[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 208 (Wednesday, December 10, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8594-S8597]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                               Healthcare

  Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, the Senate is talking a lot about 
healthcare right now for good reason. There are major cost increases 
going up on insurance all across the country but especially for some 
folks that are in ObamaCare Marketplace plans.
  I talked earlier this week with a gentleman from my State who is in 
his early sixties. He runs a small business, works his tail off. His 
insurance plan that he has taken on, he took on in the last few years 
because of the enhanced premium tax credit subsidies that were added in 
2021. Those temporary tax gifts to insurance companies expire in just a 
few weeks.
  Now, he knew that they would expire. As he told me in our 
conversation we had this week, he said he knew they were temporary, but 
now he is trying to figure out what to do to find affordable healthcare 
options for himself because his healthcare is going to go up about $500 
a month. That is an enormous amount.

[[Page S8595]]

  And his frustration was pretty clear. He is just looking for a plan 
that he can afford. He is just looking for an option. He is not asking 
for something unrealistic. He is just trying to figure out what to do. 
He asked me the question: How did we get here? How did this happen?
  Well, let me just walk through that because the interesting thing 
about all of this is how confusing it has really been in the process. 
Everyone that I talked to about healthcare, they all say: It is 
incredibly confusing. I can't figure out any of this.
  Let me try to explain just a couple of things we are talking about.
  My Democratic colleagues are asking for a multibillion-dollar 
extension, not of ObamaCare but of a subsidy that was put on top of 
ObamaCare. And it doesn't apply to 320 million Americans. It applies to 
about 20 million Americans. If I want to make it even more specific 
than that, it is not just 20 million Americans because most of those 
qualify for the full subsidy; it is just for a certain group--
typically, folks that are 50 to 64--that it applies to.
  It is that particular group that are on the ObamaCare Marketplace 
that are in that age bracket that are facing very high premiums that 
are coming up very, very soon. It is a big deal to them, as well it 
should be for any American.
  Let me set the context for this. The Kaiser Family Foundation lists 
the average cost for healthcare insurance on the individual market--the 
average cost for healthcare insurance on the individual market--at $215 
the year before ObamaCare came into effect. Let that set in for a 
minute. People in this room know how much your health insurance is now. 
If we went back to prior to ObamaCare's passage, the average cost for 
the individual marketplace for health insurance was $215. Not so any 
more. It has more than doubled--more than tripled for many people.

