[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 83 (Thursday, June 9, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3670-S3671]
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 again today, as I
have week after week since the health care law has been passed, with a
doctor's second opinion about the health care law. As you know, I have
practiced medicine for 25 years in Wyoming, taking care of Wyoming
families.
I have great concerns about this health care law that has been passed
by this body as well as the House, signed by the President. The
American people continue to learn more and more about this health care
law, and the more they learn, the more concern they have about this law
being bad for patients; bad for providers, the nurses and doctors who
take care of the patients; and bad for the payers, the taxpayers of
this country who are going to get hit with an incredible bill.
The main subject I wish to talk about today is a new report that has
come out that says to me that the taxpayers are going to get hit with a
bill much higher than they initially thought. It is a report from the
McKinsey Quarterly called ``How U.S. health care reform will affect
employee benefits.''
In the debate and speeches the President had given in the runup to
the election and the vote on this bill, he said that if you had care
you liked, you could keep it; that the American people, if they had a
plan they liked, would be able to keep it. It was a promise he made to
the American people, a promise the American people wanted to believe.
But now this report shows that the American people were right in being
skeptical, and, as we see, the more the American people learn about the
health care law, the less they like it and the more they oppose
it. What this report says is that a shift away from employer-provided
health insurance will be vastly greater than expected and will make
sense for many companies and lower income workers alike.
When we work our way through this report, what we see is that more
and more private companies that today--today--provide health insurance
for their employees will be much less likely to be willing to provide
that insurance in the future. Why? Because it is going to be a lot more
expensive to provide the insurance. The mandates, the quality, and the
high level of expense involved with providing that insurance is going
to be a significant burden to those companies. And if they don't
provide the insurance at all, there are going to be other chances for
those employees and it will actually be cheaper for the business to not
provide insurance, give the people a raise, and pay the penalty of the
health care law and leave people without the insurance.
When we take a look at this overall health care law, we see it as one
where this body and this President raided Medicare. They took $500
billion away from our seniors on Medicare, not to save Medicare but to
start a whole new government program. With the President's Payment
Advisory Board, he additionally wants to ration Medicare--ration
Medicare. They have raided Medicare and rationed Medicare. Is it any
surprise that people on Medicare are having a much harder time finding
a doctor as doctors refuse to see patients on Medicare?
So with all of this, now we get this report. This report says--and
this is a very reputable national consulting firm. This report says
they did a survey of 1,300 employers across the country--different
industries, different geographies, different employer sizes--and the
results ought to be a huge wakeup call for all workers and all families
across the country, because what this group has seen from this study is
that overall, 30 percent of all employers--30 percent of all
employers--will either definitely or probably--so likely--stop offering
employer-sponsored health coverage in the years after 2014. That is
when ObamaCare goes fully into effect.
Among employers with a high awareness of how the program actually
works for health care reform--who have actually studied what the law
says--in that group, those who are most well informed, they are saying
more than 50 percent and upwards to 60 percent will pursue other
options. They will likely stop offering their employees health
coverage. At least 30 percent of the employers would gain economically
from dropping coverage even if they completely compensated the
employees for the change of losing their insurance. This is very
alarming for our country.
There was a well-written editorial in yesterday's Wall Street Journal
by Grace-Marie Turner, and I ask unanimous consent that it be printed
in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. BARRASSO. Grace-Marie Turner is president of the Galen Institute
and coauthor of a book called ``Why ObamaCare Is Wrong For America.''
Having read the book, I will tell my colleagues a lot of the things I
have been talking about during the debate leading up to the vote on
ObamaCare and that I have been talking about afterwards as a doctor's
second opinion are included in her book. She specifically writes that
no, you can't keep your health insurance. There are about 150 million
Americans who get their coverage at work. We are not talking about
people on Medicare; we are talking about nonelderly Americans who get
their coverage at work.
The Congressional Budget Office, when we were debating the health
care law, estimated that maybe 9 million, 10 million of those people,
or about 7 percent of the employees who currently get their health
insurance through work, may lose their health insurance at work, in
spite of the fact that the President said if you like what you have,
you can keep it. But this survey of 1,300 different companies--
organizations that provide health insurance--30 percent of them say I
don't think we are going to follow that route. We are talking about a
significantly larger number than the Congressional Budget Office had
even anticipated. The numbers are astonishing.
