[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 154 (Monday, December 15, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6823-S6826]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Murthy Nomination

  Mr. BARRASSO. I rise today to oppose the nomination of Dr. Vivek 
Murthy to be Surgeon General of the United States. The Surgeon General 
is known as America's doctor. Americans have great respect for this 
important position. They expect their Surgeon

[[Page S6824]]

General to be someone who has substantial experience in helping 
patients, in helping improve their health, and in helping them reduce 
their risk of illness and injury.
  This important position has been vacant since July of 2013, about a 
year and a half. It is far too long, and it has been completely 
avoidable. We have seen how the Obama administration has struggled in 
response to important health issues such as the Ebola crisis. America 
should have had a Surgeon General in the job to lead in the fight 
against Ebola and to take on other serious health challenges as well.

  Dr. Murthy is a smart man who is very well educated. He has an 
undergraduate degree from Harvard, an MBA from Yale, and an M.D. from 
the Yale School of Medicine. These are impressive academic credentials, 
and I am sure he will be a fine doctor, but they are simply not 
sufficient qualifications for this important job.
  Is Dr. Murthy a renowned expert in treating patients or researching 
diseases? No, not at all. Has he actually built a career teaching 
medicine or leading major public health organizations? No, not yet. In 
fact, Dr. Murthy only completed his residency in 2006--just 8 years 
ago. I speak as someone who has actually practiced medicine for 25 
years, has been an instructor of surgery at Yale Medical School, which 
Dr. Murthy attended, and I saw that being a doctor is about much more 
than going to school. Doctors learn more and more as they progress 
through their careers and spend more time with their patients, 
listening to patients and the patients' families. Dr. Murthy has not 
had the time to develop these kinds of skills.
  So what qualifies him to be Surgeon General of the United States? 
Well, in 2008, just 2 years out of his residency, he founded a group 
called Doctors for Obama; the purpose: to elect a President. The 
majority of his career has been spent not as a doctor treating patients 
but as an activist--an activist focused on gun control and political 
campaigns.
  Even former Surgeon General Richard Carmona has said Dr. Murthy 
doesn't have the medical experience to serve in such an important 
position. Let me point out that Dr. Carmona is a Democrat. He wrote an 
article for the Huffington Post on December 4. It was entitled ``In 
Search of a Surgeon General.'' I will read a little bit of what he 
wrote. He said:

       We don't appoint doctors early in their career to be a 
     university Dean or Chairman. Graduate business students at 
     the top of their class don't become instant CEOs. Top law 
     graduates of elite law schools don't get nominated to be U.S. 
     Attorney General or a Supreme Court Justice. Why would the 
     U.S. Surgeon General be any different?

  He concludes by asking:

       Is the health, safety, and security of the Nation any less 
     important?

