[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 132 (Monday, September 30, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7035-S7037]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS
Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, let me speak for a moment about what
we have happening. There is no reason for this happening, and there is
absolutely no reason why, first of all, we could not have worked
together to put a budget in place. We, months ago, passed a budget in
the Senate and have been trying to go to a conference committee with
the House so we could work it out and have a long-term budget that
continues to bring down the debt. By the way, the deficit is coming
down, which is very positive. But we know we need to continue to do
more in a balanced way. That could be happening. It is not happening
because the same people now who are putting us in a position where in a
few hours there may very well be a government shutdown are the same
ones who do not want to negotiate to get a budget for our country,
which is very difficult to understand in terms of what the strategy is
other than to just obstruct.
We are now in a situation where we have agreed to a compromise that
would allow the continuation of funding of public services, from safety
to health research, to what we do around education, innovation, small
business. We have a whole range of things for 6 weeks. So we are
talking about 6 weeks.
The compromise is that while we believe we ought to be reinvesting in
education, in innovation, we ought to be creating jobs, rebuilding our
roads and bridges and water and sewer systems, and doing a number of
things that would strengthen our economy and create jobs, for this 6-
week period, we agree to continue the funding level at the lower level
the Republicans want.
So the continuing resolution we have sent to the House is a
compromise by definition because we are willing for 6 weeks--while we
negotiate a broader package on a full year's appropriation--to continue
funding at the level the Republicans have asked to be the spending
level. By definition, certainly for many of us who believe we will not
have a middle class--that we cannot grow the economy without doing the
right kinds of investments and that we certainly should not be cutting
back on cancer research and cutting clinical trials for women with
breast cancer or cutting back on other possible cures, and that is
happening right now at this lower level--but for 6 weeks we have said
we are willing to compromise with the House Republicans in order to
continue funding the government while the larger issues are worked out.
Instead of that happening, what we are seeing is a fight that,
frankly, has been fought over and over. It was fought in the last
election. It was very clear we had a President of the United States who
ran on and who made a signature accomplishment of his first-term health
care--access to affordable health insurance for all Americans--running
against someone who said he would repeal that, and the President of the
United States won with a substantial margin.
In the Senate, we had Democrats running against Republicans, with
Republicans saying: Elect me and I will repeal ObamaCare; Democrats
saying: No. We need health reform. We need to create a better, more
competitive way to bring down health insurance rates--like in
Massachusetts, the home of our distinguished Presiding Officer. Our
candidates--Democrats--won.
So I would suggest that in many places, and certainly across the
country, with the President of the United States, the people of America
spoke pretty strongly.
Now we are here. We all have seen the intensity of what is a minority
opinion. I appreciate that. It is very intense. But it is a minority
opinion in this country. So the minority of a minority is trying now to
essentially slow down or stop the economy, hurt middle-class families,
bring public services to a standstill because--even though they lost in
the election, even though theirs is not the majority view--they have
decided it does not matter--it does not matter--they are going to shut
things down if they do not get their way.
What we are going to see tomorrow when healthcare.gov comes online
are more competitive, lower rates for many Americans, young Americans,
families, and so on, people who maybe could not get insurance in the
past at all, moms-to-be who could not find maternity care--8 million
women in this country who have not been able to find insurance
companies that will cover them for maternity care because somehow being
a woman was a ``preexisting condition''--they are going to have a
chance to do that, which means we will have more healthy moms, we will
have more healthy babies, and this is good for our country.
We are seeing now in health reform that has already taken effect
hundreds of dollars a year more in the pockets of senior citizens that
they used to pay out for prescription drugs. But they do not have to do
it anymore because we are closing this gap in coverage from the
Medicare prescription drug bill.
As a caveat, let me say as somebody at the time 7 years ago who voted
no on that Medicare prescription drug bill--because I believed and the
majority on our side believed it was written way too much in favor of
the drug companies as opposed to the seniors in terms of costs, not
allowing Medicare to negotiate group rates and so on--when we lost that
fight, we did not shut down the government, we did not try to stop
funding the implementation of Medicare prescription drugs, we did not
do all of the antics that have been done. We said: OK, we lost that
fight, so let's make it work the best we can make it work, and we will
fix it later.
We did not stop the funding for the educational efforts for seniors.
We did not spend hundreds of millions or--I do not know, maybe it is
billions now--trying to scare people, confuse people. We said: Let's
try to make it work. Even though in the May before the prescription
drug bill took effect 21 percent of the public said they wanted it,
they supported it, 7 years later, 90 percent of the public says they
support it.
In health reform we were able to fix one of the things that many of
us were concerned about then. Rather than
[[Page S7036]]
stopping the ability of seniors to get some help--even though it was
not structured the way I would like to see it structured--rather than
stopping that, we said: Let's make it work the best we can and look for
opportunities to make it better.
Under the Affordable Care Act, we have made it better. We have made
it better by closing the gap in coverage, which has been dubbed the
doughnut hole, so that gradually under health reform this goes away,
which will mean literally thousands of dollars in the pockets of many
seniors.
I would suggest to our colleagues in the House and the minority of
the minority here in the Senate who want to shut things down because
they have not gotten their way on health reform that it would be so
much better for the American people if they chose the path we did on
Medicare prescription drugs, to try to make it work the best we can,
and then to look for ways to make it better.
