[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 188 (Saturday, November 8, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8009-S8032]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

 CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS AND EXTENSIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to Proceed

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 
5371.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the bill by 
title.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, a bill 
     making continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal 
     year 2026, and for other purposes.

[[Page S8010]]

  



                           Government Funding

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, yesterday, we finally heard Democrats 
entertain the notion of reopening the government. It only took them 38 
days. Why? In the days before, progressives were urging Democrats to 
prolong the shutdown in perpetuity.
  One House Democrat said:

       There would be hell to pay if Senate Democrats don't let 
     events play out.

  And so I am glad to see Democrats, after 38 days, back down from the 
maximalist and, frankly, insane position they have held since 
September.
  The Democrat leader's proposal is a nonstarter for the Republican 
majority. The Democrat leader wants to believe that this is a 
``simple'' proposal; that it is some sort of compromise, but it is not. 
He is talking about throwing tens of billions more taxpayer dollars at 
a program that even Democrats admit has failed to lower healthcare 
costs.
  The American people are tired of Washington taking their hard-earned 
money and spending it on costly government programs that fail to follow 
through on their promises. Of course, that is what Democrats have been 
doing for years with ObamaCare. They passed ObamaCare 15 years ago 
without a single Republican vote, and in that time, Democrats' 
signature healthcare law has failed to do what Democrats promised: If 
you like your health insurance, you can keep it--not true. If you like 
your doctor, you can keep him or her--not true. Premium costs will go 
down--not true. Actually, the opposite is true. They keep going up. 
ObamaCare drove premium prices higher.
  So, in 2021, in the Democrats' American Rescue Plan Act--a bill best 
known for setting off a yearslong inflation crisis--Democrats created 
these Biden bonuses, further papering over the higher premium costs 
under ObamaCare, with bigger taxpayer subsidies. Again, they did that 
without a single Republican vote.
  Then, in another partisan bill in 2022, they extended the subsidies 
through the end of this year. The Democrats chose the expiration date; 
they created this cliff; and now they want to blame Republicans for 
their mess. Give me a break. Republicans are not about to further 
burden taxpayers by blindly extending a flawed program.
  The Democrats' proposal is just more of the same--masking rising 
premiums and padding insurance companies' profits with more taxpayer 
dollars. The Democrat leader's proposal is a nonstarter.
  There is still only one path out. It is a clean funding extension. 
The House has already passed a clean funding extension. The President 
supports one and would sign it into law immediately. We are only a 
handful of votes away from passing one right here in the Senate--a bill 
that has been sitting at the desk now for 38 days. We reopen, and then 
we can start talking about addressing the healthcare mess that 
Democrats created.
  I know that Democrats know this. Just yesterday, the Democrat whip 
came to the floor to say something that I have been waiting for a 
Democrat to say for a long time. He said that the first thing we need 
to do is reopen the government, then address the cost of healthcare and 
advance appropriations bills.
  I have been saying that for about 6 weeks now, and I think that is 
exactly what we need to do today. So I hope the Democrat whip and 
others in his caucus will join the three Democrats who have been 
supporting a clean continuing resolution--the only bill that can 
actually end the shutdown.
  I am glad to see that, after 38 days, Democrats are finally warming 
up to the idea that their shutdown can't go on forever. I urge my 
colleagues to support a clean continuing resolution so we can start a 
real discussion to address their healthcare mess, get back to the 
regular appropriations process, and, above all, finally provide relief 
to the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                               Healthcare

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, yesterday, Chuck Schumer, minority 
leader of the U.S. Senate, came to the floor with his most recent 
ransom note. Of course, it wasn't serious. It was dead on arrival.
  Senator Schumer is demanding that the U.S. Government send a check 
directly to the insurance companies of America to the tune of tens and 
tens and tens of billions of dollars, right from the government, 
mainlined and into the bank accounts of the insurance companies of 
America.
  Chuck Schumer actually cuts the people--the American people, the 
taxpayers--out of the process. The people who are waiting for food, the 
people who are waiting for paychecks, the people who are protecting 
us--it cuts them out completely. Nope. Direct money--Chuck Schumer, 
U.S. Government--into the bank accounts of the insurance companies of 
America.
  Think about it. Direct payment, U.S. Government to U.S. insurance 
companies, with the American people having absolutely no say in how 
that money is spent. That is what Chuck Schumer wants. No 
accountability.
  What he said is that if the Republicans will not send that $30 
billion to insurance companies--and it may be more than that, actually, 
if you do all the calculations--the Democrats are ready to keep the 
government closed. No paychecks. No food stamps. No military getting 
paid. Nothing.
  This is a true reflection of the failure of ObamaCare. Since 
ObamaCare was passed by Democrats--and not a single Republican voted 
for it in the House or the Senate; Democrats alone--the cost of 
healthcare in this country has skyrocketed. Do you know what? So have 
the stock prices of the insurance companies.
  The average ObamaCare premium has gone up by 221 percent since 
ObamaCare passed. Remember when President Obama said that ObamaCare 
would actually bring down prices? He said premiums would decrease by 
$2,500 apiece. It was a direct lie to the American people, and I 
believe Barack Obama knew it. He didn't seem to care. He was going to 
do anything he could to get a bill passed that was named after him.
  At the same time, since ObamaCare became law, the stock prices of 
U.S. insurance companies have gone way up--some by 500 percent, some by 
1,000 percent--because the money goes directly from the Federal 
Government into the insurance companies' pockets.
  What do Senate Democrats and Chuck Schumer, who have held this 
country hostage now for well over a month, well over 5 weeks, what do 
they want to do? They want to just send them more money for 1 more 
year. Let's just send them all the checks again for 1 more year.
  Republicans believe that taxpayer dollars should go directly to the 
people who are making their own decisions about healthcare for their 
families, not the insurance companies. Let the American people decide 
what works for them and their families.
  Remember, it was the Democrats who broke healthcare in this country. 
They broke it the very day they passed ObamaCare.
  You know, recently, the liberal New York Times stated the obvious. 
This is from a headline Sunday, a week and a half ago: ObamaCare is 
pricey. Right there, headline, top of the page: ObamaCare is pricey.
  I am a doctor. I practiced medicine for 24 years in my home State of 
Wyoming, chief of staff of the Wyoming Medical Center in Casper, 
president of the State medical society. I will tell you exactly what 
ObamaCare is. It is a failure. It is broken. It is unaffordable. The 
American people know that.
  Chuck Schumer and the Democrats want to send another $30 billion or 
more to the insurance companies for the whole next year. This is a 
disgrace. It is not just a mistake--a disgrace.
  You know, there are Democrats who realize that ObamaCare is a 
failure, failed to lower the cost of care, because just this week on 
this very floor, Senator Peter Welch of Vermont admitted that Democrats 
``did fail to bring down the cost of healthcare.'' You better believe 
they failed. We have been saying that for years.
  It is good to be here on the floor of the Senate with another 
physician who

[[Page S8011]]

knows all of the same things I know. He is going to speak about this as 
well.
  My question is, Why are Senator Welch's Democrat colleagues holding 
our entire country hostage to double down on a program that they know 
is continuing to fail? It has failed, it continues to fail, and they 
want to send more money. Why are Senator Welch's Democrat colleagues 
holding the entire country hostage to double down on a law that has 
failed the Nation with regard to our healthcare?
  From the start, Democrats started to realize it because they needed 
to paper over the terrible cost overruns they saw with ObamaCare, and 
they did it with juicy, permanent subsidies.

  When Joe Biden became President, Democrats said: Oh, it is getting 
worse. We better put additional subsidies on top of the already juicy 
subsidies that were there just to try to prop it up.
  They did it to further hide the failures of ObamaCare.
  The end of the Biden COVID bonus payments--as I like to refer to 
these new, juicy subsidies, the add-on subsidies--only about 4 percent 
of next year's projected 20 percent premium spike comes from that. And 
what do we see? We see these new subsidies. They didn't lower premiums. 
They continued to try to hide the real cost of the premiums. They shift 
the costs. And who do they shift them to? They dump it on the 
taxpayers.
  That is what Chuck Schumer is trying to do today--dump it onto the 
taxpayers and send more money directly to the insurance companies, 
keeping the American people out of the equation completely.
  Today, taxpayers are paying 93 percent of the cost of ObamaCare 
premiums. This is a dramatic escalation from years before. What did all 
of this extra spending by the Democrats buy? There is that much money 
floating around. The American people who are left behind don't have a 
right to look right at where it is happening. It brought waste, fraud, 
abuse, and corruption. Oh, yes, there has been corruption.
  Last year, the American people filed over 200,000 complaints with the 
Federal Government because they were unknowingly signed up or switched 
into ObamaCare plans. How did that happen? Two hundred thousand people 
either didn't know it or were switched. How did that happen? Because it 
happened without their consent. You look into those situations, and 
these people had to find out about it and then complain to the 
government. So there are people who actually got switched and still 
haven't found out about it.
  Insurance agents and brokers get paid every time they enroll someone 
in ObamaCare. They do get something for that. So we know that some are 
actually criminally manipulating the system, and that is where we 
believe those 200,000 complaints have come from--people who have been 
maneuvered and manipulated without their knowledge.
  But Senator Schumer continues to promote keeping the government 
closed while his buddies from the big insurance companies, whose stocks 
have soared now under ObamaCare, get another $30 billion or more 
injected right into their bank accounts. That is what Chuck Schumer 
came to the floor yesterday and demanded--the government staying closed 
until you guys all send $30 billion directly to the insurance 
companies.
  We know what people across the country believe about insurance 
companies. Would the American people trust themselves to make these 
decisions or trust the insurance companies to protect them? That is 
what Chuck Schumer wants to do--keep the American people out of it.
  Meanwhile, Federal workers have missed paychecks for more than a 
month. Military families are worried about rent. Air traffic 
controllers are overworked; they are exhausted. Planes are being 
canceled. Flights are being canceled. People are concerned about 
Thanksgiving.
  Enough is enough.
  Let's be clear what Republicans are offering. We are ready to reopen 
the government today--make sure everybody gets paid who has been 
working without pay for the last 5 or 6 weeks--by passing a clean, 
continuing, bipartisan resolution. That means funding the government at 
current levels so we pay our military families, we pay Federal workers, 
and we fund food assistance for 42 million Americans. Think about that. 
That is 42 million Americans. That is more than twice the number of 
people in this country who are on ObamaCare.
  Yet Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are willing to deny food to 
hungry children who outnumber the people on ObamaCare right now by 2 to 
1. That is what we are dealing with here. And not just once have they 
denied it; 14 times the Democrats have voted to not pay the working 
people and continue to vote to keep the government closed.
  I know Republicans welcome a real debate about the many failures of 
ObamaCare because we believe Americans deserve quality, affordable 
healthcare, and they haven't gotten that with ObamaCare. Reforms are 
needed that actually lower costs to protect the taxpayers. The American 
people deserve a full debate about the unaffordability of ObamaCare.
  Senator Schumer's offer does nothing to address the cost of 
healthcare, does nothing to lower premiums, does nothing to reassure 
the American people. All it does is make insurance companies richer and 
taxpayers poorer, and that is why it is dead on arrival.
  Republicans welcome the debate about having taxpayer money go 
directly to the American people versus this cozy relationship that 
Chuck Schumer wants to have with the insurance companies, moving money 
directly to them.
  It is time to reopen the government.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Lummis). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The Senator from South Carolina.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, so here we are on a Saturday. It is 
beautiful outside.

       Every day gets better for us.

  If you are trying to get through the airport today, probably not 
true. If you are working for the government and not getting paid, not a 
good day for you, not a good day for us, not a good day for the 
country.
  This is going on way too long. Too many people are being damaged for 
no good purpose.
  We are not going to be extorted, held hostage. You are not going to 
terrorize the country to make us do something that makes no sense. I 
would like to work on healthcare, but we are not going to extend the 
debacle called ObamaCare.
  So ``every day gets better for us.'' You need to ask yourself in 
America: Is that true for you?
  I don't think so.
  Let me tell you who has a good day today: healthcare insurance 
companies.
  In 2024, UnitedHealthcare made $817 million per day under ObamaCare. 
So it is definitely a good day for them. Cigna, $677 million; Anthem/
Elevance, whatever they are, $480 million; Centene, $447 million; CVS, 
$358 million; Humana, $322 million; and Molina, $112 million a day.
  That is what healthcare companies get under ObamaCare every day. So 
when Senator Schumer says, ``It gets better for us,'' I guarantee you, 
every day we keep this system in place is a great day for the 
healthcare insurance companies that have been making out literally like 
bandits under ObamaCare.
  In case this job doesn't work out for any of us, do you want to go 
into the healthcare business? A big upgrade.
  At UnitedHealth Group, the CEO made $26.3 million; Cigna, $23.3 
million; Molina, $21.9 million; Centene, $20.6 million; Elevance 
Health/Anthem, $20.5 million; CVS, $17.8 million; Humana, lagging still 
at $15.6 million. These people are doing very well.
  The problem is health insurance companies do great every day from 
ObamaCare. All these healthcare CEOs are doing fantastic, but you, the 
consumer, not so much. You were promised, when ObamaCare passed in 
2010--President Obama said: Every family in America who participates in 
this thing will have about a $2,500 savings in premium reductions.

[[Page S8012]]

  It has been like a 100-percent increase. He didn't just miss it a 
little bit; he missed it a lot. This thing is unsustainable.
  Why do you call something the ``Affordable Healthcare Act'' when, 
every 5 minutes, you are asking me and the Presiding Officer to dump 
$350 billion in it to keep it afloat?
  It is not affordable. It has never been affordable. The only people 
winning from this are healthcare insurance company CEOs, and it needs 
to stop.
  And why is the government shut down? The government is shut down 
because our friends on the other side are insisting we continue this 
program for another year. I am not going to continue it for another 
day. I am not going to pour tens of billions of dollars through 
ObamaCare and the healthcare insurance companies with the result being 
your premiums have been increased by 100 percent. We are going to stop 
that.
  We would like to work with you to come up with a better deal. Here is 
the good news: It wouldn't take much to make it a better deal.
  But if you are wondering what kind of deal it has been for healthcare 
companies: UnitedHealthcare Group, 1,177 percent increase in their 
stock prices since ObamaCare. Look at these numbers. I mean, 822, 414, 
490, 859, 604, 595 percent increase in stock prices after the passage 
of ObamaCare. These are the big winners, not you.
  And we are going to break this healthcare cartel. We are going to 
take this money that is flowing to insurance companies, and we are 
going to try to get it directly to you the consumer, so you can have 
more purchasing power and, actually, over time, create more competition 
and lower your healthcare prices, something ObamaCare is not doing.
  And to illustrate my point, I am going from no charts to a bunch of 
charts. This is big change in my life.
  Even I can understand that. That is like a rocket ship compared to 
the rest of the economy.
  So what have we discovered in the last few days? We have discovered 
that the subsidies under ObamaCare are a windfall for insurance 
companies. We have discovered that every day we talk about healthcare 
as it is today, they are making a gob of money, hundreds of millions of 
dollars a day.
  We have learned that these health insurance companies have had stock 
prices increase unlike any other sector of the economy, and it all 
happened after ObamaCare.
  They promised you lower premiums; your premiums have doubled.
  What has happened? The big winner is insurance companies, and 
insurance companies are doing the Democratic Party's bidding. They are 
signing up people for ObamaCare that haven't made a claim in 3 years.
  For every person they can find, they get money. So they have got 
incentive just to stack this thing with people, whether it is good 
healthcare or not.
  So what did President Trump say today? He said he recommended to all 
the Republicans: Stand your ground. Break this cycle. Take the money 
away from health insurance companies, and let's flow it to the people 
to give them more purchasing power and stop the money-sucking health 
insurance companies from taking tens of billions of dollars out of 
ObamaCare.
  So the Affordable Care Act is not affordable. There is a better way. 
We are going to insist on that better way.
  And to my Democratic friends, we are not going to extend this program 
for a year because that would be unfair to the taxpayer; that would 
continue a healthcare system that is out of control. It would enrich 
health insurance companies even more. We are not going to do that. We 
are going to replace this broken system with something that is actually 
better for the consumer to meet the goal of lowering healthcare costs.
  So you have to understand terrorizing the public is not going to get 
us, as Republicans, to continue a very bad healthcare bill. We are not 
going to do it. We will talk to you, President Trump will, all of us 
will about how getting better value is possible, how lowering premiums 
is possible. But you have got to change the fundamental precept of 
ObamaCare, which has proven to be anything but affordable.
  That is like the Inflation Reduction Act. All it did was cause 
inflation.
  The Affordable Healthcare Act has become unaffordable. ObamaCare is 
growing faster than almost any other thing in healthcare because it is 
designed to enrich healthcare companies. The more people they sign up, 
the more money they get.
  And it is not about quality. It is about stacking as many people as 
you can under the umbrella of government-run healthcare. And, 
apparently, it doesn't matter if the government-run healthcare is 
working.
  It does matter to us. We would like to get a better return on 
investment.
  So I want to congratulate President Trump. He has gotten into the 
game today. He has given us a pathway forward. I am going to heed his 
advice and counsel. I am not going to extend the unaffordable 
healthcare--ObamaCare healthcare--program for another year or another 
day.
  There is a better way. President Trump talked to me this morning, and 
he would like to sit down and see if we can come up with a better 
solution. I know we can. But we are not going to do it while the 
government is shut down.
  This is day 37, 38--whatever day it is. Every day is hundreds of 
millions of dollars to these insurance companies. Every day that we 
have shut the government down, it is families who work for the 
government that have no money. We are hurting our national security. We 
are hurting morale. It is getting dangerous to fly. So stop it. End 
this madness.
  We tried to shut the government down to build a wall. We eventually 
built the wall because it is a good idea. But shutting the government 
down to build the wall wasn't a good idea.
  So I would urge you, my Democratic colleagues: Keep working with us. 
Open this government. Let's find a way to provide better healthcare 
that doesn't enrich insurance companies.
  Let's see if we can break this cycle of all the money going to 
insurance companies. They are getting filthy rich off this. Let's see 
if we can take the money and actually give it to people to buy better 
healthcare, to lower costs, and create competition.
  Mr. President, in case you are listening out there, I think you have 
come up with a good idea. Count me on board.
  To my colleagues on this side, this is a fight worth having.
  To my Democratic colleagues, let's open up the government and act 
like adults and see if we can get this problem in a better spot. We 
will never do it with the government shut down. The only thing that is 
going to come from the government shutdown is misery, pain, and 
heartache.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I am pleased to join my colleague from 
South Carolina on the floor. I really want to echo and emphasize what 
he is talking about, and that is that healthcare absolutely needs to be 
reformed. And as the Senator from South Carolina said, that is exactly 
what the President has said. We have got to reform healthcare because 
medical inflation is going up like a rocket, and it is not going to 
change until we reform this healthcare system.
  And it starts with making sure that support goes to people so they 
have more control over their own healthcare. That is just common sense.
  And so I agree with my colleague from South Carolina and certainly 
with the President's comment that that is the kind of reform that needs 
to be done, but it needs to be done when the government is open.
  And so, again, you know, we are calling on our colleagues to join us 
to vote to open up government. The American people are suffering. We 
need to get back to work on all these issues, and that happens when 
they join us and vote to open up the government.
  For more than a month, Democrats have refused to pass a simple, 
clean, nonpartisan continuing resolution--one that would simply keep 
government open and allow us to continue our work on all these things 
and on the appropriations process, regular order, moving the bills 
through the way we should.
  And, gee, this is something that they did 13 times during the Biden 
administration--13 times during the Biden administration. And it wasn't 
just some of the Democrats that made these 13