In a study last year, Doug Holtz-Eakin, who is the former director of
the Congressional Budget Office, estimated not what the current CBO
said--maybe 10 million--he thought maybe 35 million workers would be
moved out of employer-covered plans into subsidized coverage, paid for
by the taxpayers, and he thought by getting to that number, it would
add an additional $1 trillion to the estimate of what the real costs
were going to be for the President's health care law. If these numbers
are true, this newer, higher number of 30 percent pulling out--and
maybe 50 percent once they find out what is actually in the law, in the
mandates on these businesses--the additional costs, at a time when we
are looking at 9.1 percent unemployment in this country, are going to
go even higher with the significant subsidies that exist for families
making up to $88,000 a year.
So I come to the floor to say that the more we learn about this
health care law, the more unintended consequences we find; that many of
the predictions made about this health care law from this side of the
aisle are now coming true.
I have spoken in the past about waivers. We now are at a point where
3 million people who get their health insurance through work--3 million
people covered with health insurance in this country--have gotten
waivers. Whole
[[Page S3671]]
States have gotten waivers so they don't have to live under the
mandates of the health care law, and they are going to be back for
waivers again next year and the year after that.
We see additional concern with what is in this health care law. As
Nancy Pelosi said, first you have to pass it before you get to find out
what is in it. As more and more people find out what is in it, we are
finding that more and more people who maybe had coverage they liked are
not going to be able to keep that coverage and are going to lose that
coverage, and the taxpayers are going to get stuck footing the bill.
That is why I come back to the floor week after week with a doctor's
second opinion, because there is new information that comes out week
after week, as this McKinsey & Company study and report came out this
week. That is why I continue to say we need to repeal and replace this
terribly broken health care law.
Thank you.
With that, I yield the floor.
Exhibit 1
[From the Wall Street Journal]
No, You Can't Keep Your Health Insurance
(By Grace-Marie Turner)
A new study by McKinsey suggests that as many as 78 million
Americans could lose employer health coverage.
ObamaCare will lead to a dramatic decline in employer-
provided health insurance--with as many as 78 million
Americans forced to find other sources of coverage.
This disturbing finding is based on my calculations from a
survey by McKinsey & Company. The survey, published this week
in the McKinsey Quarterly, found that up to 50% of employers
say they will definitely or probably pursue alternatives to
their current health-insurance plan in the years after the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act takes effect in
2014. An estimated 156 million non-elderly Americans get
their coverage at work, according to the Employee Benefit
Research Institute.
Before the health law passed, the Congressional Budget
Office estimated that only nine million to 10 million people,
or about 7% of employees who currently get health insurance
at work, would switch to government-subsidized insurance. But
the McKinsey survey of 1,300 employers across industries,
geographies and employer sizes found ``that reform will
provoke a much greater response'' and concludes that the
health overhaul law will lead to a ``radical restructuring''
of job-based health coverage.
Another McKinsey analyst, Alissa Meade, told a meeting of
health-insurance executives last November that ``something in
the range of 80 million to 100 million individuals are going
to change coverage categories in the two years'' after the
insurance mandates take effect in 2014.
Many employees who will need to seek another source of
coverage will take advantage of the health-insurance
subsidies for families making as much as $88,000 a year. This
will drive up the cost of ObamaCare.
In a study last year, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former
director of the Congressional Budget Office, estimated that
an additional 35 million workers would be moved out of
employer plans and into subsidized coverage, and that this
would add about $1 trillion to the total cost of the
president's health law over the next decade. McKinsey's
survey implies that the cost to taxpayers could be
significantly more.
The McKinsey study, ``How US health care reform will affect
employee benefits,'' predicts that employers will either drop
coverage altogether, offer defined contributions for
insurance, or offer coverage only to certain employees. The
study concludes that 30% of employers overall will definitely
or probably stop offering health insurance to their workers.
However, among employers with a high awareness of the health-
reform law, this proportion increases to more than 50%.
The employer incentives to alter or cease coverage under
the health-reform law are strong. According to the study, at
least 30% of employers would gain economically from dropping
coverage, even if they completely compensated employees for
the change through other benefit offerings or higher
salaries. That's because they no longer would be tethered to
health-insurance costs that consistently rise faster than
inflation.
Employers should think twice if they believe the fine for
not offering coverage will stay unchanged at $2,000 per
worker. ``If many companies drop health insurance coverage,
the government could increase the employer penalty or raise
taxes,'' according to the new study, authored by McKinsey
consultants Shubham Singhal, Jeris Stueland and Drew
Ungerman.
The case for repeal of ObamaCare grows stronger every year.
The massive shift of health costs to taxpayers thanks to the
disruption of employer-sponsored health insurance will add
further to the burgeoning federal budget deficit. Congress
can and must develop policies that allow the marketplace to
evolve and not be forced into ObamaCare's regulatory
straitjacket.
Mr. BARRASSO. I note the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Franken). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________