  Is the health, safety, and security of the Nation any less important? 
Well, no, the health, safety, and security of the Nation are not less 
important, and the job of Surgeon General is not less important.
  Americans want the same thing from a Surgeon General as they want 
from their own doctors. People want honest and straightforward advice 
about medical dangers, such as cancer, heart attacks, and stroke. They 
don't want an inexperienced, unqualified political appointee. Patients 
don't want a doctor who might let political ideology get in the way of 
treatment and their best interest. Americans don't want a Surgeon 
General who might use this position of trust to promote his own 
personal campaign against the Second Amendment of the Constitution.
  This is just another example of President Obama giving someone an 
important job based solely on their support of the President's 
political career--just like his nomination of a soap opera producer to 
be Ambassador to Hungary or the President's nomination of a man to be 
Ambassador to Norway when the person didn't know the first thing about 
the country. Of course, both those nominations to be Ambassadors had 
funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to the President's campaigns. 
Well, those nominations were embarrassing, and so is this nomination to 
be Surgeon General.
  This office of Surgeon General is not just an honorary title. It is 
not just a figurehead position. The Surgeon General commands the entire 
Commissioned Corps of the uniformed public health officers. There are 
6,700 people whom the Surgeon General commands. It is one of the key 
positions leading America's public health efforts.
  America has a long history of qualified and talented people filling 
this job. When President Bill Clinton nominated David Satcher in 1998, 
Dr. Satcher had already served as president of a medical school and as 
Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. C. Everett 
Koop spent 35 years as a leading world-renowned pediatric surgeon. They 
were substantial candidates who brought serious experience to the job. 
The responsibilities of being America's Surgeon General require a 
strong, professional leader, and the American people deserve a 
qualified nominee. There is a long list of capable doctors who could 
meet those requirements. The President should pick one of them.
  Over the years, we have seen that when the President has nominated 
qualified people for this position, the Senate has approved their 
nominations on overwhelmingly bipartisan votes. When President Obama 
nominated Regina Benjamin to be Surgeon General, she was confirmed 
unanimously, as was Richard Carmona when President Bush nominated him. 
Today, even Democrats have objected to the nomination of Dr. Murthy.
  So why are we wasting the Senate's time talking about this now? Well, 
if President Obama thinks Dr. Murthy is qualified, why haven't we 
already voted on him? He was nominated more than a year ago--more than 
a year ago. We had the Ebola crisis and no Surgeon General. He was 
nominated more than a year ago. His confirmation hearing in the 
committee was last February. The majority leader could have brought 
this up for a vote at any time in the past 9 months, but he didn't do 
it. Why? Because he knew this nominee--this unqualified, partisan 
nominee--didn't have the votes. He could not get the votes on the 
Democratic side of the aisle. The nomination would have been an 
embarrassment before the election.
  Now is not the right time for this nomination, and this is not the 
right job for Dr. Murthy. The Ebola problem and the other health crises 
facing our Nation are enormous challenges that require skills and 
talents that this nominee has simply not had time to develop and which 
he has so far not demonstrated in his career.
  I wish to close by quoting from a letter former Surgeon General 
Carmona sent to all of the Members of the Senate earlier this month. He 
sent it to each and every one of us. I ask unanimous consent that the 
letter be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                 December 1, 2014.
       Dear Senator, I am writing to express my concern over the 
     present nominee for U.S. Surgeon General whose name may be 
     submitted to you for confirmation during the remaining Senate 
     session. The U.S. Surgeon General is the doctor of the nation 
     and the commander of the U.S. Public Health Service 
     Commissioned Corp, one of the seven uniformed services of the 
     United States. The nominee, Dr. Vivek Murthy is a physician 
     very early in his career with great promise but no formal 
     public health education, training, leadership or management 
     experience.
       However, he was the founder of Doctors for Obama, a 
     partisan organization supporting the election and policies of 
     President Obama. His partisanship and lack of qualifications 
     for the job of Surgeon General give this nomination the scent 
     of political patronage. In addition, the position of Surgeon 
     General is a uniformed services position with the rank of 
     Vice Admiral. The nominee has no uniformed service 
     experience, does not merit this rank and his confirmation 
     would undermine the credibility and authenticity of the 
     Office of the Surgeon General while demeaning the selfless 
     service of qualified career uniformed officers who merit 
     consideration.
       The public we have the privilege to serve deserves and 
     expects a Surgeon General who, through extensive education, 
     experience, training and service, merits the position of 
     Surgeon General of the United States.
       For these reasons, I respectfully request that if this 
     nomination comes before you that you reject it in favor of a 
     qualified career USPHSCC officer who merits your 
     consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                               Richard H. Carmona,
                                               M.D., M.P.H., FACS.

  Mr. BARRASSO. Dr. Carmona writes:

       His partisanship and lack of qualifications for the job of 
     Surgeon General gives this nomination the scent of political 
     patronage.

  That is from a Democrat who actually served as Surgeon General and 
knows what it takes to do the job well.

[[Page S6825]]

  Dr. Carmona added in his letter to all of the Members of the Senate:

       His confirmation would undermine the credibility and 
     authenticity of the Office of Surgeon General, while 
     demeaning the selfless service of qualified career uniformed 
     officers who merit consideration.

  That is whom the President of the United States has chosen to 
nominate--someone who would undermine the credibility and authenticity 
of the Office of Surgeon General, while demeaning the selfless service 
of qualified career uniformed officers who merit consideration.
  Americans deserve a Surgeon General who has substantial experience in 
managing complex crises and delivering patient care. The American 
people deserve a Surgeon General who has proven throughout his or her 
career that their main focus is a commitment to patients, not a 
commitment to politics.
  Dr. Murthy has time to learn, time to gain experience, and that may 
make him a fine Surgeon General someday, but that day is not today. I 
call on the Senate to defeat the nomination of Dr. Murthy for Surgeon 
General of the United States.
  I thank the Presiding Officer.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I see my friend from Wyoming, who spoke 
on the floor earlier and is in the Chamber, and I wish to publicly 
acknowledge--and I hope he will too--that we are friends, but we 
disagree on the nomination of Dr. Murthy to be the next Surgeon 
General. I will speak for a few moments about why I support him, and I 
hope a majority of Members will join me in supporting his nomination.
  This is an indication of what can go wrong in the Senate. We received 
this nomination from the President of the United States to fill the 
post of Surgeon General, which was reported from the committee in 
February of this year. Obviously we are in December. It has been 
sitting here since February. In fact, the post of Surgeon General has 
been vacant since July of 2013.
  The Surgeon General is supposed to be one of the leaders in America 
speaking to issues on public health. Can anyone think of a public 
health issue we have had to face since February when Dr. Murthy was 
reported to the floor of the Senate? Perhaps one of the deadliest 
diseases that has ever been recorded is being fought in west Africa, 
and we are being asked on a regular basis how we will respond in the 
United States. The Centers for Disease Control plays a major role in it 
but, historically, Surgeons General have played a major role when we 
faced similar public health challenges.

