[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 2927-2929]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              HEALTH CARE

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, there have been a lot of issues brought up 
on the floor of the Senate recently, and two that seem to be front and 
center are the health care reform bill and questions related to our 
national debt and the annual deficits we run into.
  I have listened as many on the other side of the aisle have come to 
the floor and argued to do two things: first, kill the health care 
reform bill, and second, reduce our Nation's debt. Unfortunately, that 
is a mixed message, an inconsistent message, and it is one that

[[Page 2928]]

really defies logic. We know the increasing cost of health care is 
adding to the expenses of the Federal Government, State governments, 
and local governments. If we do not do something to suppress, if not 
reduce, the cost of health care, we are going to see a dramatic 
increase in our deficits.
  The bill before us attempts to create mechanisms to start bringing 
down the increase in the cost of health care. Anyone who would stand 
before you and say, well, if you pass health care reform, next year's 
health care premiums are going to go down, I do not think is telling 
the truth. I think it is likely they would go up. But what we are tying 
to do is slow the rate of increase. If the rate of health care 
inflation were the same as inflation in general, it would be a major 
step forward to come to grips with a real problem facing America.
  I have told the story on the floor about a local town in Illinois 
that spends 10 percent of its small budget--a $20 million annual 
budget--on health care premiums, and they have just been notified that 
next year the premiums on about 200 employers will go up 83 percent for 
health care. That is one small town, Kankakee, IL. The same thing is 
true in the State of Illinois with our State budget, where we face a 
fiscal crisis and the costs of health care, in the Medicaid Program in 
particular, continue to go up because of high unemployment. People who 
lose their health insurance at work turn to Medicaid, and it creates a 
greater burden for the State and Federal Government. So as the economy 
struggles and people lose their jobs, we have to view health care 
reform as part of the answer not only to family challenges and business 
challenges but challenges that face us at the Federal level as well.
  Health care costs take up a growing share of Federal and State 
budgets. In the year 2009, we spent an estimated $2.5 trillion on 
health care, consuming 17.3 percent of our gross domestic product. That 
is the sum total of all goods and services produced in America. It 
represents the largest 1-year increase in the health share of gross 
domestic product since we first started tracking it in 1960. If we do 
not pass health care reform to try to slow this rate of growth, the 
deficits each year will get worse. So those who come to the floor and 
say, kill health care reform, balance the budget, are really preaching 
an inconsistent message. It does not work. If we can reduce just 
slightly the annual increase in Federal spending on Medicare and 
Medicaid, we can see positive changes when it comes to our annual 
deficits.
  Economists agree. Twenty-three leading economists, including Nobel 
laureates and those who have served both Democratic and Republican 
administrations, identified four key measures that will lower cost and 
reduce long-term deficits. Health insurance reform includes all four of 
those measures--deficit neutrality, an excise tax on highest cost 
health insurance plans, an independent Medicare advisory board, and 
delivery system reforms.
  The Congressional Budget Office has scored the health care reform 
bill and says it will actually--at least the Senate version--reduce the 
budget deficit by $130 billion or more over the first 10 years and by 
$1.3 trillion over the next 10 years. We are waiting for the latest 
score of the bill, which could be forthcoming in the next day or two, 
but we hope it indicates the same thing.
  To fail to pass health care reform is to invite higher deficits in 
the future. We cannot have it both ways. You cannot stop the effort to 
bring down health care costs--at least the rate of increase in health 
care costs--and then preach fiscal conservatism. It just does not work. 
Those two messages are inconsistent.
  In terms of the use of the reconciliation procedure in the Senate to 
pass parts of health care reform, it is not a process that is unknown 
to us. Over 20 times we have used reconciliation to deal with major 
issues facing America. In fact, the Republican side of the aisle has 
used the process much more frequently than the Democratic side of the 
aisle. The programs that have been affected by reconciliation have 
often included Medicare and COBRA and the Children's Health Insurance 
Program. In fact, when President Bush wanted to pass his tax cuts for 
wealthy people, he used the reconciliation program and the Republicans 
supported it.