[[Page S8013]]

votes. It was all of them. All of them. All of them.
  And now they continue to hold government hostage, and the American 
people pay the price.
  For more than a month, Democrats have put programs like SNAP at risk, 
jeopardizing support that 42 million Americans rely on to help put food 
on the table.
  For more than a month, Democrats have refused to support women and 
young children who rely on WIC Programs for supplemental nutrition 
assistance. Emergency funding for that program is nearly exhausted.
  For more than a month, Democrats have refused to provide educational 
opportunities to the 750,000 children who participate in the Head Start 
Program, many of which are in danger of closing soon or have already 
been shuttered.
  For more than a month, Democrats have refused to pay Federal 
employees, including our military, our National Guard, air traffic 
controllers, and TSA agents--those who keep this Nation safe. These 
individuals are maintaining critical services for our Nation while 
facing major personal financial uncertainty.
  The Department of Transportation has been forced to order air service 
reductions across the country in order to protect the safety of the 
traveling public, as fed-up and tired air traffic controllers continue 
to go without pay.
  The men and women of our Armed Forces are waiting in line at food 
banks and struggling to pay their rent.
  The American people are suffering. This shutdown is not governing. 
Senate Democrats need to vote with us to reopen the government so we 
can continue our work on full-year appropriations bills.
  As I said just a minute ago, during President Biden's administration, 
Democrats passed the same kind of clean, short-term CR 13 times. Now 
they want to add extraneous policies just to keep the government 
funded.
  The Appropriations Committee has advanced 8 of the 12 appropriations 
bills with strong bipartisan majorities. We have passed 3 of those 
bills on the Senate floor, with more than 80 votes. And we are ready to 
move on them today and to get back to regular order and the 
appropriations process, govern the right way, fund priorities, find 
savings to address the deficit where we can, and make sure we are doing 
our work on behalf of the American people.
  It is long past time for Democrats to vote yes to reopen the 
government. It is time to resume governing on behalf of the American 
people. It is that simple.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The Democratic leader is recognized.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, the blast radius of the Republican 
shutdown grows even larger. This morning, tens of millions of Americans 
remain in limbo as this administration continues its crusade against 
SNAP. The Supreme Court has allowed the administration to withhold 
benefits as the case makes its way through the lower courts.
  For this administration to go all the way to the Supreme Court just 
to get out of having to pay SNAP benefits for hungry kids is 
pathological levels of vindictiveness.
  This crisis is in the administration's hands. It is all them. Not 
anyone else. The minute the administration wanted to, it could find a 
fix for SNAP and ensure that people don't go hungry. But they are not 
choosing to act, in what is really a nasty act of hostage-taking 
against the most vulnerable people in our society.
  Let me read what the Rhode Island judge said earlier this week about 
this case:

       People have gone without for too long, not making payments 
     to them for even another day is simply unacceptable.

  Now, the administration could have said: OK. We will have to pay it. 
But that wasn't good enough for them. Of course not. This 
administration, again, is viciously cruel and will use anybody for a 
hostage.
  But the chaos doesn't end with SNAP benefits. Thirty-nine days into 
the crisis, the FAA has ordered a 10-percent cut of flights at 
America's busiest airports, and Secretary Duffy warned it could soon 
reach 20 percent. As of this morning, over 1,000 flights have been 
canceled. Travelers are standing in line for hours just to get through 
security. Parents traveling to see their kids have had their plan 
turned upside down. People traveling for funerals, family reunions, 
business trips have all too often been met with chaos.
  But what is happening in America's airports right now is not an 
accident. It is a stunt. Look at the way the order was designed. Four 
percent of flights canceled yesterday at 40 major airports, with plans 
to ramp up day to day until it hits 10 percent and maybe 20. How much 
more transparently political can you get? This isn't about safety; it 
is about politics masquerading as safety.
  When air traffic controllers are working without pay, when the system 
is strained to its limit--the solution isn't to cancel flights; it is 
to pay the workers and open up the government, which the administration 
could do right now.
  As I understand it, under previous shutdowns, airports were never 
shut down. But, again, the level that this administration--the level 
that they will go to, putting the American people in discomfort and 
worse, is unprecedented.
  Instead of negotiating with Democrats to lower costs, Republicans 
would rather let air traffic controllers go unpaid. Instead of 
negotiating with Democrats to reopen the government, they would rather 
ground flights. Instead of negotiating with Democrats to help families, 
they are punishing travelers. Instead of governing, Republicans are 
playing games with people's livelihoods.
  And they have the ability to pay the air traffic controllers like 
they sent money, just as Trump sent money to Argentina, $20 billion. If 
they wanted to find the money, they could--absolutely.
  So why? Why have Republicans dragged this shutdown on for so, so 
long? Because they don't want to lower healthcare costs. Because they 
seem happy to let 24 million Americans see their premiums double on 
average.
  Yesterday, we offered Republicans a perfectly reasonable compromise 
to get out of this horrible shutdown that they installed on the 
American people. We offered three things: We all vote to reopen the 
government. We all approve a one-time, temporary extension of current 
ACA premium tax credits. And then after we reopen, we negotiate, as the 
Republicans say they want, for longer term fixes to ACA affordability.
  Mr. MORENO. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. SCHUMER. No. Only after I finish.
  I know many Republicans stormed out the gate to dismiss this offer, 
but that is a terrible mistake. Our offer is not a new policy. This is 
not negotiating in a shutdown; it is simply agreeing to maintain 
current funding levels. A 1-year extension is something many 
Republicans themselves have said they want. It is something a great 
many Americans support--55 percent of Trump supporters support it, 
after all. So it is alarming that Republicans even refuse to 
acknowledge we have an immediate crisis right now that needs fixing.
  Listen to the arguments Republicans have been making on the floor. 
Just listen. Republicans are making it clear as day that they are happy 
to let premiums skyrocket. Behind me is the consequence.
  Look at this. Across America, in States red and blue, the black areas 
are districts that insurance payments for people would increase 300 
percent; dark blue, 200 to 300; and the list goes on and on.
  Look how bad it is. Every single State is impacted--most of all, 
Republican States.
  Look, if Republicans want to talk about long-term fixes to ACA 
affordability, Democrats are ready. We said so yesterday.
  But in the meantime, doing nothing is derelict because people will go 
bankrupt. People will lose insurance. People will get sicker. And that 
is what will

[[Page S8014]]

happen if this Congress fails to act. Republicans must act.
  I yield to my colleague from Ohio.
  Mr. MORENO. Thank you to the Democrat leader for yielding for a 
question.
  Have you put forward a proposal that we could read that you reference 
in your speech, which says a clean continuing resolution, with the 
extension of the ACA Biden credits?
  Mr. SCHUMER. The answer is yes. As we spoke yesterday--
  Mr. MORENO. So there is--
  Mr. SCHUMER. I will not be interrupted.
  Mr. MORENO. No, no. My question is: Is there a proposal in writing 
that we can read?
  Mr. SCHUMER. There is a proposal that is very simple. First, you 
haven't put your proposed fix to the ACA--the new one, which Leader 
Thune has spoken about on the floor--so we can't give you a counter in 
writing.
  But it is very simple because we have two sentences we would add to 
any proposal which would extend the ACA benefits for 1 year. That is 
all. Plain and simple. The leader can put that in his proposal on 
opening up the government. It doesn't need a vote. It can't be blocked 
by anybody. It is the right thing to do.
  Mr. MORENO. Would it still have no income caps, so people who make $1 
million, $2, $3 million a year--
  Mr. SCHUMER. As we said, if you would have listened to my speech 
yesterday, once we pass the 1-year fix so people right now aren't in 
difficulty, we would sit and negotiate that. The leader has said he 
won't negotiate before. We are willing to negotiate once the credits 
are extended, plain and simple, and we made that in our proposal 
yesterday.
  Mr. MORENO. So for 1 year, people making millions of dollars would 
still receive--
  Mr. SCHUMER. No.
  Mr. MORENO.--these COVID-era subsidies?
  Mr. SCHUMER. The bottom line is--the Senator from Ohio ignores that 
99 percent of people--you want to hurt people making $10,000, $50,000, 
$90,000 and hold this up? We can fix what the gentleman said in a 
negotiation. But don't have people who are every day being hurt--hurt--
by paying thousands of dollars more that they can't afford.
  I know that the Senator from Ohio cares about the billionaires. We 
care about average working people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. MORENO. Just to be clear, what we heard from the minority leader 
was the following. I want to recap for those who might have missed it. 
No. 1, he acknowledged that the Democrats have not put forward a 
written proposal that people could look at. No. 2, he acknowledged that 
his plan would be to allow millionaires--let me say that clearly--
people making millions of dollars would receive Biden-era COVID 
ObamaCare subsidies. You heard that right--no income cap.
  I was going to ask him before he stormed out of the room because 
evidently he doesn't want to hear any opposing views or actually engage 
in meaningful negotiation. He would have heard me ask the next 
question, which is, would he continue zero-dollar premiums, which we 
know for a fact have enormous levels of fraud.
  If he had stayed, I would have asked him a third question: Does he 
want these moneys to go directly to insurance companies? Let me repeat 
that because I don't think the American people have been told the truth 
here. This money does not go to people on ObamaCare; this is a check 
written from the Federal Government to the wealthiest insurance 
companies on the planet.
  He wants no income caps, millionaires getting COVID subsidies. He 
wants zero-dollar premiums that are filled with fraud, and he wants to 
enrich insurance companies even more. And because he can't get that--
here is the irony--there are Federal workers--military, TSA, the clerks 
here--that aren't receiving paychecks, that might get their health 
insurance canceled because we are not sending the premiums in. He is 
doing this to help people who have made millions of dollars already 
with this flawed healthcare system.
  To make it worse, he admitted right here on the floor of the U.S. 
Senate--the minority leader admitted that he has actually not submitted 
a written proposal to allow the Senate to consider.
  Let me just say one last thing, and I will yield my time to the 
Senator from Louisiana, who last night--I give enormous credit, 
honestly--gave a phenomenal proposal.
  I love what you said, which is that instead of sending this money to 
insurance companies, why don't we send to the people directly? Let them 
be empowered to hold insurance companies accountable. Let them make the 
decisions.
  I find it laughable that he says that I am for billionaires. I am 
somebody who worked my entire life in the private sector. According to 
financial disclosures, he has a higher net worth than I do, and he has 
been a politician his whole life. I don't know the math around that.
  I will yield the floor to my great colleague from Louisiana, who, by 
the way--sadly, the cameras don't pan the room. There are no Democrats 
here listening to what you are about to say. You are here because you 
are a good man, and in your heart, you want to fix this.
  They say we won't negotiate with them. They want to negotiate with 
President Trump, which is funny because when I look around, there are 
little plaques all over this floor, and there are none that say 
``Donald J. Trump.'' This is a negotiation among the U.S. Senate, but 
they are not even here. Look--gone, empty. Maybe they are at lunch with 
some lobbyists. Maybe insurance company lobbyists are taking them out 
to play golf today. I would if I were an insurance company lobbyist.
  Man, you guys are making me rich--like, filthy, filthy rich.
  I am going to end, I swear.
  Isn't it ironic, Senator Cassidy, that we want to give the money 
directly to the American people, and they want to give it right into 
the pockets of the people who fund their campaigns? Maybe they even own 
those stocks.
  People out there, listen to it, and think about.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.


                               Healthcare

  Mr. CASSIDY. I think Senator Moreno and, frankly, Senator Schumer are 
reflecting the frustration the American people have.
  I want to give a speech which is substantially the same as what I 
gave last night, and I will give it again later today. It is like TV 
advertising. I need people to actually listen to what I am saying as 
opposed to immediately presuming they know what I am going to say, and 
we end up in the same daggum situation we have been in for 39 days.
  We need to open the government, so if we need to talk about 
healthcare to open the government, let's talk about healthcare.
  Again, I worked for 20 years in a public hospital for the uninsured 
and the poorly insured. I know the consequences of this inflation that 
we have been having when it comes to health insurance. I know the 
impact it is having upon people as to whether or not--``My gosh, can I 
even afford to keep it?''

  So Congress, Senate, let's find a solution, but to find a solution, 
we have to put down the way we have always thought, the way that--``Oh 
my gosh, we are going to oppose it if the other side proposes it just 
because the other side proposes.'' We have to actually move beyond the 
entrenched way of thinking and be creative.
  May I point out an irony here? Senator Moreno talked about irony. 
Right now--right now--Republicans are trying to return to the original 
ACA model in which money went straight to the patient but not to the 
insurance company. At some point, it wasn't funded, so the first Trump 
administration allowed a workaround, and that workaround has led to 
these high premiums.
  Democrats are going to the mattress to defend a workaround from the 
first Trump administration that was trying to make up for a portion of 
the Affordable Care Act that could not be implemented. They should be 
saying: Let's go back to the model of how the Affordable Care Act was 
supposed to be implemented.
  Instead, they are defending Trump 1 policies. I don't even know if 
they

[[Page S8015]]

know that. But it is their ``My gosh, I have to oppose just to oppose'' 
that is going to defeat us getting out of this lockdown.
  Let's just talk about the enhanced premium tax credit, again, a 
program that sends billions--this coming year, $26 billion will go to 
insurers if all we do is a straight-out reauthorization. But that 
actually doesn't make healthcare less affordable; in fact, even for 
health insurance, it can make the policies more expensive for many of 
those who are in the individual market.
  Let me make it clear now. Let me show this chart as to the impact 
this is having upon health insurers.
  This is major health insurance company stock performance after the 
passage of ObamaCare, from March 2010 to November 2025. For 
UnitedHealth Group, they are up almost 1,200 percent; for Cigna, 800 
percent. And you can go down the line.
  I am not bashing insurance companies. We need them. But do we really 
need to send $26 billion more this year when we can send it straight to 
the patient?
  By the way, we are not talking about doing away with every part of 
the health insurance program--just that portion currently being funded 
by the enhanced premium tax credits.
  When Senator Moreno talks about these dollars going to insurance 
companies, we can see the impact of that on their stock price. They are 
doing great.
  Let's maybe do something different. Instead of worrying about the 
pocketbook of the insurance company, let's worry about the pocketbook 
of our fellow American who is paying these higher costs. Instead of 
paying an insurance company to manage the care, my proposal is to have 
a prefunded Federal flexible spending account.
  Before I go into that detail, let's talk about the problems with the 
enhanced premium tax credits.
  By the way, this is Bill Cassidy talking. This is not the chairman of 
the HELP Committee. This is not the Trump administration. This is not 
the leader of the Senate. This is my proposal, and I don't attribute it 
to anybody--although I will note the President apparently is in support 
of it.
  Right now, I am speaking to my colleagues, and I am speaking to 
Americans who might be watching.
  The problems under the enhanced premium tax credit--if your insurance 
premium goes up, Washington just pays more. There is absolutely no 
incentive for the insurers to hold down costs because the more it 
costs, the more they get. Think about that. The higher the healthcare 
costs, the more the insurance company gets. They are not evil, but I 
will say there is a clear motivation here. If you are a profit-making 
company and you can be insensitive to how much that cost is increasing, 
you are going to be insensitive.
  We need to have an incentive to bring the cost down, we need to have 
transparency as to what things actually cost, and we need to reward 
families who actually try to save.
  I liken this to, if you have a broken bone and you put a bandage on 
it, it doesn't heal the fracture; it just hides the broken bone. Let's 
fix the broken bone.
  We actually need to help the patient, the family, be incentivized to 
shop for that lower cost and incentivize the companies to lower the 
cost.
  The enhanced premium tax credit doesn't empower patients; it enriches 
insurance companies.
  I will note that since this ObamaCare passed, insurance companies 
have done very well, but the patient's healthcare has become more 
expensive, and it is now out of reach for many families.
  I got a tweet last night from one of my Democratic colleagues. ``No, 
we have to defend status quo.'' I am thinking--and this person is a 
vociferous critic of insurance companies--I am thinking: Will you just 
listen? As opposed to just reject, listen.
  We don't want this $26 billion going to insurance companies, where 20 
percent of it is taken for administrative overhead and profit; we want 
it to go to the families, where 100 percent is paid for healthcare--and 
not in some way which puts them at a disadvantage but in a way that 
puts them at an advantage.
  As opposed to discussing this over Twitter, let's actually meet face 
to face and see if you can be persuaded that this is a better way to 
go.
  So what can we do to break the model and do something different? 
Imagine a different type of health--not an insurance subsidy but a 
health account that you, our fellow Americans, control.
  Right now, where does the healthcare dollar go? In the enhanced 
premium tax credit, it goes to the insurance company. Twenty percent is 
going to administrative overhead--that should read 80 percent--and 80 
percent is going to pay for payment of care. So 20 percent for 
administrative overhead--you lose that--80 percent to take care of 
payments.
  Here, we take that portion of the current payment the Federal 
Government is making that goes to enhanced premium tax credits, and we 
put it in a prefunded, flexible savings account, and the patient has an 
account. My wife and I have one of these. It works pretty well. One 
hundred percent of the money goes to pay for healthcare. It can pay for 
the physician, the medicine. It can pay for dentistry and orthodontia--
all of that. So in all of this, you have a 20-percent plus-up in the 
amount available to actually pay for healthcare.
  Every eligible American citizen on the exchange would get this 
federally prefunded--I keep stressing the prefunded. In the health 
savings account my wife and I have--we are on an ObamaCare exchange--we 
actually take a portion of our income and we designate it to go into 
the flexible spending account. But here, we would take a value equal to 
the amount the person would have otherwise received from the enhanced 
premium tax credit, and we put it in the flexible spending account, and 
it pays for the real-world expenses I just mentioned. It pays for 
dental care. It pays for eyeglasses. Keep in mind, many insurance 
companies on the exchanges don't pay for dental care, and they don't 
pay for eyeglasses. It is something extra that you have to purchase. In 
this case, the flexible spending account would allow that to be done 
for prescription drugs, your routine medical services, and preventive 
care. It does not go for premiums, though. It goes to the patient. The 
patient then uses it as she understands it helps her family's budget 
the most.

