[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 23, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4999-S5000]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               Healthcare

  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, I congratulate all of those responsible 
for the passage of this long-overdue legislation. I thank my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle who made this happen but first and foremost 
all of the advocates all over the country but primarily in and around 
the Northeast. There were hundreds upon hundreds of individuals who 
rushed to that scene from my State of Connecticut, many of them dealing 
with potentially terminal diseases as a result of that action. I am 
glad we have stepped up in a bipartisan way and once again done the 
right thing.
  I am on the floor to continue the conversation about healthcare. I 
wish I had as good news as comes with the passage of this legislation, 
which is going to extend the guarantee of healthcare to all sorts of 
heroes in and around New York. At the very same time, we are dealing 
with a potential calamity for millions of other Americans who also have 
serious conditions, who are dealing with diagnoses like cancer.
  Today, if you have a preexisting condition, you know you are going to 
be able to get insured for that preexisting condition. If you are the 
parent of a child who has a serious illness, you don't have to worry 
about being denied care for your son or daughter because of that 
diagnosis. That is because we have the Affordable Care Act.
  The Affordable Care Act has been on the books now for going on a 
decade. It says: No matter how sick you are, no insurance company can 
deny you care. That has made a world of difference for millions upon 
millions of Americans who have preexisting conditions.
  The potential calamity comes in a court case filed by Republican 
Attorneys General, supported by the President and by Republicans in 
this Congress, that would try to use the court system to do what the 
Congress would not--overturn the entirety of the Affordable Care Act. 
Congress wouldn't do that. We debated it. We voted down measures to 
repeal the Affordable Care Act. Why? Because Americans all across this 
country rose up and said: We want you to fix what continues to be 
broken with the healthcare system, not tear down my coverage, not 
remove me from the rolls of those who are insured.
  All across the country, over 20 million people have insurance just 
because of the Affordable Care Act--either because of tax credits we 
give people to afford private insurance or the 12 million people who 
got Medicaid because of the Affordable Care Act, never mind all the 
folks who buy private insurance on their own, who can finally afford it 
because we don't discriminate against you if you are poor. People 
didn't want that taken away from them, so they rose up all across the 
country, and Congress listened. By the skin of our teeth, we voted down 
legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
  Because opponents of the Affordable Care Act--in particular, this 
President and Republicans who don't like it--couldn't get the job done 
in the people's branch, they are now going to the courts to try to 
repeal the Affordable Care Act. Right now weaving its way through the 
court system is a case called Texas v. United States. I won't go into 
the complicated legal argument. The goal of it, if it is successful, is 
to wipe out the entirety of the Affordable Care Act overnight. It has 
been successful at the district court level. It was just argued before 
the appellate court level, and by the account of witnesses who were 
there, the arguments didn't go too well for those of us who think the 
Affordable Care Act should stick around.
  There is just a simple question right now for my colleagues: Do you 
support Texas v. United States? Do you support the lawsuit that would 
wipe out the entirety of the Affordable Care Act overnight and replace 
it with nothing?
  I put Republicans on here because I actually know what the answer is 
from the Democratic side of the aisle. Every single Democrat in the 
Senate opposes this lawsuit. It is not because every single Democrat 
thinks you shouldn't change anything about the healthcare system; it is 
because we don't think it is a very good idea to kick 20 million people 
off of insurance, jack up rates for people with preexisting conditions, 
and have nothing to replace it--nothing. That is what will happen if 
Texas v. United States is successful. Petitioners are asking for the 
whole act to be thrown out and nothing to replace it. That would be a 
humanitarian catastrophe in this country, if 20 million people all of a 
sudden woke up and found they didn't have insurance coverage any 
longer; if insurers were once again able to charge that family of a 
child with a cancer diagnosis two times, three times, four times as 
much.
  The question for Republicans is, Do you support this lawsuit? I think 
we need to get some answers. I think we need to get some answers. Some 
of my colleagues are on record saying they hope it fails. More are on 
record saying they hope it succeeds. But I don't think this body can 
just box its eyes and ears to the reality of what would happen if this 
lawsuit succeeds.
  We are not riding to the rescue this Congress. Let me just be honest 
with you. Given how fractious the debate is here about everything but 
in particular about healthcare, there is no way that the Congress and 
this dysfunctional White House can reassemble all of the protections in 
the Affordable Care Act if the courts wipe them out. That is just not 
realistic. We don't debate anything on this floor any longer. We don't 
have the muscle to pass minor pieces of legislation like this body used 
to do 20 years ago, never mind a reordering and reconstruction of one-
sixth of the American economy, which is what the healthcare system 
represents.
  Republicans need to start making a decision. Do you support this 
lawsuit or do you not? If you do support it, you can't just say ``Well, 
you know, if everybody loses insurance and rates go through the roof 
for people with preexisting conditions, we will figure it out'' without 
having a specific plan for how you are going to do that. It is not good 
enough to just say ``I hope that lawsuit succeeds. I hope everybody 
loses their insurance. And then, the day after, we will come back and 
we will see if we can try to find people healthcare.'' That is 
irresponsible. That is not satisfactory. It isn't enough for people out 
there who are living life in fear that their insurance is about to 
vanish.

