[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 14036-14038]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 6331

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, with regard to the Medicare issue upon 
which we just voted, we have had a number of discussions in the course 
of the week about the way forward. Senator Grassley has made it clear 
he would like to lead us in negotiations with the majority, represented 
by Senator Baucus, to bring us together to get this Medicare extension 
completed. The way to do it is on a bipartisan basis.

[[Page 14037]]

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of a Senate bill, which I will send to the 
desk. It is a clean 30-day extension of the Medicare payments bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read the 
third time, and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. We are seeing 
another partisan game being played on something that affects the 
American people.
  I have laid out in detail what this legislation does and what will 
happen to the American people if it doesn't pass. Obviously, the 
Republicans in the Senate have done what they feel is appropriate and 
that is to wipe out Medicare as we know it today.
  People can chuckle all they want, but the senior citizens in America 
today and the health care delivery system are not chuckling. This is 
very important.
  What has happened in this legislation tonight is detrimental to the 
health care delivery system, which is precarious at best even now.
  There are no winners in their game--the game of the Republicans. It 
is noteworthy here----
  Mr. McCONNELL. Is my good friend objecting to my request?
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am objecting, and I will use leader time 
to make a statement.
  It is obvious that everybody can see there were 59 votes in favor of 
this. We needed 60. They have played this game before, going only to 
59, and they are going to try to wiggle out of it some way. The only 
way to wiggle out of this is to accept this legislation.
  My friend, the Republican leader, said he wants Ranking Member 
Grassley to lead us to a bipartisan agreement. We have a leader. He is 
called the chairman of the committee. He is the chairman of the Finance 
Committee, Max Baucus, one of the most experienced Members of this 
body. And he also has some experience in the other body. He led us to 
what is the right thing to do.
  The majority of the Senate--in fact, 59 Senators--approved what we 
are trying to do today. I say to all my friends, even if this request 
were granted and I laid this out in some detail, the House would not be 
able to pass it.
  I wish I could use a better term, but I did not graduate from 
Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. This is a phony excuse, this is a phony 
exercise and leads us only down one path--no help for patients and cuts 
for doctors.
  By the way, I don't mean to disparage those schools. They are OK.
  If my Republican friends truly wanted to prevent the physician fee 
cut from taking effect, they would have supported passage of this bill. 
In the record that is now before this body are more than 200 
organizations that are begging that this legislation pass. This is the 
only bill we can send to the President in time to meet the deadline, 
the deadline that is established by law, July 1. The House did its 
work. They passed a bipartisan compromise by a 6-to-1 margin, 355 House 
Members to 59.
  Moreover, even if the 31-day proposal could be passed, it does not 
solve any problems. It is an administrative nightmare. Medicare 
physicians and the beneficiaries they serve want the House-passed bill. 
They are not served by this false proposal.
  I, of course, object, as I hope the record reflects, to this request 
and hope that my Republican colleagues will finally--one more, we only 
need one, one more Republican will do the right thing. I have said we 
are all here by virtue of being elected by our respective States. I had 
out here earlier today our Velcro chart, 79 filibusters. Is it any 
wonder that the House seats that came up during the off year--Hastert's 
went Republican, a Republican district that went Democratic; a seat in 
Louisiana that was a longtime Republican seat went Democratic. Is it 
any wonder that the State of Mississippi sent us a Democratic House 
Member? It is no wonder because they see what is going on over here.
  I am very sorry for the people of our country that this legislation 
did not pass. But I want the record spread--Democrats to the number, 
every one of us, except Senator Kennedy, who is ill, voted for this 
legislation. If Senator Kennedy was not ill, he would have been here to 
vote. He would have been the 60th vote. We understand they probably 
would have peeled off 1 and it would have been 59.
  The record should reflect that Democrats support this legislation 
because it is good for the American people. A majority of the Senate, 
59 Members of the Senate, voted for this legislation. We will be back, 
and my colleagues will have another opportunity to vote for this bill. 
It will be led by the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator 
Baucus.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I believe I have the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. The Republican leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I believe I have the floor.
  The path the majority leader just recommended we go down leads to a 
Presidential veto and an expiration of this law at the end of the week 
and a certain doc fix rejection. In other words, the doctors cut is 
going to go into effect at the end of this month because of this 
recalcitrant view, this excessively partisan approach that refuses to 
accept any input from this side of the aisle.
  We have all known the way forward. In fact, Senator Grassley and 
Senator Baucus working together started the way forward months ago by 
working together to get a bipartisan agreement, which is the way we 
have typically done these periodic Medicare bills. But, no, my good 
friend the majority leader jerks him back in and says: We want to do 
this on a strictly partisan basis. We don't care whether the President 
will veto the bill.
  Here we are a few days before the doctors receive this unconscionable 
cut, and the majority is saying it is more important to play politics 
with this issue, to brag about the fact there are 59 Democrats who 
voted to go forward, to talk, of all things, during the Medicare debate 
about who won special elections for the House of Representatives in 
Illinois, Mississippi, or Louisiana. What in the world does that have 
to do with the subject matter?
  The subject matter before us is not playing political games not 
bragging about the fact that every Democrat voted to go forward. We 
ought to be talking about the reality of this situation. And the 
reality is that the refusal of the majority to approach this issue on a 
bipartisan basis, as has been typically done in the past, will lead to 
a Presidential veto, a reduction in the reimbursement rates for 
doctors, an expiration at the end of the week. There is a way forward 
to get back together like we have typically done on this, and that is 
to approve a 30-day extension.
  My good friend the majority leader has just objected to an 
opportunity to prevent the physicians' reduction we all agree should 
not occur. He is objecting to it. So even the most casual observer 
could not miss the point.
  You have an opportunity to prevent the physicians' pay reimbursement 
reduction or let the law expire at the end of the week. That is the 
choice. It is perfectly clear.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am sure it was a Freudian slip--59 
Democrats voted for this. But next year at this time, there will be 59 
Democrats at least. We have a situation where we have a clear 
bipartisan piece of legislation. How bad could it be? Mr. President, 
355 Members of the House of Representatives.
  The Founding Fathers set up two equal branches within the legislative 
branch. The House is just as powerful as we are. They have every right 
to do what they think is right, as we do, and they, on a bipartisan 
basis, 6 to 1, passed this bill. We are not jamming anything down 
anyone's throat. The House of Representatives passed this on a 
bipartisan basis because it was the right thing to do. We have read 
into the Record the apology of one of the 59