  President Obama said at that time that ``it will cut the cost of the 
typical family's premium by about $2,500 a year.''
  It has not been reduced for the typical family by about $2,500 a 
year. It has dramatically increased. It has become more and more 
complicated. There are more and more entities that are involved in 
healthcare decisions.
  And the challenge for healthcare right now is the absolute complexity 
that has been created in the cost that continues to overwhelm. That is 
where we are as the baseline that every American is facing right now.
  In 2021, my Democratic colleagues saw the skyrocketing costs. And in 
what they called the American Rescue Plan during COVID, they added in 
an additional subsidy on top of ObamaCare for about 10 million people. 
That was called the enhanced premium tax credit that got added on top 
of ObamaCare because the ObamaCare costs were skyrocketing so fast.
  They called it, at the time, a temporary plan to be able to help 
during COVID. But then a year later, they added another 2 years on top 
of it. That is now what is expiring at the end of this year, their 
temporary COVID extension. The problem is, the price continues to go up 
so rapidly that now no one can afford the plan anymore.
  In my State in Oklahoma, we asked our insurance commissioner to take 
a 6-year snapshot and tell us what is happening to the Marketplace, the 
ObamaCare Marketplace, without the subsidies. If the subsidies went 
away, what was the increase? And for the commercial insurance from my 
State, what changed during that time period?
  For ObamaCare, the rates had gone up 198 percent in 6 years. In 
commercial insurance in my State, it has gone up 29 percent--apples-to-
apples comparison.
  There is a very real problem with the structure of how ObamaCare 
actually works. The request has been: Let's put more subsidies on top 
of it, more subsidies on top of it and add billions and billions more 
in taxpayer dollars to cover up the problem that is underneath. There 
is a problem in the way that ObamaCare was actually created and how it 
is actually operating and what it is causing not just for that group in 
the Marketplace but for what it is causing for everybody else, even 
people that are not in the Marketplace at all--how that is driving up 
premiums.
  We are debating the next 24 hours, trying to be able to come to two 
sets of solutions here. My Democratic colleagues are bringing a 
proposal tomorrow to say: Let's just take the subsidies that we did 
during COVID and let's extend those 3 more years, and we will just do 
that, no reforms, no changes, no anything else. Let's just do that for 
3 more years.
  It was interesting. I asked about the 3 more years and the exact 
timing on that, how that would work. It is fascinating. When you pull 
back the politics of that 3-year extension, the 3-year extension goes 
through the end of 2028. But what they don't tell you is, it would 
actually set up to announce the new insurance rates for 2029 that would 
not have the subsidies anymore in it the week before the Presidential 
election in 2028.
  Well, that was clever. They set up a little political timebomb for 
the Presidential election in 2028, saying they chose this certain date 
in this certain time to do it so that right before the next 
Presidential election, we would have the same argument all over again--
no reforms, no changes, political date-setting.
  Republicans are actually bringing forward a proposal and saying: We 
see you. We see what has been dropped on you. We see individuals in my 
State and all over the country that have now fallen prey to what has 
happened in ObamaCare that they can't get options for different 
healthcare insurance, they can't get cheaper rates, and they certainly 
can't go back to what the rates were in 2010 at $215 a month anymore 
because under ObamaCare, if you are in the individual market, that is 
not allowed anymore. That is absolutely prohibited in Federal law now.
  So we have a very simple proposal: We do want to assist folks who are 
stuck in this ObamaCare Marketplace to try to figure out how we help 
them through this, but we don't want to send the dollars to the 
insurance companies. That is a hole. We want to send it to the 
individuals who are there and give them some greater choice on it.
  So our main proposal is, yes, we want to help them, and we want to 
help them immediately, but we don't want to send dollars to insurance 
companies and trust in them that it is going to be taken care of. We 
want to get the dollars to those particular individuals and say: Let us 
help you in this process and get through this next year as we, 
hopefully, reopen this whole debate about healthcare.
  The second thing that we want to do is increase the options for 
coverage for those individuals and increase them right away so that 
they get greater flexibility in what they can choose. We trust the 
American people as they are shopping in the marketplace for healthcare 
insurance to be able to make better decisions.
  Long term, what I would love to see is let's open up the conversation 
about how we have associations of healthcare plans. Right now, the 
small business owner I talked to earlier this week is limited to only 
choosing things in the ObamaCare Marketplace, and the price is 
absolutely skyrocketing for him. He doesn't have the option to actually 
join together with other small businesses to negotiate for a better 
rate. A big company can do that. If you are Walmart, you can do that, 
and if you are JPMorgan Chase, you can do that, but if you are my small 
business owner in Oklahoma, you cannot. They are prohibited from doing 
that. Well, that is ridiculous. They should be allowed to join together 
and be able to negotiate for better rates so they can get greater 
options on that.
  We want to help expand health savings accounts. Health savings 
accounts allow individuals to actually talk to their physicians or 
their hospitals and say: How much does this cost, and actually try to 
find a way to be able to compete for cost on it. Greater price 
transparency allows people to choose, if they have got to get an MRI, a 
CT scan, or whatever it may be, to say: What are the best options to be 
able to do this that actually bring the cost down?
  Most of the time when people go to the hospital, they never know what 
the cost is for anything. They have no idea because ``insurance'' is 
covering that until, suddenly, they don't, and then it becomes a big 
issue. That should be something we can all agree on as greater 
flexibility and greater options on plans do nothing but help people.

[[Page S8596]]