  By the way, let me just give a shout-out to the President. He 
recognizes we have a problem. He knows the insurance market is broken. 
He put out a tweet last night favoring this approach. You can't read 
this because it is too much language, but you will see it is from 
Donald J. Trump, and the bottom line is he wants the money to go to the 
patients and not to insurance companies.
  The response to that from one of my Democratic colleagues was: Oh, 
oh, oh. We are taking money from insurance companies.
  No, we are taking that portion that would be part of the enhanced 
premium tax credit, and we are putting it in a prefunded flexible 
spending account.
  If people would just listen as opposed to automatically rejecting and 
if people would realize that Democrats are defending a Republican 
workaround to something that ObamaCare tried to do, but they wrote the 
language poorly so it couldn't be implemented, maybe they would stop 
and reconsider: Why am I part of this totally ironic situation, where 
Democrats are fighting to the death keeping the government closed for 
almost 40 days because we want to defend Trump 1 administration 
policies?
  The irony here is incredible.
  So the President is posting that we need to redirect these enhanced 
premium tax credit subsidy amounts to Americans so that they can get 
their own healthcare. I agree with the President. We need to give the 
money to the patients and bypass the insurance companies for this 
portion of what they would otherwise receive.
  I have also been told ``it sounds great, Bill, but it sounds 
complicated.'' There are 72 percent of Americans who are working for a 
government entity--the Federal Government, the State, and local--who 
have access to a flexible spending account, and 47 percent of those are 
in the commercial market. Hundreds of millions of Americans have access 
to these accounts.
  My wife and I have had an account for several years. This is not 
complicated. My wife and I are on the

[[Page S8016]]

Small Business ObamaCare exchange. It is not offered on the individual 
exchange, but it is offered on the Small Business exchange. It is the 
one Congress is on.
  The point is that we are already doing this. You say it is 
complicated. Yet we are already doing it. So I am not quite sure where 
the complication comes in. It is like saying it is complicated to play 
a football game, but we have been playing football games every Friday, 
Saturday, and Sunday. No, it is not complicated. We know the rules of 
the game. The players know who they are. They go out and play, and we 
have a score.
  By the way, if there were going to be some bureaucratic obstacle to 
getting some rule changed in order to make sure we can take it from one 
exchange to the other, even the people who hate President Donald J. 
Trump will admit that guy can get the bureaucracy to do things. If 
there is anybody in Washington, DC, who can get something done when a 
bureaucrat says it can't be, it is Donald J. Trump. So you may not like 
the guy, but at this point, his strength is our strength, so let's use 
his strength to solve this problem if we can just get beyond an 
outright rejection because the President might like it too. I have one 
example, and I will hold that example just for the sake of time.
  Let me make clear the differences between the enhanced premium tax 
credits and a federally funded, prefunded flexible spending account. 
Again, this is only the portion benefiting the patient that currently 
goes to the enhanced premium tax credit, which will be $26 billion this 
coming year.
  Who gets the money from the enhanced premium tax credit? Insurance 
companies.
  Under a prefunded flexible savings account? Patients and families.
  What can it be used for? Insurance premiums.
  For patients? Real care--doctors' visits, dentists' visits, glasses, 
prescriptions--boom--real care.
  Who makes the decision, the insurance company? No. In the prefunded 
FSA, it is the patient making the decision.
  Does it lower costs? No. Demonstrably, this enhanced premium tax 
credit has contributed to higher premium costs.
  Here, the patient is empowered to shop. ``If I can get my medical 
service--my mammogram, my MRI--cheaper here than there, I am motivated 
to do that because it leaves more money in my pocket.'' That is called 
patient empowerment. Give the patient the power, dadgummit.
  By the way, if it turns out you can save money by paying cash instead 
of the negotiated rate from the insurance company, pay cash, as that 
begins to lower it. You would at least get the negotiated price, but 
now you also have the option of paying cash. Believe it or not, it is 
oftentimes cheaper to pay cash than to pay the negotiated price from 
the insurance company. So you save money, and the taxpayers prefunding 
your account also save money. That is the essence of giving a patient 
the power. She picks the best deal just like she would for groceries, 
for a car, or for a house.
  Now, how does this empower consumers?
  The prefunded flexible spending account doesn't treat someone as a 
dependent of the Federal Government like the enhanced premium tax 
credit does. It treats them like a capable consumer who knows what is 
best for their family: where to go for the dental work, where to go for 
their pharmacy, and how much to pay in a negotiated rate from the 
insurance company or, if you can find it, in a cheaper cash price. 
Instead of Washington paying the insurance company to manage your day-
to-day care, you manage it; the patient manages it; the mama manages it 
with fairness, transparency, and flexibility.
  By the way, some say: Well, won't this cost more? It will cost about 
the same as the enhanced premium tax credit, which should be--and is--
something to appeal to my Democratic colleagues. By and large, we would 
take the same money going for the enhanced premium tax credit, and we 
would put it into these prefunded flexible savings accounts. That would 
cut out the fraud; you would save some money there and some little bit 
and little bit. In the second year, I think we would save money. I 
would like to do this for 2 years--but this is up for talking--because 
people are going to start purchasing more wisely, and other reforms 
will kick in.
  The point being, my Democratic colleagues, it will cost about the 
same as far as I am concerned. The difference is, instead of 20 percent 
going to an insurance company's profit and administrative overhead, 100 
percent is going for real care. So this isn't just fiscally 
responsible; it is common sense.
  Now, as I conclude, let me once more point out the irony. The irony 
is, with the enhanced premium tax credits, you can draw a straight line 
back to the higher premium cost associated with the Trump 1 
administration trying to find a workaround for a poorly drafted 
Affordable Care Act, and since then, premiums have gone up. What my 
Democratic colleagues are fighting for to the death is to continue a 
direct result of that Trump 1 policy. We could say there is some irony 
that Republicans are saying: Let's go back to an original structure 
because it gave more money to the patient. I would like to say that is 
something that, as a Republican, I was always for. But I would say 
that, currently, the Democratic position is entrenched--not all--but 
entrenched. If a Republican proposes it, if Donald Trump tweets in 
favor of it, we have to reject it.
  All I am asking is to stop being a Democrat for just a second and be 
an American. Be an American who hasn't been paid for 40 days. Be an 
American who is paying too much for her health insurance and too much 
for her healthcare. Stop being a partisan, and start being an American.

  I am ready to talk. Again, it is Bill Cassidy. It is not Trump. It is 
not Thune. It is not anybody else. But only when we begin to 
communicate are we going to find a solution that works for us all. 
Let's stop writing blank checks to insurance companies. Let's invest in 
the patients.
  I will finish by saying this: We have got to open the government. We 
have got to open the government. Now, once we do that, we will have the 
people back who can finish drafting this, but we have to be willing to 
take a risk. We have to get out of our entrenched positions. By the 
way, I am going to get criticized for this, but we have got to take a 
risk. If we take that risk--if we are brave enough to do something 
different--then we are going to solve this problem. I am a doctor, but 
most importantly, I am a doctor who is an American, who wants our 
country to be served by a Congress which is less concerned about 
partisan bickering than about the people back home.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  Mr. MORENO. Will the Senator from Louisiana answer some very quick 
questions?
  Mr. CASSIDY. I will. Yes, sir.
  Mr. MORENO. The first question I have for you, Senator, is, How many 
Democrat colleagues are in the Chamber today, right now?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Unfortunately, none.
  Mr. MORENO. So zero. Not one single Democrat is in the Chamber 
listening, debating, having a dialogue with you.
  Question No. 2: If you are a union worker in my State of Ohio, do 
these Biden, ObamaCare, COVID-era subsidies lower their health costs?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Absolutely not.
  Mr. MORENO. If you are somebody on Medicare, no matter where you are 
in America, do these COVID-era, Biden, ObamaCare subsidies lower your 
deductibles?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Absolutely not.
  Mr. MORENO. If you get private insurance from a small business like 
the one I used to own, do these Biden-era COVID subsidies lower your 
healthcare costs?
  Mr. CASSIDY. It does nothing to benefit those people you are 
describing.
  Mr. MORENO. If you are, unfortunately, somebody who is having a tough 
time and you are on Medicaid and you are disabled or have children, do 
these Biden-era COVID subsidies lower your deductibles or your out-of-
pocket costs?
  Mr. CASSIDY. No.
  Mr. MORENO. So none of the people I just mentioned--not union 
workers, not people on Medicare, not people on Medicaid, not people on 
private insurance, not unions that have negotiated incredible rates--
none of them will see lower healthcare costs; am I accurate on that?

[[Page S8017]]

  

  Mr. CASSIDY. You are absolutely accurate.
  Mr. MORENO. Who stands to gain by the Federal Government writing a 
check for $26 billion to do what the Democrats want in order to open 
the people's government?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Well, insurance companies most directly, and there will 
be lower premiums.
  Mr. MORENO. But just to be clear, the money goes directly to the 
insurance company, correct?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct.
  Mr. MORENO. It doesn't go to the pocket of the consumer.
  For example, if I want to go find a doctor who is going to offer 
treatment for less money because my deductible is too high, this 
doesn't help me because I am not getting the money. It is going to go 
to the insurance company, correct?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct.
  Mr. MORENO. Senator, you are so smart on this topic. You are the 
chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee; is 
that true?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct.
  Mr. MORENO. Who was the previous chairman?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Bernie Sanders.
  Mr. MORENO. Bernie Sanders.
  Bernie Sanders was the chairman when again--just to be clear?
  Mr. CASSIDY. In the last Congress, a year ago.
  Mr. MORENO. Which would have been through 2024?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Yes, for 2 years.
  Mr. MORENO. And the Biden-era ObamaCare subsidies were made, 
extended, in 2022; is that correct?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct. I think that is right.
  Mr. MORENO. To expire in 2025?
  Mr. CASSIDY. To expire in 2025.
  Mr. MORENO. So who voted for the expiration date of 2025?
  Mr. CASSIDY. None of the Republicans. Rather, Democrats.
  Mr. MORENO. So, just to be clear, the Democrats voted to have these 
subsidies expire this year, correct?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct.
  Mr. MORENO. To your knowledge, was there a hearing last year, in 
2024, in which the Democrats got together and said: ``Whoa, of these 
Biden-era COVID ObamaCare subsidies, we set them to expire in 2025. We 
should really make them permanent or extend them''? Was there a single 
hearing in your committee about that topic?
  Mr. CASSIDY. There was none.
  Mr. MORENO. Wait. I am confused.
  They set the expiration date of 2025, and then they didn't have one 
hearing to say: ``My God.''
  Now, how about in December of 2024? They knew they had lost the 
election. Did they have an emergency meeting in December of 2024 and 
say: ``These Biden-era COVID ObamaCare subsidies are going to expire. 
We don't know if the Republicans are going to extend them. We need to 
do that''? Did they add it to the continuing resolution then that 
funded the government in December when they had total control of this 
Chamber? Did they do it then?
  Mr. CASSIDY. They did not.
  Mr. MORENO. So this is a political stunt, and the American people 
need to see it for what it is.
  In my career, I have negotiated my whole life. Negotiation is about 
leverage.
  Would you agree?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Yes.
  Mr. MORENO. What leverage are the Democrats using in this 
negotiation?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Unfortunately, shutting down the government.
  Mr. MORENO. What does that mean, ``shutting down the government''? 
Who is the leverage? Is it the air traffic controllers who aren't 
getting paid or the Capitol Police who aren't getting paid?
  Yesterday, we tried to fund Federal workers who are forced to work; 
is that true?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct.
  Mr. MORENO. The Democrats voted that down; is that correct?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Correct.
  Mr. MORENO. Would you have a hard time walking into this building, 
Senator, and seeing those Capitol Police officers out there and your 
staff and knowing that you voted not to pay them?
  Mr. CASSIDY. I cannot imagine feeling good about that.
  Mr. MORENO. Knowing that you walk by TSA to go to your lobbyist 
retreat in the Napa Valley, and you know that you are responsible for 
their not getting paid and that they are your leverage and SNAP 
recipients and Head Start recipients?
  They are using the American people's suffering as political leverage. 
That is how far gone the Democrat Party is.
  What you are offering would hurt insurance companies' pocketbooks; 
would it not?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Insurance companies would do pretty well, no matter 
what.
  Mr. MORENO. But this would hurt their pocketbooks?
  Mr. CASSIDY. It would take $26 billion that would go to an insurance 
company, and, instead, it gives it to a family for the--I always use 
the feminine. Women make all of the decisions in healthcare. It would 
give her the ability to make the best decision for real care for her 
family, finding the best care for her dollar. A hundred percent of it 
would go to her, to all of those, and they would make a better 
decision.
  Mr. MORENO. Two final questions, then I will yield the floor. Our 
great Senator from West Virginia needs to speak.
  Twenty-six billion dollars--$26 billion--a number that most Americans 
can't even conceive of. The government is staying closed because 
Democrats want to give $26 billion more to insurance companies, and you 
are proposing to give that to the American people instead. Is that 
accurate?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Absolutely.
  Mr. MORENO. Last question: The COVID-era Biden subsidies were set to 
expire in 2025, by Democrats. Did you know that when they had power, 
they set the EV--electric vehicle--subsidies to expire in 2032?
  Mr. CASSIDY. Wait. Wait. Just to understand, the EV subsidies did not 
expire until 2032, but this subsidy for people's health insurance 
expires this year?
  Mr. MORENO. Correct. And they were $7,500. You could lease a Rolls-
Royce, a Mercedes, a Lamborghini, and if you did that, the government 
would give you $7,500. I want the American people to think about that 
when they understand how far gone the Democrat party has gone.
  Thank you for your presentation.
  Mr. CASSIDY. I yield.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Lummis). The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mrs. CAPITO. Madam President, while we are getting set up here, I 
want to thank my fellow Senator from Louisiana, who just spoke about an 
issue, the health savings accounts and the flexible spending accounts.
  Do you know what always gets me about the pushback on something like 
this, when people are going to be able to make their own decisions and 
have the money go to them rather than an insurance company? For some 
reason, the other side always underestimates the real intellect and the 
real thoughtful decision making that go on in families every single 
day, no matter what your socioeconomic status is or how much money you 
make. They always underestimate the voter, and they underestimate the 
ability of a family to make a decision about their own healthcare when 
they do that.
  So I congratulate him for his thoughtfulness always and, really, 
common sense and, really, the simplicity of what he is really saying.
  If anybody has been outside today--and I know many of you are here 
working, unfortunately--it is an absolutely gorgeous day, a great day 
for football, with beautiful sun, not too hot, not too cold--a gorgeous 
day.
  But for a lot of people, it is not a good day. A lot of people around 
this country are wondering when they are going to get back to work, 
when they are going to get paid, how they are going to feed their 
families--is their trip going to be canceled? All of this has been put 
onto the American people.
  And here we are again, day 39 of the Schumer shutdown. And what is 
there to show for it? Well, nothing, except a lot of pain on a 
beautiful day.
  The chart here, which I am going to put up here myself, is something 
that I think really hasn't been talked about enough, but it is really 
something we need to focus on because it shows the fairness of what is 
going on today.
  Thirteen times during the Biden-era Presidency, we passed this exact 
same bill, extending the government. Some of this, the ``VV,'' is by 
voice votes. I voted for every single one of these, and so did many of 
my colleagues, 13 times.

[[Page S8018]]

  So I think you have to look at the contrast--we have well exceeded 
this 14 times and probably will again--where we are getting total 
obstruction from the other side.
  Families are anxious about their paychecks. Federal workers are not 
sure when they are going to go back. Capitol Police, folks here, many 
of the folks in and around the DC area, and many West Virginians, 
because we have a lot of Federal employees, don't know where their next 
paycheck is coming from.
  I am really concerned about our SNAP recipients, about whether they 
will be able to put food on the table.
  We have travelers stranded in airports all over the country, and our 
air traffic controllers, many of them, are pushed to the brink. They 
are not getting paid. They have got a lot of anxiety about that because 
they have so many obligations. Like many families, they can't meet the 
obligations.
  Veterans are facing delays as well.
  Do you know what? The American people do not deserve this. They 
deserve a beautiful day in the fall, watching their favorite football 
team--if that is what they want to do--watching their grandchildren 
play soccer, and not have all of this put on top of them.
  So instead of ending the shutdown, the Democrats have come forward 
with their so-called offer, which is a 1-year extension of the 
ObamaCare act subsidies.
  Let me make clear, as my colleagues have: This offer is just absurd. 
We have been doing this for 39 days. The government has been closed for 
39 days, and yet this offer is supposed to be the bridge to the end? To 
me, that is just incredible.
  The plan is to give a $26 billion handout to the insurance companies.
  Here is my second chart, which shows the revenues per day--per day--
of insurance companies that provide health insurance benefits through 
the exchange. I mean, it is not millions; it is hundreds of millions. 
Yet the Democrats want to hand over another $26 billion.
  So who does it benefit? It benefits the wealthy. There are no fraud 
protections. It does nothing--absolutely nothing--to lower the cost of 
healthcare. Dr. Cassidy made a compelling argument about that, just 
previously.
  So while Americans are feeling the consequences of this shutdown, our 
colleagues' answer is to shovel $26 billion to the insurance companies. 
That is not compassion. That is fiscal insanity.
  I had a conversation with one of my Democrat colleagues last night. 
They said: Well, you know, the insurance companies are saying that it 
is too late now for them to redo their insurance estimations because of 
what is going on or to make any adjustments--say, if you want to bring 
the income down or you want to do no zero-cost plans, it is too late.
  I am sitting there thinking, maybe that was the plan all along: Let's 
close the government for 39 days because now it is too late to make any 
adjustments. Thirty-nine days ago, with the government open, we could 
have been negotiating all of this.