So instead of doing that, what we have is a situation where we are
being held hostage--public services are being held hostage to eliminate
something that, frankly, a majority of people already voted to say they
wanted to put into place. Fix it, yes. If there are problems, yes, fix
it. But they certainly do not want to go back to hundreds of dollars a
month for a family for a policy that covers almost nothing, which is
what has happened all across Michigan and all across the country.
This was a situation where women get discriminated against on the
basis of gender, just because we are women or because we cannot find
preventive care or we cannot find maternity care as women. We certainly
do not want to go back to a situation where a family has a child who
gets a serious illness and then suddenly finds, after spending hundreds
of dollars a month on a policy that does not cover anything much, that
there is a cap on how much care they can get for their child.
So they end up with thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket expenses,
maybe going bankrupt, maybe losing their house, because even though
they were paying for insurance, it did not cover what they needed. Then
there is a limit on the number of treatments they can get. Oh, by the
way, now that their child has a serious chronic illness, they cannot
get insurance any more because the child has a preexisting condition.
This is the world in which tens of millions of families have been
operating for way too long. We do not want to go back to that. I am
certainly not going to be a party to going back to that. So we have
said no. Negotiate on the budget. Be responsible. Focus on jobs. Move
forward, yes. Take us back to a time of bankruptcy for families when
there is an illness in the family? No. Take us back to a time when
women were charged more than men just because we are women? No. Take us
back to a time when seniors are paying more out of pocket for
prescription drugs because of this gap in coverage? No.
We could go on and on. When we look at this whole approach, I do have
to say given the fact that--we as women gain so much under health
reform in terms of protection about unfair rates, getting preventive
care without out-of-pocket expenses, access to maternity care, many
women for the first time, so many other things.
A majority of those on Medicare are women. There are so many ways in
which we benefit. We now see the House over and over sending us
something that would delay or end health reform. Then today, on top of
everything else, they have decided not only do what they want to stop
the next stage of health reform, but they want to repeal what already
is the law of the land now on preventive care for women, on family
planning services, on mammograms, and all of the other preventive
services that we know save lives.
The amendment that all of the Democratic women Senators offered under
our leader, Senator Barbara Mikulski, which made sure that going
forward, preventive care would be available and affordable, no out-of-
pocket costs, that was repealed in what was sent to us today. It is
also interesting that preventive services for men were not repealed.
Only preventive services for women, without out-of-pocket expenses.
We find ourselves now in a situation where we are waiting for the
House to send back something else again that will chip away at health
care and put in jeopardy the ability for the Federal Government in the
greatest country in the world to be able to provide services tomorrow,
whether it is safety, whether it is health, whether it is education,
whether it is the basics, like traveling with your family and needing a
passport or visiting one of our national parks or any number of other
things that affect us, protecting the air and the water, and what we do
to support our farmers and so on.
So that is where we are. We will once again indicate that we are
willing to compromise on the budget issues. This is a budget issue. We
will support the level of funding that the House says they want, not
what we want, because it underfunds critical investments in services
and hurts the middle class. But for 6 weeks, as a compromise, we are
willing to operate the government at the level that they want. But we
will not take the next step which is to take away the ability of
millions of Americans to have access to basic health care.
Tomorrow is an important day for so many reasons. But one of them is
that for the first time, citizens across the country are going to be
able to begin to get the information they need from healthcare.gov
about what is available for them and for their families in terms of new
health care options.
From what we have seen so far, the rates are not only competitive but
lower than was estimated they would be. In fact, for most families and
most individuals, they are going to be able to get much more care. They
are actually going to get something they are paying for. They are going
to be able to receive that at much less cost than they currently can.
So tomorrow is an important day, where as they say in Michigan ``the
rubber meets the road.''
People will begin to find out for themselves, despite all of the
stuff that has gone on for the last 3 years, all of the misinformation,
the scare tactics, the millions of dollars in horrible ads that have
been run, tomorrow, people will be able to judge for themselves.
We certainly expect it will take a while, just as it did for Medicare
prescription drugs, for it to fully take effect. People will have 6
months the first time around to figure out what they want to do to be
able to sign up for next year. If we find that there are things that
need to be improved on, then we need to come together and do that. We
are more than willing to do it. But we are not willing to go back to
the day where families could not find any care for themselves or their
families or could not afford it.
We, in fact, are the greatest country in the world, and health care
is pretty basic for each and every one of us. We need to have a system,
which begins tomorrow through private sector insurance and competition,
to have a way to be able to lower costs for families while making sure
they are actually getting the care that they are paying for. That is
starting tomorrow.
I hope tomorrow, in addition to that starting, we are going to see a
continuation of critical public services in our country and that we
will send a message around the world that America really can get its
act together, that this Congress can really work together and be
responsible and not see the kind of incredible partisan games that have
gone on, not by everyone but by a minority of the minority who are
right now holding things hostage in this Congress. We can do better
than that. I am looking forward to having the opportunity to work with
colleagues on both sides of the aisle, in fact, to do that.
I am hopeful that the Speaker will just very simply put a continuing
resolution on funding the government before the full body of the House
of Representatives and let them vote. We have heard from many House
colleagues today, Republican colleagues, saying that if they have an
opportunity to vote on continuing the operations of government, they
will do that, a clean CR, a continuing resolution that would allow the
continuing functioning of services that the public depends on, and
those who are providing as well are depending on.
The Speaker just simply needs to allow an up-or-down vote. Just allow
a vote this evening. I believe if he does
[[Page S7037]]
that, he will see a bipartisan vote in the House of Representatives
that will be responsible and do the right thing.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________