[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 15537-15538]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           HEALTH CARE REFORM

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, Americans certainly want health care 
reform. There is no dispute about that. People are frustrated with the 
high cost of care, and many are worried about losing the health care 
coverage they already have. Some can't afford care or have to choose 
between basic necessities and the treatments they need. These are some 
of the things that are wrong with the current system, and they need to 
be fixed.
  But while all of us recognize that serious reform is needed, we 
should also recognize the necessity of getting it right. Before we rush 
to pass just anything in the name of reform, such as the bill 
introduced in the HELP Committee this week, Americans have a right to 
ask some very basic questions: How much will it cost? How will we pay 
for it? What will this mean for me and for my family?
  As to the first question, Americans have good reason to be concerned 
about what the bill would cost. The Congressional Budget Office 
estimates that just a portion--just a portion--of the HELP Committee 
bill would spend $1.3 trillion over 10 years. That doesn't even include 
major portions of the final proposal, including a massive expansion of 
Medicaid, which will cost untold billions of dollars. These are 
staggering amounts of money for taxpayers to contemplate, which is why 
it is troubling to a lot of people when we see committee members in 
such a rush to pass this legislation before the Congressional Budget 
Office even has a chance to fully estimate its cost. On something as 
important to the American people as health care reform, cost and 
effectiveness should be a higher priority than speed.
  But even if we decided this bill was the right reform, another 
question

[[Page 15538]]

arises: How would we pay for it? Most people don't walk onto a car lot, 
pick out the most expensive model, buy it, and then figure out how they 
are going to pay for it. Even if they wanted to, the car salesman 
wouldn't let them. We need to take the same approach here.
  The proposal we have seen is full of creative new ways to spend 
taxpayer dollars, but it offers little in the way of offsetting the 
cost of the overall bill. We will have to either charge the money to 
the national credit card or, more likely, raise taxes on working 
families--in other words, more spending, higher taxes, and even more 
debt. So far, some of the taxes under discussion include a tax on soft 
drinks and juice boxes, the creation of a new tax on jobs, and new 
limits on charitable donations. But this would just be the beginning. 
The HELP Committee bill would be hugely expensive by any reckoning, and 
no one has a plan to pay for it. This isn't a very good start as far as 
health reform is concerned.
  Americans are also right to wonder how these changes would affect the 
family budget. Will the HELP Committee's so-called reforms raise the 
health insurance costs for millions of families and businesses at a 
time when they are already struggling? This isn't a scare tactic or a 
theoretical question. Not only does the CBO estimate suggest the final 
bill is far too expensive, but we also have the example of States that 
have tried some of the proposals it suggests. Shouldn't we look at the 
experience of these States to determine whether we want to replicate 
these proposals nationwide?
  Take Kentucky, for example. Many of the same concepts embraced by the 
HELP Committee bill were tried 15 years ago in my State--with 
disastrous results. Instead of reforms that were promised, Kentuckians 
were left with higher expenses and fewer choices for health coverage. 
Instead of more affordable care, one report estimates that 850,000 
Kentuckians faced dramatically higher premiums. Instead of increased 
competition, about 50 insurance companies stopped offering individual 
insurance, leaving only a handful of private insurers and a government-
run plan that wasn't affordable for taxpayers. After years of failure, 
many of these so-called reforms were repealed but not without 
significant damage to the Commonwealth. While the market has rebounded 
some, Kentucky's small businesses and families tell me that a lack of 
competition in the health care market continues to keep prices high. 
Shouldn't this experience figure into our consideration?
  When it comes to our approach on legislation as costly as health 
care, we should learn from our experience with the stimulus. Democrats 
rushed that bill on the grounds that we needed it to jump-start the 
ailing economy. Yet a few months later we are already hearing 
outrageous stories of abuse and the unemployment rate actually 
continues to rise.
  When it comes to specific proposals within any so-called health care 
reform bill, we should learn from the experience of Kentucky. We should 
not be rushed into enacting so-called reforms that cost taxpayers 
trillions and could increase premiums to consumers.
  Americans indeed want reform, but they want us to do it right. They 
do not want a blind rush to spend trillions of dollars they and their 
grandchildren will have to pay for through higher taxes and even more 
debt.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.

                          ____________________