  Our leader has sat there in the well every single day and offered to 
negotiate. The President has offered to negotiate. Many of us have, 
including me. Dr. Marshall here--Senator Marshall--has a plan that he 
has had in front of all of us. Yet we are now 39 days in.
  So, maybe, that is the plan. Maybe that is the plan: Let's hold out 
for 39 days so the insurance companies can get their $39 billion.
  Let's not forget where these subsidies are from. They are out of the 
COVID era, from the healthcare that they created and proudly called 
ObamaCare, which none of us voted for.
  These bonuses were never meant to be permanent--never--or they could 
have attempted to make them permanent themselves. So they set them to 
expire this year. The irony that they want to have them expire next 
year, right before an election, is not lost, I don't believe, on any of 
us.
  So instead of doing their job and simply reopening the government--
this is not a hard exercise here. This is: Open the government.
  They want to make these temporary giveaways permanent. They want to 
double down on the failures of ObamaCare. We are not even talking about 
the cost of healthcare, hardly. That whole argument is getting lost in 
this--a system that they have admitted on this floor has not been 
working, and it is irrational.
  So these so-called premium subsidies, they don't lower the cost of 
healthcare. They simply shift the cost onto the taxpayer.
  Under the proposal, wealthy families--people making hundreds of 
thousands of dollars--would now qualify for taxpayer-funded healthcare.
  How many times have I sat on this floor and heard the argument from 
the other side that all we hear about are millionaires and 
billionaires, eliminating taxes for them, when they themselves are 
putting $26 billion into the hands of very wealthy companies but, also, 
individuals are able to take advantage of these.
  How is that fair to a coal miner in Logan County or a nurse in Mon 
County or a teacher in Wheeling? It just plain is not. These West 
Virginians work hard every day. They pay their taxes. They expect 
government to live within its means--well, not to say, they expect 
government to be open; isn't that kind of a given here, government to 
be open?--and not to hand out big bonuses to big insurers or the 
wealthy.
  Meanwhile, because of this shutdown, real people are paying the 
price. In my State of West Virginia, not just thousands of families and 
of people, hundreds of thousands of people have lost their SNAP 
benefits, which they rely on every month.
  When I think about that, what do I think about? I think about the 
young mother who is maybe a single mother with two kids who is working 
hard every day but can't get insurance through her employer. She is 
working hard every day. She has got to be frantic, so concerned about 
how she is going to care for her kids. That is just an excruciating 
thought for any mother to have to have. Our seniors have the same 
thoughts.
  But these benefits are a risk because the Democrats won't do 
something simple like open the government.
  Our Federal employees, our park rangers, our mine safety inspectors--
my mine safety inspectors--I have got a lot of coal mines. Mine safety 
inspectors are very thin right now, not doing a lot of their work. 
People who keep our communities safe, they are forced to wait, to 
wonder, and to worry. And it is a worry.
  We are leading up to Thanksgiving. People make plans in advance. They 
don't buy their ticket the day before they fly. They make plans in 
advance.
  In our family, our kids are married. So one year we get Thanksgiving, 
and one year we get Christmas. So we are making a plan a year in 
advance for when we are all going to get together and be able to share 
fun times with our families. But now we have got long lines. We have 
got canceled flights and growing frustration.
  All this chaos and uncertainty are so avoidable. I mean, 39 days is 
shameful.
  Senate Republicans have made clear that we are ready to negotiate. I 
have mentioned that. The leader, many of us here, including myself, the 
President himself--we are ready to debate. We are ready to get into 
this. But we are not going to negotiate until the government is open. 
That is such a reasonable proposition, and they will not take yes for 
an answer.
  I thought it ironic that the Democrat leader used Senator Thune's 
words. Senator Thune, every time he talks, he says: Take yes for an 
answer.
  And he tried to turn it on him. I am turning it back to him: You guys 
take yes for an answer and see where we are.
  I have talked a lot about the financial cost that this shutdown has 
brought forth on the American people. But there is a not-so-hidden cost 
here, one that is harder to measure, and that is the uncertainty and 
the anxiety that this is bringing to families and businesses across the 
country, not to even mention what the international thought must be: 
What is wrong with these people that they won't open the government? 
This has got to be what the international community is thinking every 
day.
  The worry about when your next paycheck will come--when will you be 
able to go back to work? When will things get back to normal? When can 
I sit in the stands at my home football game and actually not have all 
these burdens on my mind?
  These costs can't quite be measured, but they are very, very real. So 
I have

[[Page S8019]]

a hard time believing that my colleagues on the other side have truly 
grasped this impact.
  I don't know who they are talking to, but we are getting phone calls, 
having personal conversations all day long, talking about the cost of 
this shutdown. If they did grasp it, they wouldn't have dragged this 
out for 39 days.
  I have heard the news reports that some of them are feeling 
emboldened because of an election on Tuesday. So, really? We are going 
to hold that young mother who has those two kids--we are going to hold 
her hostage on whether she can feed her family because we have a 
political advantage? That is just a shameful thought, in my opinion, 
but, apparently, by their own words, it is real.

  Do you know what? There is no political advantage to a shutdown. I 
have been through so many of them. I have voted many times to reopen 
the government. There is no political advantage to having our 
government shut.
  I am also a member of the Appropriations Committee. I have to say, 
after many years of stagnancy, we have passed bills out of the 
committee, including my bill to fund the Departments of Health, 
Education, and Labor. It is historically a very challenging bill to 
pass, but we passed it out of committee with bipartisan support. It is 
waiting here to be brought up to the floor.
  We passed three bipartisan bills through the full Senate, and, 
hopefully, we will be able to vote on those shortly. Leader Thune has 
fulfilled a commitment to bring these bills to the floor, with more to 
come, because--do you know what?--that is what legislating is all 
about. That is what legislators do.
  So one of the great frustrations to me in this whole process is that 
the Members who supported these bills in committee and on the Senate 
floor now won't allow us to move forward on these bills.
  So, today, I urge my Democratic colleagues: Stop with the gimmicks. 
Stop with the political advantage and the political theater. Stop 
holding the government and the American people hostage to a partisan 
wish list.
  West Virginians don't want political games. They want their 
government opened. They want their benefits secure. They want their 
leaders focused on results.
  Let's reopen the government. Let's restore certainty and sanity. And 
then let's do the hard work of reforming our healthcare system in a way 
that lowers costs and empowers patients and families.
  We could have been doing this for 39 days, by the way, but we can't 
until the government reopens. That is what leadership looks like. That 
is what government looks like--and governing--and that is what the 
American people deserve.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cassidy). The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, I don't have to tell anybody in this 
room that this is day 39 of a Democrat shutdown--day 39.
  A real common question I get is: Who is winning? Are the Republicans 
winning? Are the Democrats winning?
  I will tell the Presiding Officer: No one wins when there is a 
government shutdown--especially when it goes on this long--and it is 
certainly not the American people.
  My heart goes out with empathy to those folks who have not received a 
paycheck since October 1--hard-working Americans. I especially feel for 
our TSA workers, our air traffic control workers, all those people who 
are out there keeping us safe, our Capitol Police. All those folks who 
are involved in the day-to-day safety of Americans, thank you for 
continuing to work without being paid.
  It is interesting to me to understand why the Democrats have shut the 
government down. And you can blame whomever you want to, but I think it 
is an 80-20 issue that Americans don't think it is right to shut down 
the government, holding everybody hostage over these Biden ObamaCare 
bonuses. So $35 billion a year, that is what they are holding the 
government up over--$35 billion a year--these enhanced Biden ObamaCare 
bonuses.
  That is one-half of 1 percent of the Federal budget that we are 
keeping everything else under wraps for--$35 billion that is being 
given, by the way, to insurance companies--another subsidy to insurance 
companies.
  Overall, ObamaCare actually costs the Federal Government closer to 
$150 billion a year. That is right. We are spending about $150 billion 
of your taxpayer dollars supplementing other people's healthcare.
  It was interesting. When they sold this to the American people, they 
said it would cost $40 billion or $50 billion. But we are already 
triple that, and that is what the American taxpayers are paying. That 
is $400 million a day. That is right. We are giving insurance companies 
$400 million a day of stipends from the ACA, from ObamaCare--taxpayer 
money, $40 million a day.
  If you look at this ObamaCare overall, by the way, there is about $25 
billion of fraud. And we are going to get into that in a second. And, 
again, there is $35 billion of these Biden ObamaCare bonuses, and, 
overall, it is a $150-billion-a-year project.
  These dollars are funneled straight into the coffers of big insurance 
cartels through ObamaCare subsidies. All the while, they deny claims. 
Think about what insurance companies are doing today. Through prior 
authorization and other issues, they are able to deny claims, to jack 
up costs for everyday families, sending many into bankruptcy. All the 
while, they are boosting their profits, driving up their stock values.
  Now, what do you mean ``driving up stock values''? You know, there is 
driving up stocks, and there is driving up stocks. I think, when you 
take a look at this one chart here--and I believe that President Trump 
put this on Truth Social today, as well. United--this is since 
ObamaCare was enacted. UnitedHealthcare Group is now up almost 1,200 
percent. This is their stock price. CIGNA is at 800 percent. I know you 
are feeling sorry for Humana at only 500 percent. Molina here is at 859 
percent as well.
  So, certainly, we understand that these insurance companies have 
profited from these direct subsidies from ObamaCare going into their 
bank accounts. But what is important is these subsidies aren't really 
helping the little guy. It is corporate welfare on steroids that boosts 
the profits of giants like UnitedHealthcare, which pocketed over $14 
billion in earnings last year alone, laughing all the way to the bank 
on the backs of struggling taxpayers--$14 billion in earnings. Don't 
feel sorry for them that they are not going to get this $35-billion-a-
year subsidy.
  The big winner of ObamaCare has always been and will always be large 
health insurance companies, they and the lobbyists who helped write 
ObamaCare.
  I want to remind everyone, though, that the ACA ended up being not so 
affordable as well. Premiums are up over 200 percent and sometimes 400 
percent since its conception, and we are expecting another spike of 25 
percent increase in premiums. Regardless of what Congress does or 
doesn't do with ObamaCare, the premiums are going to go up 25 percent. 
And for the most part, the government stands to pay for that entire 
increase.
  The way ObamaCare is set up, you pay a percentage of your income. So 
if the insurance rates--if the premiums go up 10 percent, 20 percent, 
100 percent, the government is going to subsidize and take care of all 
that increase. That is one reason why the insurance companies wrote 
ObamaCare this way. There is basically no recourse. They know, whatever 
they make the premium, the government is going to pay it. That is why 
it is not working.

  And what else? ObamaCare, like Medicaid, is not meaningful 
healthcare. With an average deductible of $5,000, that is not 
meaningful access to healthcare. ObamaCare is an abstract failure. It 
is expensive. It doesn't work. It doesn't give you access.
  I think everything I have said so far is undeniable. It is 
inarguable. It is factual. But I want to turn now to think about 
goals--goals that Republicans, Democrats, and Americans would have when 
it comes to healthcare. Republicans want every American to have 
meaningful, affordable access to healthcare. And a $5,000 deductible 
for people at 200 or 300 percent of the poverty level, frankly, does 
not give you meaningful access to healthcare.

[[Page S8020]]

  I want to turn to talk about fraud just a little bit more. Get this: 
35 to 40 percent of ObamaCare recipients that are enrolled in ObamaCare 
never file a claim.
  Let me say that again. There are 24 million people on ObamaCare, and 
35, 40 percent of those people never file a claim. These are ghost 
people. They don't even know they are on ObamaCare. They have been 
falsely enrolled in ObamaCare.
  Some people would say: Oh, but there are always some people that 
don't file a claim. It is usually more like 10 percent. More like 10 
percent of people in a pool of insurance products are not filing a 
claim. In this case, it is 35 to 40 percent.
  And, overall, I think we could say that this group of people on 
ObamaCare is a high-risk group. Big cities like Chicago will push 
people who took early retirement and push them onto ObamaCare. These 
are typically sick people who have been pushed off other plans and they 
went toward ObamaCare.
  Trust me, I am going to address that. That is why we need a high-risk 
pool that would address those types of folks as well. But the point 
here is that some 10 million people on ObamaCare are not using it, but 
the insurance companies are getting the entire premium paid by the 
Federal Government. So 10 million people, a premium every month--it is 
like a slot machine going to big insurance companies.
  So what is the solution? Instead of giving money to insurance 
companies, let's give it to the American people. Let me say that again. 
Instead of giving money to the insurance companies, let's give it to 
hard-working Americans--what a novel idea. Let's turn patients into 
consumers once again by funding some type of an HSA or a flexible 
spending account. Call it what you want to. But instead of giving the 
insurance companies dollars--these premium dollars--let's give that 
money to hard-working Americans.
  I did miss one point I wanted to make when it comes to fraud. In 
addition, to address those people that are ghosts, there are ways to 
fix that--real simple ones. No. 1 is to have some type of meaningful 
ID. Right now, basically, you could give an insurance peddler out there 
just your name and your birth date, and they can enroll you.
  They need to go through the same type of regimen that it would take, 
say, to enroll for Medicare. There are biometrics that we can use as 
well.
  But, in addition to that, all we would have to do is have a monthly 
payment. And I understand; it doesn't have to be a lot. You are at 150 
percent of poverty level; you don't have a lot of money. But if there 
is a $10 or a $20 payment coming out of your Apple Pay card once a 
month, you would see that every month. And if you didn't know you were 
enrolled in something, it would force you to call this company and say: 
Hey, I didn't sign up for this. And we need the highest enforcement 
levels when people are defrauding the Federal Government like this as 
well.
  Let me return now to our flexible spending accounts, our HSAs. Right 
now, there is about $12 billion every year we are spending on cost-
share reductions--CSRs, as they are called up here. So we are spending 
about $12 billion a year on these cost-sharing reductions. In addition 
to that, there is another $35 billion we have been spending on these 
ObamaCare enhanced bonuses, if you will.
  So our belief is that we take both of those fundings--the $12 billion 
and the $35 billion--and put it on an HSA card, no different than we do 
with food stamps or all the other Federal programs, and use that money, 
then, for your out-of-pocket expenses. You couldn't use it on premiums. 
That would not make any sense. You would use it for your out-of-
pockets, your deductibles, your copays, and that would allow you to 
purchase--to start driving insurance premiums down by picking a product 
that you know that you have some money in your own bank account, so to 
speak, to take care of those out-of-pocket expenses.
  So, eventually, as this group of people become consumers again and 
they become better consumers out there, comparing the price of one 
hospital to another or a surgery center to a hospital or a doctor's 
office versus another's doctor's office--making those choices 
themselves--they are going to drive the cost of healthcare down.
  And I wanted to remind everybody that we wouldn't touch the original 
subsidies. So the original ACA subsidies--again, this is pre-Joe 
Biden--those would remain in place. So don't feel sorry. The insurance 
companies are still going to get $100 billion a year of these subsidies 
from the original ACA plan. We are just taking these new enhanced 
subsidies--this Biden bonus money and the CSR money--and putting those 
into some type of HSA account.
  There are lots of other things we could do, as well, to help drive 
the true cost of healthcare down. We have talked a lot about a 
pricetags bill, letting patients become consumers and letting them 
shop--so forcing hospitals and surgery centers and imaging centers and 
all other healthcare providers to provide a pricetag along with some 
type of quality outcomes as well.
  We need to end silver loading. We need to expand options. I hope that 
we could let people choose association healthcare plans or ministry 
plans as well. There are many, many things we could do to impact the 
cost of prescription drugs for this group of people as well.
  I will start winding it down here and just say, you know, enough with 
the lies about the so-called affordable care. The big insurance company 
cartels have formed a monopoly that controls premiums, with the Federal 
Government acting as their personal ATM, dishing out billions in 
enhanced subsidies that only inflate their executive bonuses and 
shareholder dividends, while leaving millions without meaningful access 
to healthcare.
  It is time we demand an end to this rigged system where insurance 
behemoths rake in tens of billions of dollars in revenue yet rely on 
some $150 billion in yearly government handouts under the ACA, turning 
public health into a private profit machine at our expense.
  Our carrot-and-stick approach uses federally funded FSAs-HSAs to 
encourage mindful spending and reward efficient users by converting a 
portion of their savings into a retirement account eventually.
  All of this fosters consumerism.
  If you think about the ACA, we are spending $6,500 a year of Federal 
dollars per each patient--$6,500 per year, per patient. We are not 
spending any more than that on Medicaid, and then the States are 
putting their money on top. We might as well move these patients into 
Medicaid and continue to subsidize these insurance companies.
  It makes no sense to anybody up here, but yet we continue to throw 
good money after bad money.
  In this case, we are keeping the Federal Government closed because of 
this insane program. And maybe it is just pride. Maybe it is just the 
pride of my friends across the aisle that they won't admit that the 
ACA--``Unaffordable Care Act,'' ObamaCare--was a failure.
  It destroys competition. It destroys consumerism. Overregulation 
always leads to consolidation of industry. We have seen it with 
insurance companies, with hospitals. We are seeing it now with doctors' 
practices even.
  It is going to be hard to fix this overnight. This has been the law 
of the land for 15 years. But everything where we are today--the reason 
that rural hospitals are going broke, the reason that we have $5,000 
deductibles, the reason that premiums are going up 25 percent, it is 
because of the ObamaCare rules.
  Again, the insurance companies wrote ObamaCare. They, their 
lobbyists, big hospital systems--they are the ones that wrote 
ObamaCare, and here we are. They have been on the gravy train now for 
over a decade--$150 billion a year for these 24 million people.
  I want to open the government. I want to open the government, but I 
can't be forced to throw good money after bad money.
  So many of us want to fix healthcare. That is why I came here. Fixing 
healthcare won't be easy. It is 18 percent of our GDP. But there are 
fixes out there. It will take a bipartisan effort. It is going to take 
months and not weeks and not days to fix it.
  All I can do is, I have outlined a plan here. If my friends across 
the aisle would embrace just two simple concepts of dealing with fraud 
and instead of giving money to big insurance companies, we give it to 
hard-working Americans, I think that is framing two pieces of a very 
good healthcare package--a very good, bipartisan healthcare package.

[[Page S8021]]

  So I am asking you to come across the aisle and shake our hands and 
say: Yes, let's get to work on that.
  But in the meanwhile, we need to get the government open.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, we are now in the longest government 
shutdown in American history--39 days--and all across our country, 
Americans are paying the price.
  More than 600,000 Federal workers have been furloughed. Air traffic 
controllers, Federal law enforcement officers, Border Patrol and TSA 
agents, U.S. attorneys, Capitol Police, and the staff here in this 
Chamber show up every day to work, and they are not getting paid. 
Federal courts are running limited options. SNAP benefits are only 
partially being issued. Head Start grants are on hold. Small business 
loans are frozen. Aircraft inspections are delayed. Veterans' 
transition assistance is disrupted. National Guard training is 
postponed.
  Every one of these examples represents real people, hard-working 
Americans who are being harmed by this shutdown.
  Thirty-seven percent of Americans cannot cover a $400 emergency using 
cash, savings, or a credit card that they can pay off quickly. They 
need to borrow from their friends or their family. They need to take 
out a loan, or they need to sell something. And 12 percent--12 
percent--of those folks couldn't even pay at all without borrowing or 
selling. That wouldn't even help them.
  I want to share a few voices from my constituents in Nebraska.
  In Ogallala, a young farmer who is trying to make ends meet wrote to 
my office. Even though the FSA offices are kind of open, he is still 
unable to make advances on his annual operating loans. This is a 
critical time when land rent payments are due, along with bills for 
fuel, seed, fertilizer, and equipment.
  These funds were approved months ago. We need to reopen government so 
our farmers can access that vital assistance.
  A fire inspector at Offutt Air Force Base who puts his life on the 
line to keep our troops and Nation safe wrote to my office after he 
missed a paycheck. This is a matter of fairness, respect, and 
responsibility.
  Government employees are not bargaining chips. The Democrats want to 
use people like him as leverage. This is not OK. These are not abstract 
numbers; these are people's lives.
  A military spouse in Bellevue picked up a prescription at Offutt Air 
Force Base and was told that she could only receive a 30-day supply 
because of the government shutdown. She was told to call back in a 
month and hope they can fill it.
  A small business owner in Lincoln wrote in that their sales had 
dropped 47 percent. Their government customers cannot buy the equipment 
they need to destroy classified data. That creates a risk to our 
national security. So this business--they have been forced to reduce 
staff, and they said they cannot sustain any further delays.
  Our Main Street businesses aren't asking for special treatment; they 
are asking for stability.
  Another spouse of a Federal worker who has been called in to continue 
essential work during this shutdown wrote in after day 24 of her 
husband not receiving pay for time worked. Their mortgage company and 
their utility provider don't care that the government is shut down; 
they expect payment.