  There is an issue that I have worked on with several of the folks in 
this room, and that deals with pharmacy benefit managers. We have got 
to be able to actually land this. We all know of the rising costs of 
pharmaceuticals that are out there. We all experience that, and 
everybody says: What is the problem? It is the middleman in the middle 
of this who is actually controlling the formulary and controlling a lot 
of the pricing, and that completely hides the cost of everything on it.
  The pharmacy benefit managers are destroying our independent 
pharmacies in our rural areas all around the country as they continue 
to make more and more profits on Wall Street. We have got to say: We 
are not trying to destroy you, but you have got to stop destroying our 
independent pharmacies around the country, and you have got to actually 
be more transparent in the process on this.
  We have a bill that is a bipartisan bill that has come out of the 
Finance Committee that we have unanimous support for--tell me how often 
that happens in this body--but that we can't seem to get to the floor. 
We should be able to agree that, if someone is trying to dramatically 
jack up the cost of pharmaceuticals on our individual constituents and 
on the families in our neighborhoods and is destroying our independent 
pharmacies, we should all be able to agree that that is 
anticompetitive. That has got to stop. We should be able to do that.
  Listen, we already passed this last July--a $50 billion amount going 
to rural hospitals to stabilize those rural hospitals. We have already 
engaged in ways to be able to stabilize Medicaid in the long term and 
make sure that the program continues to work well. We have already 
taken on some of these things to be able to make things better. We have 
got to deal with the issue of individuals and their healthcare options 
and their opportunities to find better insurance to be able to take 
care of their healthcare.
  Let's increase competition, and let's increase options for 
individuals in the days ahead; but in the short term, let's at least 
get immediate assistance to those folks who need the help right now by 
giving dollars to those individuals, not by sending cash to the 
insurance companies and setting up a political timebomb right before 
the Presidential election. That doesn't sound like that is actually 
helping people. That sounds like that is perpetuating the same problem 
that we have dealt with already. These are options that we should be 
able to have grownup conversations about and resolve. There is a way to 
resolve this. Let's get busy doing it.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I am so pleased that my colleague from 
Oklahoma is on the floor and is talking about this issue that affects 
so many Americans. Indeed, in Tennessee, we have seen the impact of 
this.
  As my colleague mentioned, our friends across the aisle have done 
what we call kicking the can when it comes to healthcare. ObamaCare is 
too expensive to afford--that is something that has been proven--but 
instead of dealing with root causes, they are saying: Let's just extend 
the COVID-era subsidies for another 3 years, and then we will talk 
about it.
  He also mentioned triggering that date during a Presidential 
election--doing nothing to reform the abuse that you are finding in the 
system and just kicking the can and saying: Let's do these subsidies. 
Let's not worry about it.
  Well, you know, that is not something that Tennesseans are wanting to 
see, and as many have reminded me, they are the exact same subsidies 
that the Democrats used as a smokescreen to carry out their 43-day 
government shutdown. But at the end of all of this, they don't want to 
do anything about it even though we have information and have seen 
research that, by extending these pandemic-era subsidies--and by the 
way, COVID is over; the pandemic is over, but they want to continue to 
fund it like it is still going on. These subsidies have been plagued by 
waste, fraud, and abuse, and what they are doing would cost taxpayers 
$35 billion a year to do nothing more than line the pockets and the 
profits of insurance companies.
  We know that there is an incredible amount of fraud. There are 6.4 
million people fraudulently enrolled. We know that it is hard-working 
taxpayers who are paying for this and that the Democrats' solution 
would do nothing to clean up the program. It would do nothing to lower 
the cost of healthcare. It would continue the status quo, and 
individuals who are enrolled in ObamaCare would continue to see their 
costs go up.
  So what we have said is, the original ObamaCare subsidies--by the 
way, I want to be very clear on this. Those subsidies are law. They do 
not go away. The only things that are going away are the Biden-era 
COVID subsidies. The Democrats put those in place in 2021. They were to 
expire in 2022, but then they decided, no, let's make them expire on 
December 31, 2025. So they created this problem. They created the 
problem with ObamaCare. Not one Republican voted for it in either the 
House or the Senate, and now they have created another problem.
  They have done all of this because they didn't want to address the 
flaws that were in the program. Well, under the Biden COVID-era 
credits, people who were making over $500,000 a year could benefit from 
the taxpayer-funded subsidies. Originally, with the original ObamaCare 
subsidies, you get the credit up to 400 percent of poverty, but the 
Democrats said: No. Let's make it a free-for-all. Let's just get these 
out here, the zero premiums--yes, that sounds great; that is what they 
wanted to push for some people--and up to $500,000 a year in income, 
$500,000 a year. You, too, could get a taxpayer-funded subsidy to help 
pay for your insurance. Maybe 80 percent was paid or 90 percent was 
paid, but this is not what the American people want. Instead of 
lowering costs, these subsidies are continuing to prop up a very broken 
system, and that is why the cost continues to go up.
  Since 2013, the ObamaCare benchmark plan premium has increased by 
more than 200 percent. In Tennessee, you have seen about a 20-percent 
increase. Now, this ObamaCare plan is going up more than 300 times the 
rate of employee-sponsored plans, so the taxpayers are on the hook for 
this.
  So why is it that they continue to go up? It is because of government 
interference and the mandates that Democrats passed when they passed 
ObamaCare. It is too expensive to afford.
  During the Schumer shutdown, I spoke in this very Chamber about the 
fraud that was connected to the Biden COVID credits. Last week, the 
U.S. Government Accountability Office actually released findings that 
showed just how easy it was to commit fraud with these subsidies. The 
GAO conducted an undercover test. They had heard anecdotally about some 
of this fraud, but the GAO, which is nonpartisan, said: Let's get into 
this. Let's dive in. Let's do an undercover test.
  So they submitted applications for these Biden subsidies for 24 
fictitious individuals, for people who don't exist, with addresses that 
are not accurate and names and Social Security numbers that are not 
accurate. Each application had false and missing information on 
identities and incomes. They just made it up. So they ran their test. 
To their surprise--get this--they didn't have one or two people who 
were approved or even half of the people--a dozen--of these fictitious 
people who made it through. They had 23 of the 24 fake people approved. 
They had fake identities and fake income--nothing was real--but 
ObamaCare approved 23 of the 24 applications. The U.S. taxpayer who is 
footing the bill for this paid more than $10,000 a month to insurance 
companies to provide for these people who don't exist, for these 
fictitious enrollees. Think about that--$10,000 a month.
  A preliminary analysis by the GAO found that there were at least 
190,000 applications between 2023 and 2024 that had unauthorized 
changes by agents or brokers. That means people didn't know that they 
were enrolled or they didn't know that changes on income and personal 
data had been made to their applications. Over the same period, there 
were close to 100,000 duplicate Social Security numbers enrolled in the 
program. So you have a broker or somebody who is enrolling people. They 
get a Social Security number, and they are going to town with it. They 
are wearing that thing out.

