[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 35 (Wednesday, March 9, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1420-S1421]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
A SECOND OPINION
Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor, as I do every
week, as a physician who has practiced medicine and taken care of
families in Wyoming for a quarter of a century, to give a doctor's
second opinion of the health care law.
County commissioners from around the State of Wyoming are coming to
town today for their annual meeting. It was 1 year ago today, at their
annual meeting, when Nancy Pelosi--then-Speaker of the House--addressed
that group and said: We have to pass the bill so you can find out what
is in it.
That quote has been repeated again and again and again, and people
now know what is in this health care law. People have found out. Every
month since this law has been passed, people have found out additional
things about the health care law they absolutely do not like. Now that
the American people know what is in the bill, and they know they don't
like it, let's get to the fundamentals of what the American people have
asked for. When they asked for a change in health care in this country,
they said they wanted the care they need from the doctor at a price
they can afford. The new law fails that test, and it fails miserably.
It has only taken 1 year to break almost every promise the President
made when he addressed the Congress and the country. So what I would
like to do now is take a look, month by month, at how those promises
were broken. I will start with March, since it is now March and this
started with Nancy Pelosi's statement in March of 2010.
One year ago, the Congressional Budget Office evaluated the law to
see how much it would actually cost. They told us the law could only
reduce the deficit if it did something about the long-term insolvency
of Medicare. Instead, the Democrats and the President proposed and
adopted and signed into law cuts of over $500 billion from Medicare.
This was not to save Medicare but to start a whole new government
entitlement program, a decision the CBO said would increase the deficit
by $260 billion.
Let's go to April. In April, we learned the costs for those Medicare
cuts go way beyond dollars and cents. An analysis by the Department of
Health and Human Services found these cuts could drive up to 15 percent
of hospitals out of business. For this administration, the shortage of
hospitals apparently takes a backseat to the shortage of Washington
bureaucrats.
Let us go to May. In May, we learned over 200,000 Americans with
preexisting conditions and expensive health insurance would not be
eligible to enroll in the new high-risk pools created in the health
care law; that is, of course, unless they were willing to completely
drop the insurance they had and wait, without insurance--wait without
insurance--for 6 months. Only then would they qualify for what was in
the health care law. For many people with preexisting conditions, who
were paying higher premiums, they felt that would be irresponsible
behavior; that it would be risky, put them at financial risk. But that
is what this administration and this government was proposing.
In June, after the administration sent over 4 million postcards to
small businesses--you remember the postcards, the ones claiming those
small businesses would be eligible for a tax credit--the Associated
Press blew the whistle. It turned out the only small businesses that
were fully eligible for these tax credits had to employ fewer than 25
people. So to be eligible at all, they had to have fewer than 25
people. Moreover, the Associated Press reported the tax credit drops
off sharply if the company employs any more than 10 people or if the
annual salary was averaging more than $25,000. So if you had 10
employees and paid them, on average, $25,000, you could get the tax
credit. But once you went to that 11th employee and gave someone a
raise,
[[Page S1421]]
you started to lose the attribute the administration said was so
valuable.
That was in June. In July, the Obama administration's own Justice
Department confirmed the individual mandate penalty is a tax increase.
Well, when ABC News's George Stephanopoulos asked the President if the
mandate penalty was a tax increase, the President said: ``I absolutely
reject that notion.'' Well, if the President absolutely rejects the
notion, why is his own Justice Department contradicting him?
In August, without so much as a hearing before Congress, the
President made a recess appointment. He tapped Dr. Donald Berwick to
run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. So how big is this
Federal agency? Well, it includes oversight of a budget larger than the
Pentagon's. Dr. Berwick believes the government must ration health care
and that the only issue is whether we ration with our eyes wide open,
as he said. Well, the President promised not to ration care, so why did
he make an appointment of someone who believes it is inevitable to
ration care and do it in a way without ever allowing the Senate--
Republicans and Democrats alike, Members of this body--to even have a
hearing so this individual could explain his position, explain his
previous comments, explain what he has said and written? The President
refused and did a recess appointment of someone who never testified,
never came to a confirmation hearing, and he put him in charge of a
program with a budget larger than the Pentagon's. Can you imagine if
the Secretary of Defense was made as a recess appointment without a
congressional hearing? It is unthinkable.
In September, the administration released new rules estimating that
80 percent of small businesses would be forced to change the coverage
of insurance they offer to their employees. These aren't my numbers,
these are the administration's own numbers. But it was the President
who said, over and over, if you like the coverage you have today, then
you can keep it. Now we know that was another one of the President's
empty promises.
In October, responding to complaints from unions and corporations,
the Obama administration began handing out waivers--waivers that
excused individual groups from ObamaCare's expensive mandates. These
waivers went mostly to those politically connected to this
administration. Most American families still have to bear the law's
expensive burdens. Clearly, for this administration, playing favorites
is more important than achieving fairness. I think every American ought
to be able to get a waiver from this health care law.
In November, a majority of the American people voiced their
opposition to this law and handed an election response that resulted in
a significant change in the composition of the House and the Senate
because the American people knew they did not want this health care
law.
The American people were concerned--and they even wondered if this
law was constitutional--and in December, a Federal judge in Virginia
ruled it was unconstitutional to force Americans to buy a product. The
Service Employees International Union, one of the biggest unions in the
country, also admitted in December that fulfilling the requirements of
ObamaCare would be financially impossible. This is the same law they
said the country needed when they lobbied in favor of it.
In January of this year, the Medicare Actuary called the
administration's claim the health care law would bring down costs
``false more than true.'' Also, a Federal judge in Florida struck down
the entire law as unconstitutional.
In February--last month--we learned the 2012 budget the IRS submitted
to Congress specifically mentions the health care law 250 times. They
mention it as a source of authority and funding for new powers. They
called the health care law ``the largest set of tax law changes in more
than 20 years.'' To begin implementing these changes will require
thousands of new Washington bureaucrats.
Well, that was through February, and here we are, on March 9. Did the
American people find out anything new about the health care law in
March? Absolutely. Last Friday night, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services granted another 150 waivers--another 150 waivers. Now there
are over 1,040 waivers covering 2.6 million individuals. These are
people who don't want to live under the Obama health care law. They
don't want it to apply to them. I think every American ought to have a
right to that same waiver. Of those 2.6 million people who received
waivers, 1.2 million are members of unions. So that is 46 percent of
the waivers have been given to union members.
If you look at the Web site you must go to for that information, the
Secretary has tried to disguise how they label these individuals, and
so union plans are now called ``multiemployer plans.'' Under this
change in the name, at the Web site you go to learn about this, are the
words ``promoting transparency.'' So we have an administration that
says one thing but does another.
But the American people now know what is in the law. As they were
studying the law before the vote, they didn't want it. Now they know
all about it, and they still don't want it. It is clear it is
unsustainable, unaffordable, and unconstitutional. It is time to repeal
and replace it.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Missouri.
____________________