  These voices are the heartbeat of America--farmers, firefighters, 
small business owners, veterans, public servants. They are not pawns in 
a political standoff; they are people who serve their communities, and 
they deserve better than this. Every day does not get better for them.
  The shutdown must end. We need five more Democrats to say: We care 
more about people than we do about political leverage. We need five 
more Democrats to join the three who have already stood with us. That 
is all it takes to reopen the government.
  Meanwhile, Democrats continue to push this absurd proposal--a $35 
billion handout to insurance companies that benefits the wealthy, 
includes no fraud protections, and it does nothing to lower real 
healthcare costs. These are so-called COVID bonuses. I thought COVID 
was over. I thought it was done. It is done. They were never meant to 
be permanent.
  The Democrats--they did this. They set it up with no Republican 
votes, and even they put this date on so they would expire. But now 
they want to extend them, doubling down on a failed system that shifts 
costs to taxpayers and even subsidizes wealthy families because there 
is no limit set on these COVID bonuses. There is no limit set on what a 
family can earn. There is no limit set on the take-home pay of hundreds 
of thousands of dollars, and you can get a bonus.
  Look at this chart. A lot of my colleagues are using it. It shows the 
huge increase in stock values for insurance companies under ObamaCare. 
Insurance companies are the winners in this scheme that was set up by 
Democrats.
  Well, unlike my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I don't 
work for the insurance companies. I work for the people of this country 
and the people of Nebraska.
  Senate Republicans are ready and willing to discuss real solutions to 
make healthcare more affordable, but Democrats must first open the 
government.
  Mr. President, the American people deserve a government that works. 
They deserve leaders who put service above politics, people above 
partisanship, and common sense above the chaos.
  It is time to reopen the U.S. Government.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, as I visit with farmers, traveling river to 
river across Iowa, I hear all too often about the crushing weight of 
healthcare costs on farm families.
  The ``Unaffordable Care Act's'' one-size-fits-none model ignored the 
realities of self-employment, seasonal cash flow, and the absence of 
large corporate employers in farm country.
  Spouses, who are often a family farm's bookkeeper, mechanic, 
veterinarian--many, many jobs all rolled into one--have been forced to 
take off-farm jobs solely to latch on to employer-sponsored coverage.
  This is what has happened in my own farm family. My brother and my 
sister are both type 1 diabetics. Both of them have had to find jobs 
off of the farm for employer-sponsored healthcare. That means 40 to 60 
hours a week away from the very enterprise they are trying to preserve 
for the next generation.
  Democrats in Congress branded ObamaCare as a chance to bend the cost 
curve downward. It turns out the only thing it is bending downward are 
the bottom lines of farmers across Iowa. And the numbers don't lie. 
Farmers and small businesses are subsidizing a broken system that 
doesn't serve them.
  Rural America needs solutions that don't force spouses to find off-
farm work or forgo health insurance altogether.
  Premiums are climbing for individuals and small businesses alike 
thanks to the ``Unaffordable Care Act's'' mountain of mandates, and now 
what we are seeing in this DC bubble is that Democrats want to hand out 
another $35 billion next year straight to the insurance companies, with 
zero guardrails on fraud or income.
  In other words, Democrats refuse to reopen the government because 
they want more welfare for the wealthy. It is clear ObamaCare has 
failed to deliver on its promises.
  I remember President Obama saying way back in the day that ObamaCare 
would drive down the cost of insurance for every family by $2,500 a 
year. If that were true, we wouldn't be in this situation today. 
ObamaCare has failed to deliver on its promises. The answer isn't 
pouring more taxpayer cash into a broken system, throwing good money 
after bad. What we need to do is fix what is broken.
  President Trump is already working to bring down costs. Instead of 
extending failed ObamaCare and preserving fraud, we can end the waste, 
return billions of dollars to the taxpayers, and let folks choose from 
quality options. This is one way we can put patients first.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. President, so a number of my colleagues have addressed the 
shutdown situation as well, and I am going to

[[Page S8022]]

veer off on another topic of those Federal employees, those air traffic 
controllers, and, for heaven's sake, our military members that are 
struggling under this shutdown.
  Now, many of our military families already rely on SNAP to provide 
food for their families. We have 1,900 Iowa Army National Guardsmen 
that are serving across the Middle East today. They are deployed. They 
have left their civilian employment only to go into a deployed 
situation where they don't know if or when they will get their next 
paycheck. Their families in Iowa are struggling right now. They are out 
there serving for all of us.
  My daughter is also a soldier in the Army. And at the beginning of 
the government shutdown, she had the really awful position of having to 
sit down with her soldiers and counsel them on where they could go to 
find loans to help their families during the government shutdown.
  Many of the employees here have had to do the exact same thing. What 
does it take to get through this government shutdown? It is a simple 
``yes'' vote from our friends across the aisle.
  They have shut the government down. We have provided opportunity time 
and time again to open the Federal Government, to pay our Federal 
Government workers, to make sure our skies are safe, to make sure our 
military members are paid, to make sure SNAP benefits are getting to 
every family, every family that struggles with food insecurity. All it 
takes is a ``yes'' vote.
  We have told the Democrats we are willing to sit down and negotiate 
on the ACA, the ``Unaffordable Care Act,'' and other opportunities. We 
will do that when we open the Federal Government. Democrats are not 
fighting to lower premiums. They are fighting to raise the profits for 
health insurance companies.
  Democrats are terrified of the truth about their temporary COVID 
credits. It is welfare for the wealthy and corporate welfare rolled all 
into one. Democrats are demanding that Republicans vote to make their 
handout scheme permanent. Their plan is to line the pockets of health 
insurers with half a trillion dollars in taxpayer-funded subsidies.
  Thanks to Democrats, insurers are pocketing record profits, fueled by 
taxpayer subsidies. Extending the Biden COVID credits would cost our 
taxpayers half a trillion dollars. Democrats shut down the government 
to protect ObamaCare subsidies that send $40 billion to insurance 
companies--not to the families that need it.
  So let's be very clear, this argument is not about helping the 
American families that need better options for healthcare insurance; it 
is about sending large wads of money to health insurers.
  Let's come together and figure this out, folks. We are the U.S. 
Senate. We are the U.S. Government. This never would have been allowed 
to happen when I was serving in the U.S. military. You come up with a 
course of action; you decide on the best course of action; and you 
follow through in that mission.
  We expect our servicemembers to do this every single day. They are at 
the behest of the U.S. Federal Government. We need to open up the 
Federal Government and ensure they are paid. Let's take care of their 
families.
  Let's take care of the food-insecure folks, not just in Iowa but all 
across the Nation. Let's make sure farmers are able to make their farm 
payments this fall. All it takes is a simple yes from our Democratic 
friends.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. HUSTED. Mr. President, it is day 39--day 39--of the shutdown. 
Some of us are here working over the weekend. I want to thank all the 
staff, all the people who work here at the Capitol who are not getting 
paid. We genuinely appreciate your dedicated public service, putting 
your jobs and the country first. Thank you. Appreciate that.
  I know that there are a number of people across the country that are 
probably pretty ``peeved-off'' today--there, we will use that word--
pretty upset about how this government shutdown is affecting them.
  I am sure many of them got turned away at the airports, receiving 
emails, finding out that their flights are canceled, their plans for 
work, for family are canceled. And for what? A senseless government 
shutdown. I know that there are a lot of people who are struggling. 
They don't know when it is going to end. They haven't been paid in over 
a month. They have questions.
  The Members of this body, we ask each other: When is this going to 
end? None of us knows. Imagine the people out there across the country 
who have lives that they are trying to figure out. They have no idea 
when this is coming to an end.
  I feel for them. And then people who struggle the most, people of low 
income who don't know where their SNAP benefits stand, whether this 
will go on for another week or another 3 years since it is about 
standing up to Donald Trump, whatever, however long that will take to, 
I guess, share that lesson.
  But 14 times I have voted, as have many of my colleagues, to keep the 
government open, solve this problem, move ahead. Soon, I believe, we 
will be having the opportunity to vote a 15th time. This one may be a 
little different, to extend a clean CR that would run until the end of 
January, along with, perhaps, some of the appropriations bills that 
have already passed this Chamber on a bipartisan basis.
  Perhaps the 15th time we could convince 5 more of our Democrat 
colleagues to go along with us, but I always choose to be an optimist.
  I saw the minority leader on the floor earlier today. They, in their 
proposal, allegedly, even though we haven't seen the written, they say 
they have a clean CR. We have a clean CR. They have a clean CR with one 
exception, a demand, an impediment, as it has become, of the extension 
of the Biden COVID bonuses.
  That is the difference between what we have offered and what they 
have offered. And really what it serves as, it has over the past 4 
years, Democrats implemented this. They set the expiration date for 
2025, but it was a COVID bonus. It was supposed to be temporary. But 
really what it was, was a bailout of a failed ObamaCare system. But 
that is what they are holding out under.
  Let me tell you what that is, what that means, what is inside of it, 
why the American people should have concerns about it.
  Healthcare inflation in this country is double of what consumer 
inflation has been since ObamaCare got enacted. In the 21st century, 
healthcare is the No. 1 driver of inflation in this country. So I hope 
we want to get at the costs and the cause of what is affecting the 
unaffordability of healthcare in this country.
  Healthcare has increased since ObamaCare started by 6 percent a year 
while overall inflation has been 3 percent or less. But I want to dig 
in a little bit over the impediment, the impediment of the Biden COVID 
bonuses. First of all, the way they are structured, there is massive 
fraud, with zero premiums and an incentive--because the money goes 
directly to the insurance companies--is to sign up people, phantom 
enrollees. No one knows who they are, where they are. The premiums go 
right to the insurance companies, not to the individual.
  And what has that done for insurance companies? Well, you can see 
here. This is what ObamaCare and the COVID bonuses have done for the 
insurance companies: Record profits. Record profits.
  During this period, while we have seen the stock performance of 
health insurance companies go up by 600 percent, the Dow Jones 
Industrial has gone up by 300 percent. Double--the insurance companies 
have doubled what the rest of the American economy has done.
  The other part of these subsidies that are problematic is that there 
are no income caps. We are not targeting these resources to people who 
are struggling to pay. We are giving them to everyone that wants them.
  So I have listened to my colleagues, the gentleman chairman of our 
HELP Committee Dr. Cassidy. He has talked about this at length. I have 
heard others talk about that there is a bipartisan way to do this. 
There is a thoughtful way to make sure that these efforts are focused 
on consumers and not on the insurance companies.
  So there are valid disagreements and substantive disagreements about 
why the Biden COVID bonuses are bad. But

[[Page S8023]]

that absolves nobody--no one--of the responsibility to continue to work 
on resolving the inflationary costs of healthcare to the American 
consumer that have come since ObamaCare was implemented.
  I wasn't here for it. I have no pride in ownership, but I do want to 
fix it. I didn't create the problem, but I do care about making sure 
that people can afford healthcare. I want that to happen. I want to 
make sure that everybody has access to good, solid healthcare coverage. 
And we can do that.
  But we don't need to shut down the government to keep working on it, 
and that is the point. We both have proposed clean CRs, take out the 
stuff that we disagree on, keep working on it, pay the American people, 
pay the people who work here, get the flights going, and then let's get 
back to work on doing what we should have been doing for the last 39 
days, which is having some constructive discussions about how we fix 
ObamaCare, how we drive down the cost of healthcare in this country, 
and how we make it affordable again for the American people.
  We will have that chance here over the weekend. I hope we will take 
advantage of it. I hope we will reopen the government and begin serving 
the American people while we continue the very important conversation 
of how we eliminate the fraud, of how we make healthcare more 
affordable.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss 
several recent floor developments.
  Yesterday, Senate Republicans started talking about big insurance 
companies and women's healthcare. Now, I have heard a lot of talk from 
Republicans about how the Affordable Care Act is just a big giveaway to 
insurance companies. I would ask any Republican who accuses Democrats 
of bailing out insurance companies to talk to a small business owner in 
their State who fears that if they don't have the tax credits next 
year--I repeat, next year--those small businesses won't be able to keep 
their doors open, run their business, pay their employees, and pay for 
healthcare.
  Now, if Republicans are serious about cracking down on price gouging 
by insurance companies and executives who want a big payday, I welcome 
them to the fight. I have been at it for years. I wrote the first tough 
law--it was bipartisan; it is on the books--to stop the rip-offs of 
older people who had 10 or 15 insurance policies that weren't worth the 
paper they were written on.
  But I can say that since a handful of Republicans joined me in 2008 
to crack down on the abuses of insurance companies, Republicans willing 
to go after Big Insurance have been mighty few and very far between.
  So let me repeat. I will work with any Republican that wants to go 
after profit-hungry crooks and get them out of the insurance business, 
where they are jacking up costs and denying care, but it shouldn't 
come--and I say this to my colleagues--it shouldn't come at the cost of 
kicking millions out of their healthcare in January.
  Democrats want to bring down costs for families. It is that simple. 
So I am not a sympathizer with the UnitedHealth Group; I am here on 
behalf of Carla and Bartley of Eugene, who are looking--I say to my 
colleague in the Chair--they are looking at a 500-percent increase in 
their premium this year.
  Now, Republicans say they might vote to lower Americans' healthcare 
costs but only if we agree, in addition, to a backdoor national 
abortion ban. As always, Republicans are spinning a tale that the 
government is funding abortion. It isn't. Here is the reality: The 
Affordable Care Act already prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars for 
this care. Zero Federal dollars pay for this care in ACA plans.
  What Republicans are talking about putting on the table amounts to 
nothing short of a backdoor national abortion ban. Instead of working 
with Democrats to fix the healthcare crisis they created, Republicans 
now want to hold women's healthcare hostage and force a radical agenda 
on the American people.
  I have one thing to say about that: Not on my watch.
  Under this plan, Republicans could weaponize Federal funding for any 
organization that does anything related to women's reproductive 
healthcare. They could also weaponize the Tax Code by revoking the 
nonprofit status of these organizations.
  Republicans have already demonstrated that they are willing to 
weaponize the law to deny women basic healthcare. Donald Trump defunded 
Planned Parenthood in his horrible budget bill. So the possibilities 
here are endless, but the results are the same--a complete and total 
restriction on abortion courtesy of Republican Senators. They have been 
laying the groundwork for decades, and now they are pulling out all the 
stops to do it. The Budget chair is already talking about another 
reconciliation bill in this session, so this is a real and present 
danger.
  Donald Trump said he would leave abortion care up to the States. 
Well, this latest scheme makes it pretty clear: A de facto nationwide 
abortion ban has been his plan all along.
  Since Roe was overturned, women are being denied lifesaving medical 
care; doctors are fleeing States where they fear persecution.
  Democrats were told for years by Republicans that we were blowing 
these scenarios way out of proportion. We were told again and again 
that we were fearmongering. Instead, now it is all coming true.
  Democrats must dismiss this radical Trojan horse against women's 
essential healthcare out of hand, and the time to do it is now.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I wanted to touch on a few topics 
relating to the shutdown, which is now in its 39th day and doing very 
serious harm to Federal workers here in Washington and Vermont and all 
over this country, and it is a shutdown that should be ended as soon as 
possible.
  The reason for this shutdown really is not complicated. Here in the 
Senate, we have a 60-vote threshold in order to pass a budget that 
keeps the government open. You need 60 votes, and that has been the 
case for a very, very long time.
  What has always happened is that if the majority party--in this case, 
the Republican Party--does not have the 60 votes, which is usually the 
case, they have to sit down and negotiate with the minority party, 
which is the Democratic caucus, which has 45 Democrats and 2 
independents, 1 of whom is me. That is what you have to do. You have to 
negotiate to get the 60 votes.
  But for the first time--I don't know--in history, the Republicans are 
saying: We don't want to negotiate. It is our way or the highway. You 
take it or leave it.
  Given the enormous consequences of what is at stake, appropriately, 
the Democrats are saying: No. You have to sit down and negotiate.
  Republicans are refusing to do that. That is the reason we are in a 
shutdown.
  To add insult to injury and to tell you how strong the contempt is 
that the Republican leadership has for the negotiating process, over in 
the House, Speaker Johnson has given his Members, the House of 
Representatives, a 6-week paid vacation. They have not been in 
Washington for 6 weeks.
  Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Federal employees don't have a 
paycheck. We are worried about what happens to air traffic. We are 
seeing flights cut back. Right now, because of Trump not willing to 
fund SNAP, we are worried that 16 million children in America may go 
hungry, and the Republicans in the House of Representatives are on a 
paid vacation.
  So that is why we are in a shutdown right now.
  When the Republicans finally hear from the American people that it is 
appropriate for them to do what has always been the case--come and 
negotiate--what will the negotiations be about? They will be about the 
healthcare crisis that this country faces. They will be about the 
reality that as a result of Trump's Big Beautiful Bill, 15 million 
Americans are going to lose the healthcare they have because of massive 
cuts in Medicaid.
  What studies from Yale and the University of Pennsylvania have 
suggested is that if you throw 15 million people off the Medicaid they 
depend upon, some 50,000 of them will die unnecessarily every year. It 
is rather unbelievable that in the richest country in the

[[Page S8024]]

history of the world, we would allow 50,000 low-income and working-
class Americans to die unnecessarily--people who have chronic 
illnesses, people who are struggling with cancer, with diabetes, with 
heart disease, with some of the terrible illnesses that are out there. 
They are now getting treatment. Well, when you lose healthcare, you 
can't get treatment, and when you can't get treatment, you die.
  We have to put that on the table. That is what needs to be 
negotiated.
  I say to my Republican friends: Do you really want to see 50,000 low-
income and working-class Americans die unnecessarily? I don't think you 
do. Let's negotiate. Let's figure a way out of this thing.
  But it is not just that 15 million Americans will lose their health 
insurance; what we are looking at now for over 20 million people in the 
Affordable Care Act is, on average--on average--a doubling of health 
insurance premiums at a time when healthcare costs throughout the 
country are already outrageously high.
  I come, obviously, from the State of Vermont, and my neighborhood is 
northern New England. So I want to talk a little bit about what would 
happen to northern New England--to Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont--
if we did not address this looming crisis.
  In Maine, some 60,000 people in a small State would be thrown off the 
healthcare they have as a result of these massive cuts to Medicaid. In 
New Hampshire, 46,000 people will lose their health insurance. In my 
State of Vermont, some 45,000 people will be thrown off the healthcare 
they have.