[[Page S8597]]

  So you have got 100,000 duplicate numbers enrolled in the program. In 
one case, a single Social Security number--one number--was used to 
apply for more than 125 policies.
  I call that fraud. And I think it is amazing that ObamaCare is so 
poorly run that they are allowing this level of fraud and waste of your 
tax dollars, which are paying for every bit of this.
  This is a program that now our colleagues across the aisle are 
saying: We don't want to fix it. We just want to kick the can. We want 
to extend these subsidies for 3 more years because the program is 
really expensive.
  And why is it expensive? Waste, fraud, abuse, and government 
mandates. And ObamaCare is too expensive to afford.
  Now, Republicans have already started to address the root cause of 
the issue, and in the Big Beautiful Bill, there are provisions that 
require individuals who misstate their income to repay the excess 
subsidy amount in full.
  Requiring applicants to verify their income, their family size, their 
immigration status, and residence before enrolling ensures no one can 
abuse the system at the expense of American taxpayers.
  This is what you call old common sense. If you are going to go apply 
for a credit card or a loan at the bank, you have got to verify this, 
and you are going to be held legally responsible.
  Under ObamaCare, it is like nobody gave a ripping flip about what you 
put on the paper. Whatever you said, all right--there was no 
verification that was done.
  Republicans are also working on solutions to lower the cost--how 
about that one?--and to promote healthcare freedom, to let you, the 
patient, the individual, have more choice, more options, and make 
decisions that affect your healthcare.
  This week, our Finance Committee chairman, Senator Crapo, and the 
Health Committee chairman, Senator Cassidy, introduced legislation that 
would direct funds directly to patients, not to insurance companies. 
Well, how about that?
  Let's make certain that patients--patients--are the ones who receive 
those funds, not the insurance companies, because we have already 
defined the waste, the fraud, and the abuse that is taking place in the 
program.
  Now, doing this through health savings accounts and funding for cost-
sharing reduction payments, these are things that are positive, that 
would help to bring some transparency to the system.
  Unlike the Democrat proposal, which only further adds to our $38 
trillion in debt, the Crapo-Cassidy bill would drive down the cost of 
premiums and provide an off-ramp for the Biden plussed-up bonus COVID 
credits for individuals that were making six-figure incomes.
  Now, last week, I introduced a package of bills to support and expand 
Tennessee's Medicaid innovation, including the Medicaid Primary Care 
Improvement Act, which would allow States to use Medicaid dollars to 
pay for direct primary care arrangements, expanding healthcare access 
for Medicaid beneficiaries and improving outcomes.
  And we are introducing legislation that I have worked on for years to 
empower citizens to purchase health insurance across State lines and 
have portability on policies. If they get a policy that works, that 
they like, that they can afford, allow them to take that policy with 
them, regardless of where they live--again, common sense.
  We do know this: You have got to promote competition so that we can 
bring down prices and give consumers--individuals, patients--more power 
to price shop for affordable plans.
  Americans do not want the Federal Government in charge of their 
healthcare. They do not want socialized medicine. They do not want 
government-run healthcare plans. And they definitely do not want their 
hard-earned tax dollars underwriting fraud.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Banks). The Senator from Iowa.