[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 116 (Thursday, July 11, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4789-S4790]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          Affordable Care Act

  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, on Tuesday, the Fifth Circuit Court of 
Appeals heard oral arguments in the Texas v. United States case to 
overturn the Affordable Care Act. Unfortunately, although the 
Affordable Care Act is currently the law of the land, the Department of 
Justice--our Nation's highest law enforcement authority--was not there 
to defend the law of the land, the Affordable Care Act. The DOJ was not 
there because it had been instructed by this President and this 
administration to join the effort to overturn the Affordable Care Act.
  Sadly, the stakes of the Texas v. United States litigation are 
profound. This year in New Hampshire alone, approximately 90,000 
Granite Staters obtained health insurance coverage through the 
Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion or through the ACA's health 
insurance marketplaces. Across the country, more than 17 million 
Medicaid expansion enrollees and 11 million people in the marketplaces' 
health plans depend on the Affordable Care Act for their coverage. Yet 
the Department of Justice refuses to defend them. It refuses to defend 
the law of the land in court.
  In this case, if the courts side with the Trump administration and 
the Republican attorneys general, millions of these people will return 
to the days when they were one cancer diagnosis, one medical 
complication, or one car accident away from medical bankruptcy.
  The Affordable Care Act's coverage expansion is also our most 
powerful tool in combating the opioid epidemic. This is critically 
important in New Hampshire as we have the third highest overdose death 
rate from opioids of any State in the country. In New Hampshire, more 
than 11,000 people receive substance use disorder treatment thanks to 
the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion, and many more Granite 
Staters are able to get substance use disorder treatment thanks to 
coverage obtained through the ACA's health insurance marketplaces.
  Just think. Without the expansion of Medicaid, which is a bipartisan 
effort in New Hampshire, and without the ACA's health insurance 
marketplaces, we would have thousands of people affected by substance 
use disorders who would not be able to get treatment. There is no plan 
B if the Affordable Care Act is overturned.
  In 2017, a mother named Nansie, from Concord, wrote to my office. I 
will not use her last name.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record Nansie's 2017 
letter.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

       Dear Senator Shaheen: Thank you for giving me the 
     opportunity to share my story about ACA. It saved my son's 
     life.
       Benjamin went to Keene State College with the same hopes 
     and dreams many have when building their American dream. 
     While there he tried heroin. Addiction overcame him but did 
     not stop him from graduating. After graduation he suffered a 
     long road of near death existence. After a couple of episodes 
     where he had to be revived (fentanyl) he chose recovery. It 
     was due to Obamacare that we were able to get him insured so 
     that he could get the proper help he needed and a suboxone 
     program that assisted him with staying ``clean''. In April it 
     will be a year for Ben in his recovery. Without Obamacare 
     this would not have been possible. In early 2016 we had very 
     long waiting lists for rehab and then the ones with the means 
     to pay were the first accepted.
       I can't find the words to define my gratitude to President 
     Obama. I believe my son would not be alive today if it were 
     not for this plan that provided the means he needed to get 
     the help he needed at the time he needed it. Ben still has a 
     long road ahead of him but I will see to it that he never 
     walks it alone.
       It is one of my greatest wishes that one day I could shake 
     President Obama's hand and thank him for providing the tools 
     that saved my son's life.
           Sincerely,
                                          Nansie J. Garnham Feeny.

  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, in Nansie's letter, she writes:

       The ACA saved my son's life. It was due to ObamaCare that 
     we were able to get him insured so that he could get the 
     proper help he needed and get into a Suboxone program that 
     assisted him. Now, if the courts side with the Trump 
     administration, this critical source for treatment and 
     recovery could be ripped away.

  We don't have enough time for me to go through the whole list of all 
of the benefits under the Affordable Care Act that will be lost if the 
ACA gets overturned. One of the benefits, though, that would be thrown 
out yet is critically important to the people of New Hampshire and 
across this country is that of the consumer protections against 
skyrocketing prescription drug costs. They will be gone.
  A couple of weeks ago, I was at a hearing in the Committee on Aging, 
and we had someone from the FDA who was testifying. She talked about 
the fact that the major driver in prescription drug costs under 
Medicare and Medicaid was the cost of biologic drugs and that what was 
bringing down that cost was the pathway for biosimilars to create 
alternatives of those biologic drugs for those people. What she failed 
to point out was that this provision

