seniors on Medicare. 
It looked to me like a propaganda piece--very misleading. Once again, 
they are focused on the seniors. Why? Well, because the seniors are 
those who are most opposed to the new health care law, the one that 
takes $500 billion away from Medicare, not to save Medicare, the health 
care program for our seniors, but to start a whole new government 
program for someone else.
  So this week, what happened? At the end of last week, the new 
director of Medicare and Medicaid, Dr. Berwick--and we have talked 
about him on the Senate floor. He is the one who had a recess 
appointment, the one who is in love with the British health care 
system, the new director who had the recess appointment who has never 
come to the Senate to share his answers with the American people. The 
American people have been denied the right to hear from him. He did not 
have time to share his views with the American people, but he did have 
time to introduce a slick new ad campaign to try to sell the new law to 
Medicare patients.
  The health care law is out there now being promoted in a television 
ad for which the American taxpayer is going to have to pay the bill. 
The American taxpayers are going to pay the bill, and the ad stars Andy 
Griffith. During this ad--and we know Andy Griffith from Andy of 
Mayberry, the television show, and in later years, Matlock. He is used 
as the spokesman now to our seniors, telling seniors a number of 
things, making a number of promises. Let's go through them.

  One is, he says seniors will have their ``guaranteed benefits.'' 
Well, only in Mayberry does a $500 billion cut equal better care for 
American seniors. Even the administration's own actuaries and own 
specialists in Medicare took a look at this, and they don't even agree 
with the commercials. They say the cuts are unlikely to be sustainable 
over time. They say that one in six hospitals and doctors offices 
related to Medicare providers are going to become unprofitable within 
10 years, and many may be forced to close. They say the new law is 
going to jeopardize patient access to medical care.
  Well, then Mr. Griffith says: ``Well, more good things are coming.'' 
Well, what kinds of things for our seniors on Medicare? When you take a 
look at how the cuts are out there--there are cuts for home health, 
which is a lifeline for seniors who try to stay out of

[[Page S6838]]

a nursing home. There are cuts to nursing homes for Medicare. There are 
cuts in physical therapy. There are cuts to hospice, where many people 
spend the last days of their lives. There are cuts across the board. I 
do not know how that can be related to ``more good things are coming.''
  The President's Medicare experts tell us that benefits aren't going 
to remain the same because things would happen with Medicare Advantage. 
One out of four people on Medicare is signed up for Medicare Advantage, 
and the reason they do it is because there are advantages of being on 
Medicare Advantage in terms of preventive care, in terms of coordinated 
care. There are good reasons people sign up for that. Yet there are 
going to be cuts there.
  In the commercial, they also say the law will lower prescription 
costs, but the Congressional Budget Office estimates that is not true, 
that the cost of prescriptions will continue to go up.
  There are people who look at ads, political ads, different kinds of 
ads. There is an organization called factcheck.org, and what they did 
is they said this commercial uses--their words are ``weasel words,'' 
they say, to avoid telling the truth. Well, that is the fundamental 
problem. As much as most Americans love to hear from Andy Griffith, we 
would prefer to hear the truth from President Obama. Instead of 
spending hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer 
money--taxpayer money--on a misleading ad, the President should put 
this money toward the $500 billion that has been cut from our seniors 
on Medicare.
  The White House continues to believe the American people do not 
understand what is in the health care law, and they say that is the 
reason it is unpopular. They say that if more people understood the 
law, well, then it would be more popular. But week after week, 
something else comes out, another broken promise that makes people 
realize this is not good for them. It is not good for them as patients; 
it is not good for the providers, the nurses and doctors who take care 
of the patients; and it is not good for the payers, the people who are 
paying for their health care, the taxpayers of America. Across the 
board, people realize, as they learn more and more about what is in 
this law, that it is not good for them.
  When I go to senior centers and visit with seniors, I say: How many 
of you believe it is going cost you more for our health care? Every 
hand goes up.
  Then I say: How many of you believe the quality of your care is going 
to go down? Every hand goes up.
  You see the same thing if you go to a Kiwanis Club or a Lions Club or 
a Rotary Club, civic organizations, whomever you visit. Do you think 
the cost of your care is going to go up? Every hand goes up. Do you 
think the quality of your care is going to go down? The hands go up 
again. That is not what the American people want--paying more and 
getting less.
  Well, I think the American people are really getting a good 
understanding of what is in this bill, and the people of Missouri have 
clearly reflected that Tuesday in the voting booth.
  Earlier this week, I joined Senator Coburn, the other physician in 
the Senate--there are only two physicians who serve in this body--and 
other Members of the Senate in sending a letter to Secretary Sebelius, 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services. What we requested is that 
the Department stop running this ad, reimburse the U.S. Treasury for 
any taxpayer money spent on the ad, and explain which one of the 
accounts in Health and Human Services paid for this advertisement.
  Take a look at this. We as a nation are $13 trillion in debt, and the 
White House's ongoing propaganda campaign should not be funded by 
American taxpayers. And that is why, week after week, every week since 
this bill became law, I have come to the floor to give my second 
opinion about the health care law and to say that it should be repealed 
and replaced--replaced with something that is patient centered, not 
government centered, not insurance company centered, but patient 
centered. Allow people to buy insurance across State lines. That will 
help bring down the cost and will help more people to be insured. Give 
people who buy their own health insurance the opportunity to have the 
same tax breaks the big companies get. Give people who buy their own 
health insurance, and others, opportunities through nutrition and diet 
and exercise and taking responsibility for their own health care. Let 
them reap the benefits of that. Then, of course, we need to deal with 
lawsuit abuse and the expense of all of the unnecessary tests, the 
defensive medicine doctors all across the country will tell you they 
end up practicing.
  Those are the things we need to do--and opportunities for small 
businesses to join together to bring down the cost of their care. With 
the individual mandate that is out there and the business mandate, we 
are seeing more businesses saying: You know, I am not going to want to 
provide health insurance under this new law. I will just pay the 
penalty and go on. That is going to make it harder for people.
  Here we are with a huge national debt, high unemployment, and a 
health care law that, in my opinion, would best serve the country if it 
was repealed and replaced. That is why I come to the floor again today, 
the last day the Senate is in session, as Senators are heading out 
around the country to visit with those in their communities. I am 
hoping the American people continue to speak out and tell their elected 
representatives it is time to repeal and replace this health care law.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________