  The problem is, the last time Republicans started thinking about what 
they would want to replace the Affordable Care Act with, it was a joke. 
It was a joke. The Better Care Reconciliation Act, which was Senate 
Republicans' replacement for the Affordable Care Act--CBO found that it 
would increase the number of people without insurance by 22 million. It 
found that by 2026, an estimated 49 million people would be without 
insurance, almost doubling the number who lack insurance today. That is 
not better care; that is much, much worse care. So forgive me if I 
don't have confidence that my Republican friends who run the Senate 
today are going to have a plan to deal with a successful Texas v. 
United States court case that keeps insurance for people in my State, 
the 111,000 people in Connecticut who get insurance through the private 
market with ACA subsidies and the 268,000 people in Connecticut who are 
covered in my State under the Medicaid expansion.
  It is time for everybody in this body, whether Republican or 
Democrat, to step up and say: A, do I support the lawsuit to get rid of 
all of the protections in the Affordable Care Act, with nothing to 
replace it, and B, do I have a plan for what to do if the lawsuit that 
I support is successful?
  Chris, from Westbrook, CT, is asking that question of everybody in 
this Chamber. Here is what he said:

       I am a 30 year old patient living with muscular dystrophy 
     type 2B. Preexisting conditions can happen to anyone. . . . 
     Disease does not discriminate. . . . No amount of pre-
     planning or prudence can stop you from preventing a genetic 
     disease, for example. . . . You can be healthy one day, and 
     have a health crisis the next. Everyone knows someone with a 
     preexisting condition. It is a lifesaver--having insurance 
     when you have a preexisting condition means being able to 
     afford lifesaving medicines and treatments.

  Chris is watching carefully to see what the answer to this question 
is.

[[Page S5000]]

  Jeff in Enfield, CT, told me that in 2012, at the age of 7, his 
daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. He said:

       By the time we noticed the symptoms and took her to the 
     doctor, she most likely had only a couple weeks left to live. 
     She is healthy today thanks to a daily regimen of insulin. 
     But insulin in the U.S. costs five to ten times what it costs 
     everywhere else. . . . Without insurance, the expense of 
     keeping our daughter alive would ruin us. The prospect of my 
     daughter being un-insurable is terrifying. . . . Without the 
     ACA's insurance protections, the problem would be epidemic.

  The problem of people not being able to afford insulin all across 
this country.
  Jeff continued:

       How can anyone be expected to live under that kind of 
     strain, especially a young person just starting out in life?

  I am asking this question of my colleagues on behalf of my 
constituents, but millions of Americans who are sick or have a child 
who is sick are sick and tired of Congress playing politics with 
healthcare. You may not love everything that is in the Affordable Care 
Act. I get it. Republicans didn't vote for it. They didn't support it. 
They have been consistent in trying to get rid of it ever since it was 
put into law. I understand that. But I have taken my Republican friends 
at their word over the last 10 years when they have said: We want to 
repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something better.
  Asking the courts to overturn the entirety of the act with no plan to 
replace it is an abdication of the promise that has been made. I don't 
begrudge people trying to repeal a law they don't like if they think 
they can do something better, but Congress didn't repeal the Affordable 
Care Act because people didn't want us to do it.
  This is an irresponsible and thoughtless mechanism to try to score a 
political victory, but it ends up playing with lots of people's lives.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill 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.

                          ____________________