  I can remember coming to the U.S. House of Representatives years ago 
when President Reagan had been elected, and he had chosen C. Everett 
Koop to be his Surgeon General. C. Everett Koop was a controversial 
choice by President Reagan because he had been outspoken on some major 
political issues. He personally had strong feelings against abortion 
and had said as much before his nomination, and some other issues. It 
led many people to believe he was too political for the job and that 
President Reagan had made the wrong choice. But Koop was chosen. 
Despite the fact that he had been at least engaged as a medical doctor 
in discussing political issues, he was chosen. I wasn't in the Senate 
at the time; I didn't have a vote when it came to his choice, but I 
will tell my colleagues this: When Dr. Koop took over as Surgeon 
General, he made it clear he understood his obligation was to be the 
Nation's doctor, not the Nation's leading medical politician. He did 
some extraordinary things. I don't know what America would have been 
like if it were not for Dr. Koop's presence, pushing back on a lot of 
political spin when it came to public health issues--issues involving 
AIDS, for example.
  It is no secret--it is well known--that many politicians--in both 
parties, for that matter--were reluctant to go into the whole issue of 
the AIDS crisis in America for a variety of reasons. But if my 
colleagues will remember, history shows that under Dr. Koop, we ended 
up mailing every household in America to let them know about the danger 
of the AIDS epidemic. That was an extraordinary act of public 
leadership when it came to public health, and Dr. Koop was Surgeon 
General when that occurred. So those who worried that C. Everett Koop 
was too political for the job were disabused of that notion as we 
watched his service to our country.
  I make that point because I don't want the same mistake to be made in 
criticizing Dr. Vivek Murthy whom we are going to vote on later today 
to be our next Surgeon General. It is true that he has engaged in 
political activity, as any American citizen is entitled to. I hope that 
will not disqualify him. When I read in a few moments the groups that 
are supporting him, people will understand he isn't in this position of 
being nominated simply because of his political activity. He has 
extraordinary backing of individuals in the medical profession.
  Now we need him more than ever. We need to fill the post of Surgeon 
General of the United States of America. We hope we can see an end to 
the Ebola epidemic, but we are not quite there. But we ought to have a 
Surgeon General in the United States of America. To think we have 
waited since February while this doctor's name has been on our 
calendar, and we had to use some extraordinary parliamentary moves to 
even bring his name up for a vote. I think it is time for us to vote 
and it is time for us to confirm the nomination of Vivek Murthy as our 
next Surgeon General.
  This past year, Americans have battled public health crises on all 
fronts. Here at home, parents watched while a severe strain of 
enterovirus spread from State to State, threatening young children. My 
home State of Illinois was one of the hardest hit. I heard from doctors 
across the State that the minute they discharged one child with 
respiratory symptoms from the emergency room, another came in.
  Abroad, we still face the worst Ebola epidemic in history. With over 
6,300 deaths and many more diagnosed with this devastating disease, now 
more than ever America needs to fill the spot of top doctor. It has 
been vacant since July--since July of last year. Dr. Murthy is that 
doctor, and I am proud to vote for him as the next U.S. Surgeon 
General. I am hoping my colleagues will join me.
  Let me tell my colleagues a little bit about his background. Dr. 
Murthy is an attending physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital and an 
instructor at the Harvard Medical School. Part of what is extraordinary 
about him is that as well as treating his patients individually, he 
also thinks about the systemic issues affecting the health of patients 
and tackles those as well. He is a leading voice in public health, 
publishing his research on the participation of women and minorities in 
cancer clinical trials and top journals, including Science, Journal of 
the American Medical Association, and Journal of the National Cancer 
Institute.
  Critics of Dr. Murthy who say he is not up to the job should look at 
the literature. He has published in medical research areas of great 
importance. He also cofounded and chairs the Trial Networks, a software 
company that helps clinical researchers collaborate more effectively 
and efficiently with drug developers to speed up drug discovery.
  In 2011, Dr. Murthy was appointed to the Advisory Group on 
Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health. Over 
100 national, State, and local public health organizations have 
endorsed his nomination. They describe him as ``a well-qualified, 
forward-thinking, innovative leader with a strong commitment to public 
health.''
  Does that sound like a political hack when 100 organizations say that 
about this doctor?
  The organizations that support Dr. Murthy include the American 
College of Physicians, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the 
American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, 
the American Hospital Association, the American Cancer Society, the 
American Heart Association, the American Diabetes Association, and the 
list goes on from there.