  By the way, when we talk about throwing 15 million people off of 
Medicaid, when we talk about doubling premiums for over 20 million, 
what is the reason this is happening? Who invented this idea? Who woke 
up one day and said: You know what, it is a great idea that in the 
wealthiest country in the history of the world--let's throw 15 million 
people off of healthcare and double premiums for millions more.
  Why did they do that? The answer is in order to give a trillion 
dollars in tax break to the 1 percent.
  So, yes, the good news is that if you are Elon Musk and you are worth 
some $500 billion, you get a tax break. The bad news is that if you are 
a working-class person trying to get by on $30,000, $40,000 a year, you 
lose your healthcare.
  There is a reason why poll after poll is showing Republicans 
responsible for this shutdown, and there is a reason why, on Tuesday, 
there was a wave of disgust for Republicans all over this country, from 
Maine to California, when people said no to Trumpism and no to 
healthcare proposals that would throw so many people off of the 
healthcare they have. I would hope my Republican colleagues learned 
something from that.
  What the Democrats are talking about is not what I want. I would go a 
lot, lot further. But what they are saying is something very simple: 
Let us at least not raise premiums, and then we can have a discussion 
about where we want to go forward.
  The sitting President here has an idea. I have a different idea. The 
President of the United States has another idea. Put them on the table, 
and see how the American people feel. Run a campaign on it in the 
election in 2026. See how the American people feel.
  Getting back to northern New England, I want to talk about what these 
increased premiums would mean. I want to put them into a human reality.
  If the ACA subsidies are not extended, a 40-year-old individual in 
Portland, ME, making $35,000 a year--not a lot of money--will see his 
or her health insurance premiums go up from $1,167 a year to $2,556 a 
year--a 119-percent increase for somebody making $35,000 a year. This 
is true in Vermont, and it is true all over the country.
  I want people to hear this. Again, I am talking about Maine. I will 
be talking about Virginia. It is true in every State in America. A 60-
year-old couple--that is a couple not yet eligible for Medicare--making 
$85,000 a year in Fort Kent, ME, will see their premiums go up from 
$7,200 a year to $38,490 a year--a 435-percent increase. We are talking 
about a 60-year-old couple making $85,000 a year who will now be paying 
$38,000 in premiums, not to mention out-of-pocket costs. That is almost 
50 percent of their income for healthcare.
  In New Hampshire, a family of four making $80,000 a year will see 
their premiums increase by $297 a month--$3,600 a year more on an 
income of $80,000. Think about it.
  A 62-year-old couple in New Hampshire making $90,000 a year will see 
their premiums go up by $14,000 a year. A couple making $90,000--you 
are going to see your healthcare premiums go up by $14,000. How do you 
survive with that kind of increase?
  In Vermont, my State, if the ACA subsidies are not extended, in 
Bennington, a couple in their sixties earning $85,000 a year now pays 
about $830 a month in premiums for their Blue Cross Blue Shield 
healthcare. Next year, without these subsidies, they would pay $3,000 a 
month. Add the deductible and other costs, and they will spend nearly 
half of their income--more than $40,000 a year--on healthcare. A couple 
in their sixties in Bennington, VT--and it is true all over this 
country--will be spending almost 50 percent of their income on 
healthcare. That is insane.
  It is interesting that my Republican friends now are beginning to 
talk about healthcare. For a while, they didn't have a word to say. 
They are coming down here, and that is a good thing because I think 
that is the kind of discussion we should have. But one thing we should 
know is that what we are talking about here is deadly serious.
  I know that some of my colleagues have talked about bringing forward 
a proposal that would ask the majority leader here in the Senate to 
bring forth a Democratic proposal to deal with this crisis. It would be 
a strong proposal. But, unfortunately, that would be a very wasteful 
and fraudulent gesture. It would mean nothing because no matter what 
happened with that proposal here--and I don't know that it would pass; 
I suspect some Republicans might vote for it--it wouldn't matter one 
bit because unless you have the commitment of the Speaker of the House 
that he will support it and that the President of the United States 
will sign it--and we certainly, certainly do not have that commitment 
now.
  So all it would be is kind of a wasteful gesture. People can feel 
good. They would vote for a bill with the full understanding that bill 
would go nowhere and premiums throughout this country would double.
  So where do we go from here? Well, short term, we cannot allow 
millions and millions of people to see an outrageous increase in their 
premiums when they simply cannot afford it. That would be a disaster. 
We cannot throw 15 million people off the health insurance they have.
  But some of my Republican colleagues here have come to the floor and 
said insurance companies are making huge profits. No kidding. Gee, that 
is something that some of us have been talking about for decades. And 
so are the drug companies.
  In fact, the function of the current healthcare system is to do 
precisely that. What is the function of the American healthcare system? 
It is to make huge profits for the insurance companies and the drug 
companies to pay their CEOs outrageous--really crazy--salaries, tens of 
millions of dollars a year. That is the function of the American 
healthcare system today.
  In my own State of Vermont and throughout this country, including 
Louisiana, I have talked to a whole lot of people, and almost always in 
my remarks, I ask a very simple question. I say: Tell me, how many of 
you believe that the American system is working well, the American 
healthcare system? How many of you think it is broken?
  Whether it is Louisiana, Vermont, or anyplace else, overwhelmingly, 
people understand that the American healthcare system is broken, it is 
outrageously expensive, it is cruel, and it is dysfunctional. It is not 
a secret, and I am glad that some of my Republican colleagues are 
beginning to catch on.
  Mr. President, as I think you know well, we spend almost twice as 
much per capita on healthcare as any other country on Earth. 
Unbelievable--this really is. According to the most recent data, here 
in the United States, we are spending $14,500 per person on 
healthcare--over $14,000 for every man, woman, and child.
  Let me tell you how that compares to other countries. Somehow, in 
Japan, they are able to provide healthcare to

[[Page S8025]]

all for $5,600; in the UK, $6,000; in Australia, $6,900; in Canada, 
$7,000; and $7,100 in France.
  In other words, major country after major country around the world 
manages to guarantee healthcare to all of their people as a human 
right, and they are spending less than half per capita than we are 
spending.
  I can tell you, having been all over the country, that the American 
people are disgusted with that reality. They understand and they 
believe that healthcare is a human right, not a privilege; that every 
man, woman, and child in this country is entitled to healthcare no 
matter how old you are, no matter how young you are, no matter how rich 
you are, no matter how poor you are.
  While private insurance companies and big drug companies continue to 
make outrageous profits, over 85 million Americans are either uninsured 
or underinsured today--before the disastrous attack on healthcare that 
Trump is proposing. The results are that 68,000 Americans die each year 
because they cannot afford to go to a doctor, and more than half a 
million Americans go bankrupt due to medically related debt. How 
absurd, how horrific is that?
  In America, under this current absurd healthcare system, 42 percent 
of cancer patients deplete their entire life savings within the first 2 
years of their diagnosis, while one out of every four of them declared 
bankruptcy or lost their home to foreclosure or eviction in 2022. Think 
about it. It is bad enough to get cancer; it is beyond horrific to 
understand that your family is going to be financially ruined as a 
result.
  Under the absurd American healthcare system, our life expectancy--how 
long we live--is shorter than every other major country despite the 
fact that we spend twice as much per capita. We live 4 years shorter 
lives on average than people in other wealthy countries, while the 
typical working-class person in America lives a 7-year shorter life 
than the wealthy.
  We also have the dubious distinction of having by far the highest 
infant mortality rate of any other wealthy country on Earth.
  As bad as our overall healthcare system is, our primary care system 
is even worse. Today, tens of millions of people live in communities 
where they cannot find a doctor, a dentist, or a psychologist even when 
they have decent insurance, and others have to wait months in order to 
be seen.
  Unbelievably, again, we are spending twice what other countries are 
spending, and we don't even have enough doctors, we don't have enough 
dentists, we don't have enough nurses, mental health practitioners, 
pharmacists, or home healthcare workers, and one out of four Americans 
cannot afford to purchase the medicine their doctors say they need.
  It is no wonder the American people understand that the current 
system is broken.
  Where do we go from here? It is one thing to talk about a system that 
is broken; it is another thing to have a solution. I have a solution. 
It is not a radical idea. In fact, in many ways, it just emulates what 
goes on in every other major country on Earth. It is to say that 
healthcare is a human right, that we need universal healthcare, and 
that we must pass a Medicare-for-All, single-payer program.
  So what is that legislation? What would it look like? What that 
legislation would do is provide comprehensive healthcare coverage to 
all, with zero out-of-pocket expenses, and, unlike the current system, 
it would provide full freedom of choice regarding healthcare 
providers. No more insurance premiums. No more deductibles. No more 
copayments. No more filling out endless forms and fighting with 
insurance companies to get the coverage that you pay for. No more 
networks in order to be treated by a doctor who is not in your network 
who can charge you some astronomical cost. It would also mean, when we 
talk about comprehensive, the coverage of dental care. The last I 
heard, dental care is healthcare: vision, hearing aids, prescription 
drugs, and home healthcare.

  Importantly, when we have a Medicare for All Program, it gives 
Americans the freedom to switch jobs without losing their health 
insurance. Right now, you have got millions of people who are staying 
at a job that they don't like because it provides decent healthcare to 
their families. That is kind of crazy unto itself. Under our 
legislation, healthcare becomes a human right--guaranteed to all--and 
not a job benefit. If there is a recession and people lose their jobs, 
they lose their healthcare because their healthcare is tied to their 
jobs. We saw that during the terrible COVID pandemic. And everybody 
gets access to the same quality healthcare. Yes, workers at 
McDonald's--here is a radical idea: Workers at McDonald's deserve the 
same quality healthcare as executives on Wall Street.
  Well, would a Medicare for All healthcare system be expensive?
  Yes, it would, but while providing comprehensive healthcare for all--
no more out-of-pocket expenses, no more premiums, no more deductibles--
it would be significantly less expensive than our current dysfunctional 
system.
  Now, why? Why would that be the case?
  Well, because it would eliminate an enormous amount of the 
bureaucracy, profiteering, administrative costs, and misplaced 
priorities inherent in our current for-profit system. The function of 
the current system is to make profits for the insurance companies and 
the drug companies. That is what this system is about. Then, built into 
that system are all kinds of disincentives for quality and inexpensive 
care. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that 
Medicare for All would save the American people $650 billion each and 
every year.
  Under Medicare for All, there would no longer be armies of insurance 
employees billing us. Go to any hospital in Alabama or in Vermont or 
anyplace else, and go down to the basement. Do you know what you are 
going to find? Not nurses, not people who provide healthcare, you are 
going to have people billing you, people hounding you for your late 
payments. Those people are not contributing to making us healthy. They 
are part of an administrative system that is costing us huge amounts of 
money.
  When you have a simple system--healthcare for all publicly funded--it 
not only substantially reduces administrative costs; it would make life 
a lot easier for patients, doctors, and nurses who will never again 
have to fight their way through the nightmare of insurance company 
bureaucracy.
  So, right now, I am glad that my Republican colleagues are finally 
being forced to actually talk about healthcare. I am not impressed by 
some of the ideas that they have brought forth, but at least it is a 
discussion. So let me propose what I think is the way out of this 
shutdown, and it isn't complicated.
  Overwhelmingly, people who consider themselves Democrats, who 
consider themselves Republicans, who consider themselves Independents 
do not want to see these ACA subsidies ended. It is not complicated. 
They don't want to see it doubling their insurance rates. By the way, 
if you end these subsidies, it impacts Republican States more than 
Democratic States, so people don't want to see it.
  Is the Affordable Care Act the long-term solution to healthcare in 
America? No, it is not.
  So why don't we do something simple? Why don't we just extend these 
ACA premiums so we don't double premiums for millions of people, and 
then why don't we have a discussion about where we go forward on 
healthcare? I think that is a commonsense solution.
  So I think I have solved the problem here in the 39th day of the 
shutdown. Let us have at least a 1-year extension, and let's have a 
debate on healthcare. Let's involve the American people in healthcare. 
Let's put our Federal employees back to work with a paycheck.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Britt). The Senator from Louisiana.
  Mr. CASSIDY. Madam President, I have given this speech two times in 
the last, probably, 16 hours, but it is going to be like a TV 
commercial, wherein I want to say it over and over again, hoping that 
someone actually hears it because the soul of education is repetition, 
and I want to have a very different tone than some of the speeches that 
have been heard. I want this to be nonpartisan. I want this to be, if 
you will, a plea for moving beyond our kind of camps we have been in 
and into something that can end the shutdown and actually benefit 
patients. So, to open the government, if we need to

[[Page S8026]]

talk about healthcare, then, by golly, let's talk about healthcare.
  We have an affordability crisis. Families are being pounded by the 
cost of everything, including insurance. So how can we make it more 
affordable?
  By the way, I am a doctor. I have practiced in a public hospital for 
the uninsured for 20 years. Many of my patients were middle income, but 
they could not afford either the insurance or the healthcare they were 
receiving. I know the impact this has on a family's budget, but if we 
are going to solve this, we have to put down the ways that we have kind 
of become entrenched. It is just like trench warfare. We are going to 
win. We are going to make them do the white flag. We are going to 
continue to take our same tired arguments and fight each other until we 
wear the other one down. Well, the people who are casualties--the 
collateral damage, if you will--are the American people. We need to 
have creative thinking but in a way in which people are willing to move 
beyond the way they have ordinarily thought.
  The Affordable Care Act attempted to make healthcare affordable by 
throwing more money at insurance companies. The enhanced premium tax 
credit is the latest example. Next year, if it is restarted, it will 
send $26 billion to insurers to not lower the cost of healthcare but to 
paper over the premium increases that are part of the increased cost of 
healthcare. That doesn't make healthcare cheaper. In fact, if you don't 
have one of these policies, it could contribute to inflation, and if 
you are not getting the subsidy and you are buying individual 
insurance, your policies are definitely higher. This is actually 
working against the financial interests of many American families. Oh, 
yes, if you are getting it, it papers over the increase. I would argue, 
though, there is a better way to do it.
  Instead of paying insurance companies to manage our money, why don't 
we trust the American family with a prefunded Federal flexible spending 
account?
  First, let me make clear: This is Bill Cassidy speaking. I am not 
advocating for the President, although I will note that he now supports 
this, nor am I advocating for John Thune. I am the chairman of the HELP 
Committee, and we will be having a hearing soon on these issues. I will 
make that announcement right now. I am not speaking for anyone but 
myself, in a nonpartisan way, trying to convey to colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle, there is another way to get to a solution that 
gets us out of this shutdown and actually lowers costs as opposed to 
just papering them over.
  Here is the problem: Under the enhanced premium tax credit, it 
doesn't matter how much healthcare costs because, if it costs more, the 
insurance company just increases the premium and passes that increased 
premium bill to the Federal taxpayer. It actually is almost 
inflationary. There is no incentive for the provider to keep the cost 
lower because the cost is just passed on to the subsidy, which is 
increased to meet the higher cost. It is like putting a bandaid on a 
broken bone. You are not fixing the fracture. You are just covering it 
up so no one can see that fracture. So we are not dealing with 
healthcare costs. We are just covering it with higher subsidies. Let's 
actually fix the fracture. Let's fix the broken bone.
  Of course, the way to do that is to support the patient, not the 
insurance company. By the way, insurance companies are important--I am 
not going to join the bashing--but I do think it is better if we give 
the money to the family as opposed to the insurance company. I will 
say, though, many of my colleagues want the status quo. They are so 
entrenched on their side that they refuse to discuss alternative ideas 
that will actually lower costs, and we get all the same ObamaCare 
debates. People in America, right now, don't care about those debates. 
What they want is to make their family's healthcare more affordable. So 
the way to do that is to be creative. Let's think differently.
  Imagine a different kind of health. There is a misprint on here, but 
I will get to it. Under the enhanced premium tax credit, the money goes 
to the insurance company, and 20 percent of that money goes for 
administrative overhead and profit for the insurance company. That 
should read ``80 percent.'' That 80 percent goes to healthcare. What if 
we do something different? Let's just imagine that we have the 
creativity and the guts to do something that isn't really different but 
is different for this program.
  Let's establish a prefunded flexible spending account, taking the 
money that would go to the insurance company and giving it, instead, to 
the family in a prefunded flexible spending account. One hundred 
percent of the healthcare dollars would go toward their care, and we 
would trust the mother, the wife--occasionally, a guy, but women make 
most of these decisions--to pick her doctor, her dentist, and the best 
value for prescription drugs and services. So this would be 100 percent 
going to real healthcare as opposed to only 80 percent going to real 
healthcare.
  You might say this is a radical idea. No. We already do this. I would 
not be surprised if some of the people up here--my family does--already 
have a flexible spending account. Now, the flexible spending account 
takes money that I could have put toward a premium, but, instead, puts 
it into this account, and I pay for my services. I already do this. I 
pay for my services. The difference between what I do and what this 
does is that this would be prefunded with money that would otherwise be 
spent on the enhanced premium tax credit.
  I am pleased to say that, this morning, the President posted on Truth 
Social that he is calling on Congress to redirect subsidies from 
insurance companies directly to Americans so that they can purchase 
their own healthcare. Now, there are a lot of words there, but just 
start at the top: Donald J. Trump is recommending to Senate Republicans 
that the hundreds of billions of dollars being sent to insurance 
companies go directly to the people.
  Why is that important beyond the President's support?
  A lot of my Democratic colleagues have been saying they don't know 
that   Mike Johnson would bring this up for a vote in the House of 
Representatives. They want a guarantee that, if we pass something on 
the floor, Mike Johnson will put it on the floor in the House. I am 
from Louisiana. I have a great deal of respect and regard for Mike 
Johnson, and we are good friends. But I do know, if the President 
supports this concept, that Mike is more likely to put it on the floor 
of the House. If what you want is a guarantee to get a vote on the 
floor of the House, the President's support for this concept makes it 
more likely that that happens.
  I thank the President for his support.
  By the way, I will also say, after the President spoke to this and 
after I spoke to this last night, we got immediate criticism from 
people saying: Oh, you want to give everything that we are giving to 
the insurance companies to the American people. Not a bad idea. But 
let's just say, this is not the total premium going to the insurance 
company. The insurance companies still provide the basis for things 
like a car wreck or if you have got kidney failure or heart failure. 
This is that portion that would go to an enhanced premium tax credit 
and instead would go to the family to make their choices as opposed to 
the insurance company to make their choice for them.