[[Page S4790]]

was in the Affordable Care Act and that if the Affordable Care Act gets 
struck down, this provision will get struck down. Those increased costs 
that we have been seeing of those biologic drugs are going to continue 
going up.
  What is probably even more important for most people in New Hampshire 
is that the Affordable Care Act includes a very important program that 
has closed the Medicare Part D coverage gap--what is called the 
doughnut hole--for prescription drug coverage. This program has saved 
New Hampshire's seniors an average of $1,100 a year in Medicare 
prescription drug costs. These savings help to ensure that Granite 
Staters who have fixed incomes can pay their utility bills or put food 
on the table.
  The court's decision could wipe out these critical Medicare savings 
for seniors, just as it could wipe out coverage for preexisting 
conditions, coverage to keep young people on their parents' insurance 
up until they are the age of 26, and coverage for essential health 
benefits, which means that mental health care and coverage for 
substance use disorder treatment are required by insurance companies to 
be covered.
  So given what is at stake, at this point I want to offer a unanimous 
consent request that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 
134, which is a resolution I introduced to express a sense of the 
Senate that the Department of Justice should reverse its position in 
the Texas v. United States case and defend the Affordable Care Act.


                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 134

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that as in legislative 
session, the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further 
consideration of S. Res. 134 and the Senate proceed to its immediate 
consideration; further, that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble 
be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid 
upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Young). Is there objection?
  The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, whether 
you support the ObamaCare law or oppose it--and let me be clear, I 
oppose it--it remains the law.
  This week, a Federal appellate court heard arguments related to the 
case of Texas v. United States, and I expect it will eventually end up 
before the U.S. Supreme Court.
  Regardless of the outcome, our commitment remains to protect people 
with preexisting conditions. As a doctor, as a husband of a breast 
cancer survivor, I know the importance of making sure patients can have 
access to high-quality healthcare at an affordable cost.
  Since the Obama healthcare law passed, this has not happened for many 
families to whom I speak at home in Wyoming. They keep telling me that 
ObamaCare made their insurance unaffordable, and it has made it more 
difficult for them to get the care they need. Simply put, they know 
that the Obama healthcare law has failed because they have personally 
experienced the law's sky-high premiums and fewer choices.
  It has taken Washington Democrats a little longer to figure that out. 
Now they are clamoring for a one-size-fits-all healthcare plan. They 
want a healthcare system controlled by Washington bureaucrats, and as a 
doctor, my focus is on making healthcare better for patients, period.
  Republicans in the Trump administration are taking on the tough 
issues facing patients across the country. We eliminated the individual 
mandate so that patients aren't punished for refusing to buy insurance 
they cannot afford. We support more insurance choices, such as 
association health plans, so folks can find the best coverage for 
themselves and their families. We are taking on the drug companies. 
Congress has already eliminated gag clauses, and more reforms are on 
the way. Finally, with the President's support, we are going to end 
surprise medical bills. Simply put, Republicans want patients to pay 
less for the coverage they already have.
  Democrats want to take away people's health insurance, especially the 
coverage they get through their work. It is simply wrong. The question 
is whether Washington Democrats are interested in actually solving the 
problem or playing politics.
  Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I knew my colleague from Wyoming was 
going to object. I am disappointed in his objection, and I know he is a 
doctor. I believe he cares about his former patients. I believe he 
cares about providing healthcare to his constituents, as I believe all 
of my colleagues care about that.
  That is why I am so puzzled by why there has been a 9-year effort to 
try and undermine the Affordable Care Act and the healthcare that it 
provides to people in this country.
  As I said earlier, there is no followup plan that will provide 
coverage for people with preexisting conditions if the Affordable Care 
Act is overturned. There is no followup plan that will provide coverage 
for people with substance abuse disorders, for mental health coverage. 
That is all going to go out the window.
  By failing to send a clear message to the Justice Department that 
they should defend the Affordable Care Act, we are putting access to 
care at risk for millions of Americans across this country.
  What we should be doing--and we should have done it as soon as the 
effort to overturn the Affordable Care Act was defeated in 2017--is 
working together to put in place changes that make the Affordable Care 
Act work better. We should be looking for ways to provide coverage to 
people that is affordable, that provides quality healthcare, that is 
accessible to every American. Instead of that, we have no plan B. There 
is no bill that would provide coverage if this administration is 
successful in overturning the Affordable Care Act.
  I am very disappointed, though not surprised, by the reaction from my 
colleague from Wyoming.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.