[[Page 14038]]

who recognized he voted wrong, and he apologized.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, will the majority leader yield for a 
question?
  Mr. REID. In just a minute. A veto by the President? Gee whiz, who 
would be afraid of him? He has a 29-percent approval rating. How in the 
world could anybody be afraid of him vetoing a bill? I cannot imagine 
why anyone would care about that.
  We have tried to pass tonight on the Senate floor a bill we received 
from the House of Representatives that was approved by Republicans and 
Democrats. It has been through the committee process over there and 
over here as a result of all the work that has been done. And to think 
at this late hour, recognizing the House is not going to do anything--
the Speaker has told us that. They passed a bill 6 to 1. Why would we 
even think they would take anything? The Speaker and the majority 
leader of the House said: We are not going to deal with this anymore.
  We are going to have another opportunity--I want everyone over here, 
all my friends to understand that during the next 10 days, think about 
how you are going to vote on this the next time because you are going 
to have that opportunity. You go home and explain to all the 200-plus 
organizations whose names are in this Record right now, explain to them 
how you were doing the right thing because you were afraid President 
Bush was going to veto a bill.
  I will be happy to yield for a question.
  Mr. McCONNELL. When the President of the United States vetoes a bill, 
it doesn't become law, right, unless it is overridden?
  Mr. REID. Absolute truth.
  Mr. McCONNELL. So if the President vetoes this bill, it is not likely 
that the fix will be prevented at the end of the week; is that right?
  Mr. REID. I say to my friend and I say I don't know how many people 
are up here for reelection, but I am watching a few of them pretty 
closely, I say to all these people who are up for reelection: If you 
think you can go home and say, I voted no because this weak President, 
the weakest political standing since they have done polling, I voted 
because I was afraid to override his veto--come on.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. We probably don't need to prolong it much further, but 
in spite of the political observations of my good friend, the fact is, 
the President, as a matter of principle, will not sign this bill. At 
the end of the week, the doctors' reduction in reimbursement will go 
into effect. There is a way to prevent that, and that is to do a short-
term extension to give us an opportunity to do what we have done in the 
past on these measures, and that is negotiate a settlement. That has 
been prevented by my good friend.
  I think we have discussed this issue long enough. We have others 
waiting to debate the supplemental.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to 
proceed to H.R. 6331 is withdrawn, and the bill is returned to the 
calendar.

                          ____________________