[[Page S6826]]

  In his confirmation hearing before the Senate HELP Committee last 
February, Dr. Murthy stated that, if confirmed, he would prioritize his 
efforts on obesity and tobacco-related disease and ``make prevention 
and health promotion the backbone of our communities.''
  This is a priority I share with Dr. Murthy. For the past 30 years, 
serving in the House and Senate, I have worked on the issue of tobacco 
and public policy. I have worked to reduce youth smoking, implement 
programs to help people quit, and rein in the most insidious practices 
of the tobacco industry. Moreover, as a cochair of the Senate Hunger 
Caucus, I have become familiar with the complex and arguably unjust way 
food is distributed and consumed in America, leaving communities--
including many in Illinois--simultaneously facing high levels of food 
insecurity and high rates of obesity.
  Obesity and tobacco-related diseases are part of a growing trend of 
chronic disease that account for 7 out of the top 10 causes of death in 
America and make up 84 percent of America's health care costs. Dr. 
Murthy says these are his priorities. They should be. These statistics 
are unacceptable.
  I believe Dr. Murthy understands the importance of the national 
crises before him. I feel confident that his experience, his training, 
and his tenacity have proved that he has the qualifications needed to 
tackle these issues.
  Not only is Dr. Murthy an outstanding doctor and public health 
expert, he also remains closely connected to his community and family.
  Dr. Murthy was born to parents who originally were from the southern 
part of India. He came to the United States at the age of 3 and grew up 
in Miami, FL. He did very well in school. He was valedictorian of his 
high school, graduated magna cum laude from Harvard in just 3 years, 
and then got a combined medical and business degree from Yale.
  So Senators come to the floor and question this man's resume, his 
ability? For goodness sakes. He has an extraordinary background and 
that is why the President nominated him.
  From a very early age, Dr. Murthy did not set out to make money, he 
set out to make a difference. In 1995 he cofounded Visions Worldwide, a 
nonprofit organization that conducts and supports HIV/AIDS education 
and empowerment programs in India. Until 2003, he served as the 
president of that organization and then board chair. He is a dedicated 
uncle and friend, consistently described by those who know him as 
humble, soft-spoken, and tireless. I know the Indian-American community 
across this Nation is so proud of Dr. Murthy's accomplishments, as all 
of us should be.
  Many years ago I worked for a State Senator in Illinois named Cecil 
Partee. Cecil Partee used to say, For every political controversy, when 
you listen to the arguments, understand there is a good reason and a 
real reason.
  What is the real reason for the opposition to Dr. Murthy? It may have 
come down to just one thing he said. It was alluded to by the Senator 
from Wyoming earlier. In an online post, he said he believed gun 
violence was a public health issue. Gun violence, a public health 
issue. For making that statement, he has been pilloried and excoriated 
by the gun lobby, and that may be a major reason why his nomination is 
controversial.
  I am proud to represent the city of Chicago and the State of 
Illinois. Gun violence is a public health problem. Go into the 
emergency rooms--and I can give the names of the list of hospitals in 
Chicago to start with. Go to the emergency room on Friday or Saturday 
night and you tell me that gun violence isn't a public health issue. In 
those emergency rooms we see the victims of gun violence, many of them 
fighting for their lives. If we go to Mount Sinai Hospital in the 
Englewood section of Chicago, we can look across the street to a rehab 
institute. Those who have survived gun violence at Mount Sinai go 
across the street to the Schwab Rehabilitation Hospital and learn how 
to live a life as a paraplegic or a quadriplegic. Does that have 
anything to do with public health? It certainly does. Gun violence is a 
public health issue, no apology necessary.
  I think Dr. Murthy, as has Dr. Koop, has made it clear they are not 
aspiring to be the leading doctor in America to engage in a political 
debate, but rather to engage in public health debates about obesity and 
tobacco and things that make a dramatic difference to the lives of so 
many people who live in this country.
  I am supporting Dr. Murthy. I think he will be an extraordinary 
Surgeon General. I am sorry he and America have had to wait so long for 
this vote. I hope the majority of my colleagues will step up and 
support his nomination as well. At this time of challenge when it comes 
to public health issues, we need his leadership. We need his expertise. 
We need a person of this quality as Surgeon General of the United 
States.
  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. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.