[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 205 (Wednesday, December 18, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7145-S7146]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Government Funding

  Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the spending bill, 
which we are about to vote on, which is going to increase our deficit 
by almost a fourth of a trillion dollars over 10 years and of which I 
think I might be the first speaker. We are going to vote on this. We 
got it yesterday--Monday, maybe--and we are going to vote on it 
tomorrow.
  I smile because this is supposed to be the world's greatest 
deliberative body, and we have not deliberated one bit on far-ranging 
policies. Now, by the why, the mess is kind of bipartisan. We can 
spread the blame around.
  Let me bring up the heart of it. When ObamaCare passed, President 
Obama famously said it would not increase the deficit by one dime. That 
is gone. I think that replaces ``you can keep your doctor if you want 
to'' as the greatest lie. What we did today is to repeal about $400 
billion in payments to pay for all the healthcare that is going out. It 
is kind of a joke on Republicans. We are getting ObamaCare, but we are 
not paying for it.
  On the other hand, as I will explain in a second, it may ultimately 
be a joke on Democrats. Now, this concerns me because we didn't have a 
committee hearing on it, and we haven't had a floor debate, but we just 
committed that for almost $400 billion that have been used to fund 
Medicaid expansion, people getting subsidies for their health 
insurance, and many other things, we just went poof, and it is gone.
  Now, some of it, like the health insurance tax, was a tax that the 
insurance industry agreed to so that the Obama administration would 
force ObamaCare upon the rest of us. But now that it has been agreed to 
and ObamaCare is stuck, they don't want to pay the tax. They would 
rather that go poof.
  Now, people say: Wait a second. If we get rid of that tax, maybe 
insurance premiums go down. One, they don't guarantee it, but, 
secondly, what we could have done is we could have taken that money, 
created reinsurance pools across the Nation, and that is estimated to 
lower premiums by 10 to 20 percent. In that case, not only would the 
insurance industry be fulfilling their bargain--hey, you stick the 
Nation with ObamaCare, but we will help pay for it--you would actually 
be able to use the money to lower premiums. That would be something 
good. One, they would have kept their word, and, two, it would have 
been good for the American patient, if you will.
  The other tax that has gone just poof--$300 billion just gone without 
debate, without deliberation, without a committee hearing, which is 
still there on Friday, and today we walk in on Monday, and it is poof, 
and we vote on it tomorrow, and I am the first person to speak on it--
is the so-called Cadillac tax.
  Now, on the Cadillac tax, that is a provision under ObamaCare in 
which for high-cost policies, if they go too high, you get taxed on 
them. The whole idea is to encourage wiser purchasing of health 
insurance. Now, frankly, I didn't care for the Cadillac tax. I get the 
reason it was there. But 100 different economists have said that it 
serves a purpose across the political spectrum. My preference is that 
if we had replaced the Cadillac tax, one, we would have paid for it. We 
shouldn't be getting ObamaCare without paying for it. Secondly, we 
would have gotten

[[Page S7146]]

some reforms. They are reforms that actually would have been--if we 
were not going to use the Cadillac tax to hold down the cost of 
premiums--another mechanism by which we could hold down the cost of 
premiums.

  Why is this important? Because not only did we just go poof to almost 
$400 billion, but because healthcare expenditures are driving our debt 
and deficit. It is not just that we lost this $400 billion. We lost any 
restraint upon policies going higher and higher.
  Now, that is bad for the American patient. It is bad for the American 
household because our country will continue its indebtedness.
  I am a doctor. I know if you put more money into the furnace, it will 
burn that much higher, and now there is just no excuse to try and rein 
in those expensive policies.
  It is not just that. One thing that my Republicans apparently have 
agreed with Democrats on is to stop the Trump administration from 
taking on something called ``silver loading.'' It is a little technical 
here, but just hang with me. For the middle-class family in your State 
who buys their insurance on the exchange and does not get a subsidy, 
pop, there goes their premium.
  How does this happen? When the Trump administration ended the 
payments from the Federal Government to insurance companies, insurance 
companies figured out a way around it. They are smart. They know how to 
get out of taxes that they have agreed to pay for, as an example. So 
they did what is called ``silver loading.'' They increased the cost of 
so-called silver policies on the ObamaCare exchange. So if you are not 
getting a subsidy, you are paying a lot more. But because if you are 
not getting a subsidy and you are paying a lot more, that increased the 
amount of subsidies for people who were. So if you are, you know, 
getting a subsidy, you are probably pleased with it. If you are the 
middle-class person making 400 percent of Federal poverty level and you 
are paying your taxes and you are trying to do it right, you just got 
stuck with a higher premium.
  The administration was trying to take it on. This deal, which we have 
not discussed, which was not heard in committee, which we have not 
deliberated on at all, says to the administration: You can't take that 
on. Yes, that middle class family not getting a subsidy is paying far 
more, but you can't take it on. Stand down, administration, we are 
going to stick it to that family, as well as saying poof to $400 
billion.
  Now, there are some other issues that are important to me in my 
State. The National Flood Insurance Program is an important program. We 
advanced some reforms that would make it more affordable for the 
homeowner, more sustainable for society, and more accountable to the 
taxpayer. We haven't had anything in there. We renewed it. I am pleased 
that we renewed it.
  We renewed it without reforms. You have had flooding in your State, 
and I have had flooding in my State. You have had yours in yours, and I 
have had it in mine. We need that program to be sustainable, 
accountable, and affordable. We have lost the opportunity. I forget how 
many short-term extensions we have had without reform. I think it is 
like 10, 12, 14, or 16. You lose count after a while. We have missed 
that opportunity.
  So we started on Friday. Everybody goes home except for a few people. 
They work on it over the weekend, they come in on Monday, and we get a 
2,000-page bill on Monday. We will vote on it tomorrow, and I am the 
first person to speak on it.
  Now, I understand that impeachment is taking a lot of energy and 
oxygen out of the Chambers. I understand that a lot of attention is 
addressed elsewhere, but all I can say is that you have just imperiled 
your country's fiscal health.
  On one more thing before I wrap up, there is a little bit of an irony 
here. Republicans are getting ObamaCare, but it is unpaid for. There is 
another irony here as well. The courts today ruled that the individual 
mandate in ObamaCare is unconstitutional. Now, I am not an attorney, 
but I gather they did not rule that this was so-called severable.
  If this is not constitutional, then the rest can stand because we 
just sever it off. Imagine this. Imagine that the courts decide that 
that portion of ObamaCare--which is related to Medicaid expansion and 
is related to the exchanges in which people get subsidies to buy these 
policies--is unconstitutional but would have allowed the mechanism by 
which to pay for it to stand, because that is another part of the law. 
We have just repealed that. Why is that important? Because if this 
falls, we have to have the money to pay for a replacement.
  Democrats have so long screamed that we need to have universal 
access. By the way, I am a doc. I would like everybody to have 
insurance. I fought for it, and I worked for it. But the other party, 
which has said this is such a high priority, has just eliminated the 
funding that could be used for replacement in Texas v. Azar, the court 
decision that may strike down that portion of ObamaCare.
  So, Republicans, we got ObamaCare that is not paid for. Democrats, 
they may end up with no ObamaCare at all. Patients, whether they are on 
Medicaid, getting a subsidy, or not getting a subsidy, will lose.
  I hope that we can return to being the world's greatest deliberative 
body, but as regards that, this has to be considered a low point.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.