  If this still seems too complicated, I am going to tell you why you 
can trust it. Seventy-two percent of Americans who work for a Federal 
entity or a State government or a local government have this as one of 
their choices of a healthcare plan. Forty-seven percent of people who 
work for a commercial employer--47 percent of those folks have access 
to a flexible spending plan. If it was so complicated--if it was so 
complicated--why do 72 percent of government employees and 47 percent 
of people in the private sector have access to this plan? It works. We 
know how to do it. There are established mechanisms.
  In fact, I have my plan through what is called the small business 
exchange--about an ObamaCare exchange--through the Federal Government. 
I get my FSA through this small business exchange. It is just a little 
bit ported over from the small business exchange to the individual 
exchange to allow an individual to get the same thing.
  This is so incredibly workable. This is not so complicated that I 
just kind

[[Page S8027]]

of scratch my head when people say that it is too complicated.
  Now, it may take the Federal Government some time to--it may take 
them some effort to make sure it can go from one exchange to the other, 
but we have a President that can make things happen--just his track 
record. Operation Warp Speed--some people said it would take 10 years 
to develop a vaccine for COVID; others, at least 18 months. President 
Trump got it done in 10 to 11 months.
  President Trump can make the bureaucracy work. If he did it for 
Operation Warp Speed, we could do it for this. We can have this ready 
for the beginning of next year, and that would be President Trump's 
effort. There is not a stronger force to get the bureaucracy to do what 
it should do than President Trump.
  Let's talk about some key differences between enhanced premium tax 
credits and what I am calling federally prefunded flexible savings 
accounts.
  Who gets the money? With enhanced premium tax credits, the insurance 
company gets the money. But in the prefunded flexible spending account, 
the patient--the family--gets the money.
  What can it be used for? Under the enhanced premium tax credit, 
insurance premiums; under the prefunded flexible spending account, real 
care. It can be your doctor, your physician, your dentist, your 
glasses, your prescriptions.
  By the way, oftentimes, these policies don't cover dental work. They 
don't cover orthodontia. Under this, you can use your flexible spending 
account to get your teeth cleaned. You can use it to have your child's 
orthodontic work done.
  Who makes the decision? Here, you go through a preauthorization 
process with the insurance company. There, the patient makes the 
decision for herself and for her family.
  Does it lower costs? No. There is evidence that the way this works, 
it actually drives up premium costs.
  Here, under the prefunded flexible spending account, it empowers a 
patient to shop--driving competition, driving down costs.
  By the way, if the patient finds that it is cheaper to pay cash with 
their flexible spending account than to pay the deductible--and that 
sometimes happens--then she could pay less by paying cash.
  The point is, if you give the patient the power, good things happen.
  The prefunded flexible spending account does not treat the individual 
as a ward of the State. It treats them like a capable consumer who can 
decide where to go in a way which is best for them and their family.
  Some ask: Won't this cost money?
  Yes, about the same as the enhanced premium tax credits for the first 
year. My Democratic colleagues should like that. An individual, though, 
would be getting a better value.
  But instead of only 80 percent of the money going for healthcare, 
under the prefunded flexible spending account, 100 percent of the money 
that we are putting up is going to pay for real healthcare: your 
dentist, your physician, your prescription drugs, et cetera--100 
percent. And over here, only 80 percent. And she makes the choice; the 
choice is not made for her.
  As I conclude, let me point out a real irony. I have not wanted this 
to be partisan at all. I am asking for Democrats and Republicans to 
come together and find a solution to reopen the government, to pay the 
people who have been working, and to make sure that those people 
traveling over Thanksgiving actually have an airport that is open that 
they can go to.
  Let's just move beyond our trench line, and let's actually think 
creatively. And can we give just a little bit to find something which 
benefits the patient but may also get us out of this situation?
  I think the American people are mad as hell, and they are not going 
to put up with it anymore. We have to be responsive to that. It is the 
right thing to do.
  Let me conclude by pointing out the irony. These enhanced premium tax 
credits are a direct result of a workaround to a portion of ObamaCare 
that was not fully implemented. Democrats are fighting to keep 
something which is a workaround for something that Republicans formerly 
objected to. And, frankly, Republicans are kind of supporting something 
that is in line with what ObamaCare tried to do. The roles have been 
flipped.
  But because one side proposes it, the other side reflexively objects. 
Let's just stop that. Why don't we just say right now that we are 
actually going to listen as opposed to automatically objecting because 
the other side puts it up?

  So the choice is before us: We can keep on paying insurance companies 
to hide the cost of the healthcare by confusing bills and rising 
premiums in a system which actually raises the cost of premiums for 
some, or we can trust Americans with the tools to pay for the care 
directly at fair prices with total transparency. If we can, it puts 
patients first, not insurers. It encourages competition, smart choices, 
and it begins to make healthcare truly affordable, not by inflating 
subsidies but by unleashing the power of an informed consumer.
  I will finish by saying we have got to open the government. I can't 
even write this legislation unless we have the government open. But you 
have got this chairman's commitment that we are going to have a hearing 
in the HELP Committee in November on how we address the issue that is 
before us right now.
  I will finish by saying, as a physician who used to work in the 
hospital for the working uninsured, who saw middle-income families who 
could not afford their insurance and could not afford their healthcare, 
I am personally--I am personally--deeply invested in not just reopening 
the government but making healthcare affordable again.
  I just ask that my Democratic colleagues not oppose this idea just 
because it is a Republican proposal. And I will say that, as a 
Republican, I will do my best to listen to them.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Barrasso). The Senator from Wisconsin.


                         Shutdown Fairness Act

  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, as my colleague from Louisiana wishes we 
were all here voting on the deal and that my colleagues on the other 
side had taken yes for an answer to open up the government, I wish that 
is what I was on the floor here today to do. That is not being 
accomplished. What I was hoping to be able to do is, once again, offer 
a unanimous consent request to pay the people who are working.
  I came down to the floor, 2 weeks ago, with the Shutdown Fairness Act 
to pay the people whom we are forcing to work. It is pretty common 
sense. It did not include the furloughed workers. The other side 
objected. I agreed to add furloughed workers. I worked with them over 
the last couple of weeks, came on the floor yesterday, offered that 
unanimous consent request, and there were more objections.
  So we offered a vote, saying: Let's proceed to that bill. Let's work 
out, literally, clarifications and differences. There is really nothing 
substantive. We are going to pay all the workers being forced to work. 
We are going to pay all the furloughed workers. We added contractors. 
We have done just about everything we could so that we are no longer 
punishing the people working for our dysfunction, so we are no longer 
using these individuals as pawns--the American people as pawns in this 
horrific partisan gamesmanship.
  Unfortunately, the other side wouldn't agree to get on the bill--
which, by the way, that is how you pass legislation around here. You 
get on a bill. It may not be perfect. There may be some objections from 
the other side. You open it up for amendments. You work on those 
differences.
  Again, if the other side doesn't particularly like the bill, they can 
vote no at the tail end. They can block it then. But, instead, they 
blocked it on the front end.
  We immediately went into discussions. Literally, about an hour ago, I 
thought I had a deal, where at least the primary objector of the 
Shutdown Fairness Act was not going to object. We have hit some snags.
  So, unfortunately, I don't think in today's session we will be able 
to offer that for a unanimous consent request. But I do want to tell my 
colleagues that we are still working hard. I am going to do everything 
I can to accommodate, to clarify the bill, to let the folks on the 
other side know, no, we are not creating a slush fund. We are

[[Page S8028]]

not giving the President discretion to use this money wherever he 
wants. We are not excluding certain workers. We are not giving the 
President the ability to include or exclude anyone. We are including 
all the workers.
  Again, I will continue. My staff is working overtime--God bless 
them--doing everything they can to be able to offer this. If we don't 
have a deal tomorrow, at least--at least--I am literally hoping and 
praying that folks on the other side of the aisle will, at a minimum, 
stop using Federal workers--the American public--as pawns in this 
partisan gamesmanship. But it doesn't look like we are going to be 
doing that tonight.


                               Healthcare

  But as long as we have got some time on the floor, I guess what I 
would like to do is I would like to discuss a hearing we held earlier 
in the week in my Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. It was 
titled ``Assessing the Damage Done by ObamaCare.''
  I hate to report that folks on the other side refused to acknowledge 
the very obvious damage being done across the board by ObamaCare.
  I had three witnesses. We kind of did this in three different 
categories. The first category was talking about the damage done by the 
consolidation of industries across the board in healthcare.
  If you want lower prices--I come from the private sector. What the 
free market guarantees is basically three things: the lowest possible 
price in cost, the highest quality, and the highest level of customer 
service. Now, it is not perfect, but there is no economic system that 
works better than that.
  The problem we have in healthcare is that we have largely driven 
free-market principles out of healthcare. We have a third-party payer 
system. You know, decades ago, patients paid 80 percent--80 cents on 
the dollar--for the healthcare they received. Today, they pay about a 
dime. Somebody else is always picking up the tab for their specific 
procedure.
  Now, we pay--oh, we pay dearly--in taxes, in insurance premiums. But 
it is disconnected from the actual point of sale, from the actual cost 
of the procedure. So there is no transparency. Doctors don't know what 
things costs.
  I love accountants. I am one of them. But if some accountant in the 
provider's back office is dealing with some accountant in the insurance 
and some accountant in CMS, or whichever third-party payer, so we had a 
complete breakdown of price transparency--because we don't have free 
market principles. We don't have consumerism--true consumerism--in 
healthcare.
  This was a chart that the Senator from South Carolina put up 
yesterday--I think others have used it as well--that really makes the 
point in terms of the consolidation of the industry, which, of course, 
when you have concentrated power, you have less competitive benefits.
  This is just the percent increase in the stock price of, I think, 
seven of the top insurance carriers. UnitedHealth Group, 1,177 percent 
increase in the stock price since the implementation of ObamaCare; 
Cigna, 822 percent; Anthem, only 414 percent; Humana, 490; Molina, 859; 
Centene, 604; Aetna, 595 percent increase.
  This is a concentration in power, a reduction in competition, and 
this proves the increase in prices--the trillions of dollars flowing 
into insurance companies, taxpayer dollars flowing into insurance 
companies because of the faulty design of ObamaCare; that force that 
aided and abetted this consolidation and this lack of competition in 
the healthcare market.
  The second area of damage, literally, was to Medicaid. I mean, 
ObamaCare is basically providing insurance through two mechanisms: 
Medicaid and the individual exchanges. Medicaid--of course, we talked 
about this in our One Big Beautiful Bill, the whole reconciliation 
package. The harm caused to Medicaid is profound. By allowing States to 
sign up able-bodied, single, working-age adults into Medicaid--that 
wasn't the main abuse. The main abuse is we reimbursed those States. 
For every dollar they spend for a single, able-bodied adult, they get 
$9 as a Federal reimbursement. That compares to, for every dollar spent 
on a disabled child, the States get $1.33.
  So that has led to rampant abuse. I would call it legalized fraud--
provider taxes, provider fees. That is not healthcare, but the American 
taxpayer is picking up the tab at a ratio of 9 to 1 for those State-
directed payments and, again, provider fees, provider taxes.
  It has also crowded out services for the disabled. There was an 
excellent article in the Wall Street Journal written by the father of a 
17-year-old severely autistic child. And God bless this family. They 
are taking care of this child at home. But they could use help. So what 
they were hoping for is to be able to have access to home healthcare. 
They were on a 10-year waiting list because those providers would much 
rather service an able-bodied Medicaid Advantage adult as opposed to 
that disabled child. So, again, we have crowded out those disabled 
children from Medicaid providers. And, of course, we have cost the 
American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars--provider fees, 
provider taxes--which, unfortunately, we weren't able to fix.
  The third area of damage done by ObamaCare is in the individual 
markets. Now, I bought healthcare for 30 years. Every year, we would 
negotiate with the insurance carriers. I remember early on when we 
didn't have 100 employees even, so I am very familiar with the small 
employer group markets.
  Probably about 3 or 4 years into my buying healthcare, because of 
competition, we had an insurance carrier come in and say: You don't 
even need to have deductibles for out-of-pocket maximums. We are going 
to match your insurance rate--zero deductibles.
  We thought: Great. What a great year for our employees. They didn't 
pay a dime for anything.
  And the insurance rate was what we had the previous year. Well, of 
course, the next year, they jacked up our rates 40 percent, so I had to 
go back into the market.
  That is just an anecdotal story of how competition actually worked.
  Now, again, I don't have the exact figures, but in the 30 years of 
buying health insurance, ending in about 2010, I don't ever recall a 
per-person deductible. Generally, the way a family plan would work is 
to have a number of deductibles, two or three per family. I don't 
recall one ever higher than $2,500, with an out-of-pocket maximum--with 
the copays, the 28 percent copay.
  So a family would maybe have one person with an illness. They would 
go through their $2,500 deductible, and then, if they were charged 
above that, 80-20 split, up to a maximum out of pocket of $5,000 per 
year. That is it. That is the most. Again, back in the early eighties, 
it started out with maybe a $100 deductible with a maximum out of 
pocket of $1,000. But again, because of inflation, by the time I left, 
it was about $5,000 maximum out of pocket.
  What has happened because of ObamaCare? The faulty design of it is 
forcing the small percentage of people on the individual exchanges to 
pick up the full cost of preexisting conditions.
  Back when I was buying insurance, we had something called high-risk 
pools. They weren't perfect. With some modifications, we could have 
completely covered people with preexisting conditions. But the way they 
worked is every insurer that sold products in the State had to 
basically take on people of high risk.
  So as I am buying insurance--let's say I had somebody who was 
diagnosed with cancer. The insurance carrier would come in and do 
something they would call laser out that individual--not a problem 
because that person right away would go into the high-risk pool. And 
there are so many different options in terms of deductibles, that type 
of thing, that we could buy a plan for that individual from the high-
risk pool at pretty much the exact same rates as we were getting and 
the exact same deductibles. If that person had a remission of cancer, 
was no longer lasered out, he came back into our plan.
  It worked beautifully. It was funded by everybody. Everybody that had 
employer-sponsored care, anybody that had an insurance policy, a very 
small percentage was assessed to pay for the high-risk pool.
  Now, every State was different. Some States were adequately funded; 
some weren't. I think Maine had an excellent high-risk pool. But 
ObamaCare dismantled all of that and put the cost of

[[Page S8029]]

those people with preexisting conditions that are high risk on the 
backs of a single-digit percentage of the American population, causing 
insurance rates to skyrocket.
  We hear our Democratic colleagues come to the floor and say premiums 
are going to double and triple. Well, first of all, that is not true. 
Gross premiums are going up an alarming 26 percent nationally, but they 
are not doubling and tripling--not on employer-sponsored care and not 
for most people on the exchanges.

  What is happening is the net premium after subsidies for people over 
400 percent of the poverty line that no longer can get a subsidy--those 
people could be experiencing a doubling or tripling of rates.
  Quite honestly, from my standpoint, those are people I have a great 
deal of sympathy for that I would like to do something for, but we are 
not going to enter into a negotiation until Democrats open up the 
government. OK.
  But again, I have said this repeatedly: I am happy to work with 
Democrats who will work in good faith, who will acknowledge the problem 
and repair the damage done by ObamaCare and transition to a system that 
actually works. I think all Republicans are eager to do that. I know 
President Trump just had a tweet today. What we should be doing is we 
should be giving--the hundreds of billions we spend on this, give that 
to the American public, and let them buy insurance policies that fit 
their needs, not the highly restrictive ones in ObamaCare that have 
caused premiums to skyrocket.
  So what this chart shows--the red line here is the increase in the 
CPI; in other words, total inflation since the inception of ObamaCare 
was 39 percent. All these blue bars--I know it is hard to read. This is 
every State, the percent increase in their premiums for a 40-year-old 
enrolled in the silver benchmark.
  Again, averages are very difficult here because you have every State 
different, all these different plans. But we picked one. This is pretty 
typical.
  So the average percent increase by State, over all the States, is a 
169-percent increase versus a 39-percent increase in inflation. That is 
4.3 times the rate of inflation.
  This is what has been happening to the 20-some million people on the 
individual exchanges. It is because of the faulty design of ObamaCare. 
It has to be fixed. We can fix it. We know how to do it. You 
reinstitute high-risk pools. You give consumers a choice of all kinds 
of different options: short-term plans, catastrophic--by the way, 
ObamaCare insurance is what catastrophic plans looked like in the past 
but only orders of magnitude more expensive.
  So, again, this is the gory snapshot of what ObamaCare has done to 
the individual premiums.
  Now, I have another chart that shows you what has happened in the 
marketplace for employer-sponsored plans. You don't see anything up 
here at the over 300 percent level. You see really quite consistency 
because ObamaCare didn't impact employer-sponsored care anywhere near 
to the extent they did--now, it is still way too high. On average, 
employer plans increased 74 percent since the inception of ObamaCare. A 
lot of this is driven because of what ObamaCare has done in terms of 
consolidation of every part of the healthcare industry.
  So there is no reason for these insurance rates to be almost double 
the rate of inflation, but it is a huge difference. It is a huge 
difference because there is greater freedom in the employer-sponsored 
insurance plans than there is in the very prescriptive ObamaCare.
  This last chart--I am glad I had it because in the hearing, my 
ranking member, the Senator from Connecticut, made the statement: I 
don't know anybody who has been harmed by ObamaCare.
  Huh? What? I mean, I already mentioned there was a consolidation of 
the industry. I mentioned the disabled child who is being crowded out 
by an able-bodied, working-age, childless adult. I already talked about 
the dramatic increase in premiums for everybody.
  But the Democrats' own witness, a mom from Wisconsin, was a victim of 
ObamaCare. This isn't exactly what her premiums are because she, quite 
honestly, didn't have all the information, but she had a few key pieces 
of information, and we could go look at the ObamaCare exchanges and 
come up with the premiums. But this is showing you what is actually 
happening, OK?
  This individual--a mom, two kids, great person--is a victim of 
ObamaCare. In 2016, her employer dropped coverage because ObamaCare 
gives small employers a great out of not having to put up with the 
rising healthcare costs by just saying: We are not going to buy group 
insurance anymore.
  Trust me, I never liked having to buy group insurance for my 
employees, but you had to do it. To be competitive, you had to provide 
insurance. Again, I would never want to see any of my employees go 
uninsured. But now you have an option, and so a large number of 
particularly small employers are dropping coverage and forcing their 
employees into the exchange.
  So in 2016, she got forced into the exchanges. Now, she initially 
bought a silver plan. It cost her $1,000 a month.
  Again, to me, somebody who had bought insurance 15 years ago--
unbelievably high insurance rate. A thousand bucks a month? Unheard of 
back when I was buying insurance.
  Anyway, that was too expensive for her, so a couple years later, she 
actually transferred to a bronze plan that she could afford. It cost 
her $250 a month, but it had a $14,000 deductible.
  Again, as I said earlier, when I was buying, an out-of-pocket maximum 
for families was like 5,000 bucks. A $14,000 deductible--that was a 
catastrophic care plan; they were dirt cheap.
  So, anyway, they signed up for that plan. Unfortunately, they had 
some big healthcare bills, and her and her husband had to take out an 
$18,000 home line of credit--18,000 bucks. This is the Democrat 
witness--a true victim of ObamaCare.
  Now, of course, she is coming in very sympathetically, asking us to 
extend the temporary enhanced subsidies.
  But this is what people need to understand. They obviously are under 
400 percent of the poverty line because she is still getting subsidies. 
So look at the annual here. In 2025, with the subsidy, her gross 
premium--again, when the Democrats say ``They are doubling premiums,'' 
they are talking about the net premium. But the gross premium was 
$15,000. She got a subsidy of almost $10,000, so she is paying $5,500 a 
year.
  Now, remember, in 2019, she had a silver plan, and she was paying 
$12,000 a year. So now, with the enhanced subsidy, the temporary COVID 
one--again, remember, Democrats are the ones that chose it to expire--
she is paying about $5,500.
  Fast forward, if she loses that enhanced subsidy, she still gets a 
higher subsidy. She is still going to get $10,000, but because her 
gross premium because of the faulty side of ObamaCare is going from 
$15,000 to $19,000, she is going to experience almost a $3,000 increase 
in her premium, not because the enhanced subsidy went away. She is 
getting an increased dollar amount of subsidy. It is the dramatic 
increase in premiums that is driving this.
  And I will close on this point because I see the Senator from 
Florida, who, by the way, knows more about healthcare probably maybe 
than anybody in America, certainly in this Chamber. And he has got some 
great ideas on how to fix and repair the damage done by ObamaCare and 
transition to a system that will actually work based on a competitive 
model.
  But the other point I want to make because of the rhetoric, because 
of demagoguery, Democrats have pretty well, I think, scared--of course, 
that is their tactic, right, let's scaremonger--scared Americans into 
believing that everybody's premiums are going to double and triple.
  First of all, we are talking about the ObamaCare exchanges, which 
they say they got about 24 million people but because of the no-premium 
policies with these enhanced subsidies, there are probably about 6 
million people with phantom plans. They don't even know that have 
coverage. Unscrupulous agents have signed them up. They get the 
commission. The premium goes right to the insurance company. They are 
none the wiser, and they make no claims.
  So we have gone from, I think, 4 million no-claim policies on the 
exchange to 12 million. So, obviously, a lot of

