[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 25069-25070]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      HEALTH CARE WEEK XIV, DAY 1

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I don't know of a single person who 
wants to see reimbursements cut to doctors who treat Medicare patients, 
but if Congress is going to step in and prevent it, we shouldn't do it 
by racking up more debt on the government's credit card.
  On Friday, the Treasury Department announced that the government ran 
a deficit of $1.4 trillion in the fiscal year that ended just a few 
weeks ago--a deficit about three times the size of the previous alltime 
high. This should have been a wake-up call but, instead, within days of 
the sobering proof of Congress's chronic inability to live within its 
means, Democrats in Congress want to borrow another $\1/4\ trillion to 
keep doctors from getting a pay cut. Republicans want to fix this 
problem as well, but there are ways to pay for it. When this matter 
comes before the Senate, Republicans will offer ways to pay for it 
without asking taxpayers to take on another $\1/4\ trillion in debt.
  It is perfectly obvious why Democrats want to resolve this issue 
outside the larger debate over health care. They are doing it so they 
can say their health care plan doesn't add to the deficit. It is a 
gimmick and a transparent one at that.
  Americans are tired of gimmicks and tired of Congress putting 
everything on the national charge card. We are not teenagers. Our 
parents aren't going to pay our bill at the end of the school year. The 
American people--our children and grandchildren--are the ones getting 
stuck with the bill. It is time we act as if we are aware of that.
  Higher debt is just one aspect of the Democrats' health care plan 
that concerns Americans. At the outset of this debate, everyone agreed 
on one thing: Any reform would have to address the primary problem with 
health care; that is, cost. Yet every day we hear about some accounting 
gimmick that is being used to conceal the true cost of this bill, and 
now we are hearing it will drive up premiums as well.
  The Director of the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget 
Office, Doug Elmendorf, indicated in recent congressional testimony 
that parts of the Finance Committee proposal would lead to higher 
premiums; in other words, that health care costs would go up, not down. 
As a result of the Democrats' latest health care proposal, that is 
exactly what will happen. This is a proposal that is only going to get 
more expensive as the process moves forward in closed-door discussions 
between a

[[Page 25070]]

handful of Democratic lawmakers and the White House. This is what the 
American people have feared all along, that lawmakers would lose sight 
of the purpose of reform and end up making problems worse, not better.
  The Finance Committee bill includes a new tax on health insurance 
that most experts, including the CBO, agree would be passed straight to 
consumers, leading to higher premiums. One estimate suggests this new 
tax on insurance plans will be passed on to families, costing them 
nearly $500 per year in higher premiums starting next year, long before 
any of the purported benefits of reform would take effect. The Oliver 
Wyman Group, an international management consulting firm, has also 
looked at how the Finance Committee bill would impact premiums in a 
number of States. This is important because every State has different 
insurance laws. In States such as Kentucky, Arizona, and Virginia, 
which have flexible insurance laws and generally lower premiums, the 
impact would be dramatic.
  Currently, the average family premium in those States is about $9,500 
a year. Under the Baucus plan, that premium is expected to rise to 
nearly $17,000. That is $7,500 more that the government is telling 
families they have to spend on health insurance. That is $7,500 these 
families can't use for the college fund or to plan for retirement. 
While the Baucus plan may subsidize some insurance plans, the subsidies 
likely will not be enough to offset these massive new costs imposed on 
many of these families.
  The bottom line is this: The Finance Committee bill has now been out 
for a few weeks. The experts are starting to estimate what it would 
mean for insurance premiums. What we have seen so far isn't good. This 
is precisely why Americans want us to debate these bills out in the 
open. This is why they want us to take our time until the true cost is 
known. This is why they should have ample time to look at proposed 
changes before Congress acts.
  We knew this proposal would raise taxes. We knew it would slash 
Medicare. Now we know it will raise health insurance premiums. 
Americans support reform, but higher premiums, higher taxes, and 
cutting Medicare, that is not reform.


                                Gag Rule

  Mr. President, the administration made a noteworthy admission over 
the weekend. In a late afternoon memo on Friday, the Department of 
Health and Human Services said health plans could now communicate with 
seniors about pending legislation that affects them. By lifting its 
prior ban on communicating the impact of Democratic plans for health 
care, the administration was admitting--admitting--the ban amounted to 
a gag rule, a gag rule that has no place in a society that prizes free 
speech and open debate. The administration's reversal is certainly 
welcome and, frankly, not unanticipated. However, many questions remain 
about the initial order itself and about the administration's 
willingness to constrain the free flow of information to seniors about 
their health care. The administration has admitted its error, though 
its proposed solution, frankly, needs further review.
  The fact is, what health plans were telling seniors is precisely what 
the Congressional Budget Office also said; namely, that Democratic 
health care plans could cause seniors with Medicare Advantage to lose 
benefits--the absolute truth.
  Americans believe strongly in the importance of the first amendment. 
I am glad to see the administration has recognized the error of its 
ways and rescinded this gag rule in the midst of such an important 
national debate.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KYL. 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.

                          ____________________