  Reconciliation has been used three times by the Republicans to 
actually increase the deficit. Out of 22 times reconciliation has been 
used since 1981, Republicans used it to increase our national deficit 
at least three times, all of those instances during President Bush's 
administration. In 2001, reconciliation was used to pass extensive and 
costly tax breaks, many of them benefiting the very wealthy. Those tax 
breaks increased the deficit by $552 billion over 5 years--Republicans 
using reconciliation to give tax cuts to the wealthy and increase the 
deficit. Reconciliation was used again in 2003 for tax breaks. Those 
breaks resulted in adding to the deficit $342.9 billion in red ink over 
5 years. Finally, reconciliation was used in the year 2005 to extend 
the tax breaks. That extension--that Republican reconciliation bill--
increased the deficit by $70 billion over 5 years.
  The health care reform bill we are considering will give middle-
income families the largest tax cut in history. What the Republicans 
fail to mention is that the money we are raising in health care 
reform--almost $500 billion--will flow back to middle and lower income 
families and small businesses to help them pay health care premiums. 
Killing health care reform, which is the agenda on the other side of 
the aisle, will deny these tax breaks and assistance to businesses and 
families struggling to pay health care premiums that are going up.
  We know America's business community will save under this approach 
and more Americans will be insured. The health care reform bill we are 
promoting will bring into coverage 30 million Americans currently 
uninsured. When the Republicans were asked: How many will you bring 
into coverage, they said 3 million. Well, let me tell my colleagues, 30 
million paying Americans, people who show up for care at hospitals and 
doctors' offices and actually have insurance is not only peace of mind 
for them but also stops the transfer of their expenses to other people. 
We currently provide charitable care for those who have no insurance 
and pass the costs on to everyone else. It is estimated that each of us 
has a hidden, indirect tax of $1,000 a year in health care premium 
costs to make certain we provide for the uninsured. The approach we are 
promoting in health care reform will provide coverage for these 30 
million and will stop this cost shifting and this hidden tax on 
families across America.
  Let me also say the provisions in this bill that are the most 
objectionable to the Republican side of the aisle mirror the health 
insurance available to Senators and Congressmen today. We have a plan, 
the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program, administered by the 
Federal Government--I guess we could call it a government-run plan, 
even though they are private insurance companies--and it requires 
minimum coverage in every plan so we know we will get protection. I 
haven't found any Republican Senator willing to step up and say, That 
is socialism; we shouldn't do it; I am going to cancel my Federal 
Employees Health insurance. Not one. They live with it. I live with it 
every day in protecting myself and my family. I believe it is fair. I 
believe every American and every business should be given this 
opportunity. The insurance exchanges offer to America what we as 
Members of Congress have enjoyed as an institution for over 40 years. 
If it is socialism to put it in this bill, then I hope my friends on 
the other side will stand up and personally condemn this socialism by 
dropping their Federal Employees Health coverage. That will be proof 
positive of their genuineness on this issue.
  Let me say as well in closing that many of the people who have come 
to the floor and suggested that reconciliation is some renegade 
procedure that is seldom used in the Senate have ignored the obvious. 
The fact that it has been used 22 times more often by Republicans than 
Democrats tells the story.

[[Page 2929]]

  I see on the floor the minority leader, the Republican leader Senator 
McConnell. He has voted for 13 of 17 reconciliation bills during his 
time in the Senate. He did not consider this procedure objectionable on 
13 different occasions when he voted for it. Senator Kyl, who is my 
counterpart on the Republican side, the Republican whip, has voted for 
11 out of 11 reconciliation bills during the time he has been in the 
Senate. In fact, every time reconciliation was used, the Republican 
whip voted for it. Senator McCain has voted for reconciliation 9 out of 
13 times since he has served in the Senate. It is a process that has 
been used repeatedly by both parties for major decisions: Health care 
cuts, COBRA insurance for the unemployed, children's health insurance, 
to name a few. It is something we acknowledge under our rules, and if 
it is part of the solution of bringing health care reform to an up-or-
down vote--at least this aspect of it to an up-or-down vote--it should 
be a process that most Republicans are familiar with because most of 
them have voted for it repeatedly.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________