[[Page S8030]]

phantom policies here. But the point I wanted to make is out of 
whatever the number is--it is really not 24 million. It is probably 
under 20 million, but I will use that as a figure--of the supposed 24 
million people on the ObamaCare exchanges, almost 22 million are going 
to continue to get their subsidy. They are under 400 percent of the 
poverty line
  You have got about 1.6 that we know are over 400 percent. Their 
subsidy is going away. So they were at 15 going up to 19, instead of 
paying--they are going to have to pay 19,000. Those people I have a 
great deal of sympathy for. They were kind of duped into thinking that 
they could retire early. And now they are getting the rug pulled out 
from under them because the Democrats chose this plan, and now it is 
expiring.
  So I have got some ideas. I have actually shared them with our 
Finance chair; I have shared them with Senator Scott. I am not going to 
talk about it now because we need to open up the government first. 
Personally, I am sympathetic to this.
  But we don't need to spend $20 billion, $30 billion to address that 
small slice of the American population whose subsidy is totally going 
away. The main point, and then I will turn it over to the Senator from 
Florida--my main point is, almost 22 million Americans on the exchanges 
will continue to get subsidies, and because insurance rates are going--
those subsidies on an annual basis are going to increase. They are not 
even going to decrease. The dollar amount will be increasing for most 
of those 22 million Americans.
  They are going to go back to the way ObamaCare was originally 
designed. So if they can't afford the healthcare based on going back to 
the way ObamaCare was originally designed, it is not because the 
enhanced subsidy is going away; it is because of the way ObamaCare was 
originally designed.
  It has failed miserably. It has damaged millions of people, and I am 
happy to sit down with the other side, if they are willing to 
acknowledge the truth, admit they have got a problem, define the 
problem properly, do a root-cause analysis, and actually enact reforms 
that will lower or certainly keep in check the cost of healthcare.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, I want to, first off, thank my 
colleague from Wisconsin. You know, not only has he worked hard to try 
to do what all Republicans have been doing to open up this government; 
he has also worked his tail off to try to get people paid.
  It is hard for me to believe that the Democrats don't want to pay 
people that are working. I mean, I don't care whether, you know, it is 
the military or the FAA or people that work here on the Senate floor, 
the people who work in our offices, Capitol Police, everybody should 
get paid. There is nobody that shouldn't get paid.
  I want to thank my colleague for working his tail off for trying to 
make that happen, and I am really disappointed that my Democratic 
colleagues are not willing to do that.
  Here is where we are. The government has been shut down for 39 days 
because of Democrats--not Republicans. Republicans voted to open up the 
government; Democrats voted to shut down the government. We voted time 
and time again. Republicans have voted to open the government, and 
Democrats have voted to shut down the government and not pay food 
stamps, our troops, our air traffic controllers, or Capitol Police, the 
people that take care of us.
  I have also tried to pass my ``No Budget, No Pay'' bill. So if 
Democrats want to fund the government and pay our Federal workers and 
our troops--if you ask the average American do they think the same 
people that have said they don't get paid or they don't get their food 
stamps, do you think they are saying: Well, I want to make sure they 
get paid? Absolutely not.
  And of course, when I brought that to the floor, Democrats blocked 
it.
  So what are the Democrats telling our families? They don't care about 
you or your family. It is clear. They don't care if you can put food on 
the table, pay the rent, pay the mortgage, make sure your children get 
healthcare. They are saying they do not care.
  They are heartless. They don't care about members of our military who 
are trying to provide for their families while protecting country; they 
don't care about moms who rely on SNAP to feed their kids this month; 
they don't care about the Capitol Police who are keeping them safe 
every single day; they don't care about the millions of Americans who 
planned to fly that are now losing money on canceled tickets, unsure of 
their safety in the skies, and have to scramble to see and spend or 
decide: Should I go home at Thanksgiving?
  And think about this: Do you think when there are fewer flights, the 
price of air travel goes down or goes up? It goes up. They don't care 
about Federal workers, including their own staff who are visiting food 
banks to make ends meet or are surviving on peanut butter and jelly 
sandwiches and rice and beans.
  They come to work every day because--all our staffers are coming 
to work every day even though they don't know when their next paycheck 
is going to happen. Not only are Democrats saying they don't care, they 
have also said that ``each day gets better for us'' and ``there's no 
reason to surrender.''

  How does that make you feel when you have been relying on food 
stamps? How does it make you feel when you are worrying about paying 
the mortgage or the rent?
  Millions of struggling Americans who don't know when they will be 
able to feed their families or know how they are going to pay the 
mortgage or pay rent--Capitol Police--and think about it. The Capitol 
Police, Democrats see them each and every day. When you walk around the 
Capitol, you see them. When you walk into the buildings, you see them. 
And they can look them in the eye and say they voted to make sure the 
Capitol Police didn't get paid. I mean, I can't imagine how they can do 
that. Democrats think that every day they refuse to fund the government 
and instead choose to use Americans as leverage to extend these 
expiring Biden COVID subsidies and send money directly to insurance 
companies.
  And look at this, has it worked? Everybody should invest in these 
insurance companies. Look at the money. Look at the dramatic increase 
in stock prices. Guess what. As Senator Johnson just said, the money 
goes directly to the insurance companies, and there are millions of 
Americans that don't even know they are getting the insurance so they 
never used it--just pure 100 percent profit.
  Do the Democrats suggest there is any fix on that? Absolutely not.
  Democrats want you, as a taxpayer, to pay for abortion. They want you 
to pay for trans surgery. It makes no sense.
  They don't want you to know that they shut down the government. They 
want to blame it on somebody else, but think about it. Fifty-two, 
fifty-three Republicans voted to open it, and all but 3 Democrats voted 
to close it, time and time again.
  Now, as Senator Johnson said, Republicans want to address healthcare 
costs. President Trump said it this morning; that he wants to address 
the problems of ObamaCare.
  What happened with ObamaCare is they said--let's think of the lies 
here: You didn't lose your doctor, biggest lie of the year; you are 
going to save $2,500 a family, it skyrocketed. Premiums are up. Copays 
are up. Deductibles are up.
  You know, back when ObamaCare started, if you had a $3,000 
deductible, that was a catastrophic plan. Now you can have a $10,000, 
$5,000, $14,000 deductible under ObamaCare. That is not a catastrophic 
plan?
  Well, President Trump said this morning, he wants to address the 
problems of ObamaCare and stop sending massive checks to insurance 
companies and give the money directly to Americans.
  He said:

       I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds 
     of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking 
     Insurance Companies in order to save the bad Healthcare 
     provided by ObamaCare BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT 
     THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN MUCH BETTER HEALTHCARE.

  Now, think about this: When they are raising kids, the money they 
make, do they spend it better than the money

[[Page S8031]]

you give them? You better believe it. If we gave the money directly to 
the consumer that needs healthcare, do you think they will spend it 
better than the government will spend it? You better believe they will.
  And maybe they will even have money left over.
  If we want to solve--if we want to fix ObamaCare, we have got to give 
the money directly to the person. Let them buy the healthcare. So if 
you are going to get a healthcare subsidy under ObamaCare, you should 
get the money yourself in an HSA and then let you buy what you want. 
The government shouldn't tell you what insurance you have got buy.
  If their idea was so good, why did the costs go up so much? It hasn't 
worked.
  So what he said:

       In other words, take from the BIG, BAD INSURANCE COMPANIES, 
     give it to the people, and terminate, per dollar spent, the 
     worst Healthcare [system] anywhere in the World, ObamaCare.

  And I have a plan to do just that. It will bring down the costs. It 
will give you more freedom.
  Instead, Democrats are fighting to keep these Biden bonus credits to 
try--why did they do it in the first place? They did it to mask the 
cost of ObamaCare. ObamaCare costs are skyrocketing, and they said: 
Gosh, we don't want people to know that so we are going to give you a 
whole bunch of money so you won't even know what it costs.
  And to make sure you didn't know what it cost, they sent the money 
directly to the insurance company. And there is massive fraud. So here 
is all you had to do. If you wanted to make money off the system, you 
just had to know somebody's name, birthday, address, and maybe 
telephone number, and you could sign them up.
  You got paid. The insurance company got the money. You might even not 
know you even got it. There are somewhere between 4 to 6 million 
Americans that didn't even know they were getting this. The money is 
just going directly to the insurance companies.
  And guess what. The Democrats want to keep that going; massive fraud 
with your tax dollars and just keep it going.
  They wanted to keep this abuse going instead of fixing its root 
problem, the rising cost of healthcare. It is all caused by ObamaCare. 
When the government gets involved in things, they often go up in price.
  If Democrats actually cared about the health of American families, 
they would come to the table with a sane proposal. Instead, they want 
to keep wasting dollars by sending it directly to the insurance 
companies who are engaging in fraud to inflate their bottom line.
  There are parents right now who don't know how they are going to be 
able to feed their kids. Guess what. I grew up in a poor family. I 
watched my mom struggle to put food on the table.
  I remember when there was a farmers market, when they were going to 
throw away the food, she would ask them for that food to be able to 
feed us. You know what? That is going on across the country.
  Under the Food Stamp Program, that shouldn't be happening in our 
country, but because of Democrats' decision to shut down this 
government and make sure that people don't get their food stamps, that 
is going on.
  I just think about the struggles my mom went through and why would 
the Democrats want to put moms and dads through that struggle today. 
That is exactly--exactly--what they are doing.
  Democrats are refusing to fund food stamps, and they are stopping 
poor moms and dads, like mine, from feeding their kids, but they are 
getting paid. Let's remember this: All the problems that are being 
caused, they still get paid.
  Now, Democrats promised to keep the government shut down and these 
essential programs shuttered until ``planes were falling out of the 
sky.''
  Can you imagine saying that?
  Unfortunately, each day we are getting dangerously closer to 
Democrats getting exactly that wish.
  Air traffic controllers are calling in sick so they can instead work 
at jobs where they get paid. Think about this. They are having to not 
come in because they are not being paid and are taking jobs like with 
Uber, to get paid so they can put food on the table. So we are making 
an already very stressful job more stressful, and Americans are paying 
the price both financially and with their safety.
  Now, Secretary Sean Duffy can see the stress in the system, and so he 
started reducing the number of flights. What he has done so far, I 
think, will mean 500,000 Americans will have their flights canceled 
each and every day. Think of that.
  So think about it. You might be going to a funeral. You might be 
going to a wedding. You might be going to see a sick grandparent. You 
might be coming to see the birth of a new baby. And your flight just 
got canceled.
  So think about this again. If there are fewer flights, the prices 
will probably go up.
  Now, right now, millions of Americans are watching us, wondering if 
they are going to have to cancel the plans to fly somewhere on vacation 
or home to see their loved ones for Thanksgiving.
  People are wondering if it is going to be safe to put their grandkids 
on a plane and wonder if their tickets are going to be canceled or if 
they have to pay more to cover changes to hotel rooms, longer stays at 
the airport, car reservations.
  Americans don't get it. Why do Democrats not want to open up 
government and vote to put the American people first?
  Now, look, we can have a policy conversation, but why would you shut 
down the government over that?
  So think about that. My personal belief is the Democrats will come up 
with some reason to shut down government under Trump. They did it under 
the first term. It didn't happen during Biden's term. Republicans 
didn't shut down then government. And the bill that we are talking 
about is the Biden budget. I didn't vote for it. I don't like it, but I 
am not shutting down the government over it.
  Now, I remember when I was a young sailor in the Navy. I was a 
radarman, and I got married at 19. My wife clearly married me for my 
money. I was making $332 bucks a month. Our rent cost $250. She was 
making, I think, $75 a week as a legal secretary. So if we didn't get 
paid for over a month, which is where our military is going to be, how 
would I pay the rent?
  Do you think the landlord cares about my problems? Do you think the 
grocery store says: Oh, we are worried about you, sailor--young sailor. 
We will give you some food.
  No. We had maybe $25 in savings. Most people live paycheck to 
paycheck in this country, especially young sailors.
  I can't imagine how Democrats can see young military families like 
mine and keep choosing to deprive them of their salaries, with a clear 
conscience.
  Many of these Americans now going without a paycheck are young 
families who are just starting out. Just think about it. When you start 
out, you live paycheck to paycheck. You probably get a mortgage that is 
too big because you are optimistic and you think you can do this. And 
then, all of a sudden, poof, your income just completely goes away.
  They would never have imagined the Democrats would have made the 
decision that they didn't get paid.
  These young sailors want to serve their country, give their kids a 
roof over their heads, and offer them the opportunity to thrive. And 
Democrats are denying them this and putting their futures in jeopardy. 
But they get paid.
  Oh, but one of them said: I have a mortgage.
  One of the Democrat Senators said: I have a mortgage.
  How many other Americans have a mortgage?
  But they don't care.
  Food banks in my State are strained. I was talking to a friend in 
Tampa, yesterday, and the lines were unbelievable at the food banks to 
get some food. These are both families that have relied on food stamps, 
and they are Federal workers that need to get paid and missed their 
paychecks.
  I think it is the same everywhere I have talked to around the 
country.
  Some food banks in Florida are reporting a 300-percent increase of 
families seeking help since the Democrats first shut down the 
government.
  Last Sunday, when I was home, at the church, we support a food bank, 
and so the church said: One, will you bring in more food?
  And they wanted basic, basic necessities. And they also raised money 
to try to buy more food.

[[Page S8032]]

  One TSA agent working in Miami visited a local food bank and 
described how her family was scraping by, not knowing when her next 
paycheck was coming, and she said it is demoralizing, and it was 
getting pretty bad.
  A recent CBS article highlighted how Federal workers in Florida who 
have been working for the last 39 days without getting paid are now 
turning to food banks for the first time while they still show up, and 
they are still doing their job.
  It is time for Democrats to show up and do their job. I just don't 
get it. How can Democrats not care? The American public should be 
outraged. I am.
  I think it is time for Democrats to finally choose the American 
people over these insurance companies that have made a fortune over a 
program that doesn't work. It is time for my Democrat colleagues to do 
their jobs and vote to fund the government.
  Now, we should have a conversation about how we fix ObamaCare. 
Republicans didn't create ObamaCare. Democrats created ObamaCare.
  And remember, you are supposed to keep your doctor--lie. You are 
supposed to keep your plan--lie. Per family, you are supposed to save 
$2,500--lie. It was supposed to save the Federal Government, I think, 
$100 billion--lie.
  So it has all been a lie. It has all failed. So we ought to fix it. 
We ought to sit down and say: How do you drive the cost of healthcare 
down?
  We should work hard to make sure everybody has access to great 
healthcare.
  We must stop taxpayer money from going directly to insurance 
companies that are posting record profits and say: Give the money 
directly to Americans who need it.
  We can give money to them directly through a health savings account 
and let them pick the insurance they want. We should allow Americans to 
shop across State lines and find the best insurance product for their 
individual family. This will clearly drive down the cost of healthcare. 
But, first, Democrats, open government.
  The American people should be calling every single Democrat. What 
should happen right now is every American should call every Democrat 
Senator right now and say: Open the government. Have a heart. And stop 
getting paid until you do.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I know that we are getting ready to 
wrap up the day here, on this Saturday, and I just wanted to take just 
a couple minutes. And I really don't feel like I am speaking as the 
Senator for Alaska. I feel like, at this moment, I want to be the 
Senator speaking for the men and women who allow this place to happen 
on a weekday but also on a weekend.
  There are a lot of really great people who come in, day over day over 
day, to either protect the Capitol, to clean the Capitol, to help make 
sure that our operations are efficient and expedient to the extent that 
we can be. They keep the wheels on the bus, if you will.
  And along with all of our other Federal employees and so many that 
are being impacted by this shutdown, they haven't been paid since the 
1st of October, since the shutdown began, and the pressure points are 
real. I spend a lot of time talking to these people because they are, 
again, the ones that are making things happen here.
  And we are here on a weekend, and I am glad we are here this weekend. 
I didn't want to be. I didn't want to be here last weekend, but I said: 
Until the government is open, we should be here doing our jobs.
  And so I am glad that we are here, but I also recognize that this is 
not business as usual. This is not ordinary times. This is a Saturday. 
It is a beautiful day in Washington, DC, right now.
  And we have asked those who are our stenographers, those who are 
doing the photocopying, those who are outside guarding the doors to 
this entrance--we have asked everybody to be here. We have asked 
everybody to be here.
  The Capitol Building, the doors that are open this weekend--almost 
identical to what we would be doing on a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, 
Thursday, Friday. The doorkeepers who are outside, same schedule as 
usual. The Employee Assistance Program, same schedule as usual. The 
food services, a little bit pared down, but outside of some different 
hours, scheduled as usual.
  The ID office--do we really need to have the people who work at the 
Senate ID Office here on a Saturday and a Sunday?
  The media galleries, the parking operations, the photographic 
services--do we really need to have the Senate photographers coming in?
  Those people who have kids, whom they don't get to see during the 
week--we are now asking them to come in, be on standby here during the 
weekend, drive 45 minutes to come in.
  Printing and graphics. We need charts. Well, those folks are all 
still here.
  The Senate Post Office, the Senate recording studio.
  I care about the people who allow our operations to function, and I 
don't want us to grind them down. And so I am asking that our Sergeant 
at Arms, along with those who have the oversight--it is the Senate 
Committee on Rules and Administration--I am asking them to take a look 
at this list and to make sure that we are treating the people who stand 
by us with the degree of respect that they deserve during a really 
difficult time.
  We need to get the shutdown over, behind us, yesterday. But, in the 
meantime, let's think about those who are here.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Murkowski). The majority whip.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, first let me thank you for the 
wonderful remarks you just made on the floor, and I would hope that our 
Democratic colleagues were listening and would follow the advice that 
you have given. It was a good lesson in leadership and one that I think 
we all believe would be best if it were followed by all of America. 
Thank you very much, Madam President.

                          ____________________