[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 118 (Thursday, July 13, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3975-S3976]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 1462

  Mr. President, in the interest of trying to immediately help to 
stabilize the insurance markets, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from 
further consideration of S. 1462; that the Senate proceed to its 
immediate consideration; that the bill be considered read a third time 
and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid 
upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I reserve the right to object.
  I wonder if the Senator from New Hampshire would allow me to pose a 
question about her request?
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Absolutely.
  Mr. CORNYN. Is it true that under the so-called Marketplace Certainty 
Act, this would appropriate billions of additional dollars to insurance 
companies?
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. What is true about the Marketplace Certainty Act is 
that it would guarantee the payments that were promised under the 
Affordable Care Act--not to insurance companies but to families who 
need help affording health insurance. That is one of the goals as we 
think about what our challenge is to address the healthcare needs of 
the people of this country, and that, in fact, is what the Marketplace 
Certainty Act would do.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I appreciate the response from the Senator 
from New Hampshire. I think I want to explore that a little more. I 
don't think the cost-sharing subsidies go directly to beneficiaries 
but, rather, to insurance companies.
  Nevertheless, this is exactly the kind of proposal that the Senate 
can vote on next week when we proceed to the healthcare bill. As we 
know, unlike traditional legislation, there is an open and unlimited 
amendment process, and

[[Page S3976]]

Members on both sides will have a chance to offer amendments and have 
the Senate vote on them. So I would encourage all of our colleagues who 
have ideas about how to shape the healthcare policy to vote to get on 
the bill and then to offer amendments.
  It has been 7 years since ObamaCare was passed. It is in meltdown 
mode. We are glad to have our colleagues across the aisle offer 
suggestions on how to improve the current terrible situation for so 
many millions of people, but I must object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. I want to be clear that what we need to do is to 
provide certainty in the marketplace right now. What is happening 
because of the effort by our Republican colleagues to repeal the 
Affordable Care Act--which is providing coverage for literally tens of 
millions of people--what is happening because of this administration's 
refusal to guarantee those payments that would help people with the 
cost of their health insurance is that we are seeing instability in the 
marketplace. But the answer is not the proposal that was released this 
morning, the second or maybe it is the third draft of healthcare 
legislation that was done behind closed doors by our colleagues.
  Earlier today, I had the opportunity to meet with two children from 
New Hampshire: Parker, who is 8, and Sadie, who is 10. These kids were 
here advocating for the children's hospitals that have meant that they 
can continue to live. They are kids who were born with serious health 
challenges. They continue to have those serious health challenges, but 
thanks to Children's Hospital at Dartmouth and Boston Children's 
Hospital, Parker and Sadie are alive today. They are smart, they are 
beautiful, and they are the delight of their families. They have been 
able to get the healthcare they need through CHaD and through Boston 
Children's because they are able to get covered for their healthcare 
under Medicaid. What our colleagues' healthcare legislation would do is 
dramatically cut the Medicaid funding that Parker and Sadie and so many 
children and old people and disabled in this country depend on in order 
to stay alive.
  That is a mean-spirited bill. That is not the answer to the serious 
healthcare challenges we have in this country, and that is not what we 
should be doing to fix what needs to be fixed in the Affordable Care 
Act. What we need to do is work together.
  I am disappointed that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
continue to work behind closed doors instead of having an open process. 
If this legislation that was introduced this morning is such a great 
piece of legislation, then let's go through regular order. Let's have a 
hearing. Let's let the people of this country weigh in and then see 
whether this is a healthcare bill we should pass.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I would like to associate myself with 
the comments from the former Governor and now Senator from the great 
State of New Hampshire.
  It is not enough to say the system is failing. It is not enough to 
come here and say: We can fix it if you just agree to vote the way we 
are voting. If you just agree, you can present any amendments you want. 
You can do whatever you want.
  We don't even have a CBO score on this legislation. We don't know 
what is in this legislation. There have been no hearings so that people 
on both sides of the aisle can ask questions and say: What does this 
mean for a family on traditional Medicaid who has to rely on this to 
keep custody of their kids? And by the way, what does it mean if, as a 
result of losing their Medicaid coverage, those children are no longer 
able to stay at home and they become foster children because it is the 
only way they can get healthcare? What does it mean for those families 
about whom we all think we ought to have a real discussion, young 
people, young families who have excellent health, how they might have 
been disadvantaged on the exchange? What do we need to do for them? 
Maybe they were doing better economically than a lot of folks until 
they hit the cliff.
  That is why I want to see my bill debated, because it can, in fact, 
offer opportunity. Every time we talk about this, what we hear about is 
how much it would cost. Well, the bottom line is that if all you do is 
shift the burden of these costs without any discussions with Governors, 
with private payers, with corporate America that is self-insured--if 
all we are doing is shifting costs and saying ``It is now your 
problem,'' we are not doing our job.
  If you look at the Rand Corporation study, 12 percent of the 
population of this country has five or more chronic diseases. As a 
result of those unmanaged--typically unmanaged chronic diseases, what 
you will see is they incur 40 percent of the cost. Is that a problem? 
The answer is yes, that is a problem. We need to figure out how we can 
better manage chronic disease.
  A great friend of mine, a guy named Richie Carmona, who once was the 
Surgeon General of this country, used to say--and I think it is true--
70 percent of all healthcare costs are related to chronic disease, most 
of which is preventible. Where in any of these bills are we talking 
about prevention? Where are we talking about wellness? Where are we 
talking about bending the healthcare curve? We are only dumping and 
running with these bills. We are not doing our job, and as a result, we 
are frightening people in this country. We are frightening the elderly. 
We are frightening people who say: Right now, I can afford my health 
insurance; I am on an exchange. But when we change the ratio from 1-to-
3 to 1-to-5 and reduce the amount of subsidies, then 30, 40, 50 percent 
of their disposable income will be used to pay for health insurance. 
That is the thing you are not hearing here.
  So we have to come together. We have to come together with the 
fundamental questions of what is wrong with not just the Affordable 
Care Act but what is wrong with healthcare and how we fix it and how we 
change outcomes. We can't do that if we don't work together. This is a 
body that is divided 48 to 52. How do you come together if you don't 
come to the middle, if you don't come to the middle to compromise? You 
don't.

  At the end of the day, we have not met our deepest obligation, which 
is to speak for those who are the least fortunate among us. We have not 
met our obligation to govern this country in a way that would make our 
Founding Fathers proud, to make our citizens proud, and that can 
advance this idea that the U.S. Congress can get something done in the 
United States of America--instead of partisan rancor.
  We hold out the hope that we will at one point be able to debate 
these ideas that we presented. We hold out the hope that we will, in 
fact, meet somewhere to arrive at a better plan for the delivery of 
healthcare in this country.
  I just want to close with one thought. There is not one organized 
healthcare group or advocacy group in my State that supports the 
Republican healthcare plan, so as we are looking at judgment on that 
plan, don't take my word for it. Take the medical associations' word 
for it, take the hospital associations' word for it, take AARP's word 
for it, take the consortium of large hospitals in my State, which urged 
a ``no'' vote on this legislation, take the disabled children's 
advocacy groups' word for it. This is not a path forward, but we are 
big enough people and good enough leaders that we can forge a path 
forward if we just find the will to do it.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cassidy). The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.