[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 13472-13475]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               OBAMACARE

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about 
a new CNN poll that came out yesterday. It says support for the 
President's health care law appears to be ``waning.'' CNN polling 
director Keating Holland talks about this. He says that support has 
dropped in virtually all demographic categories, but it has fallen the 
farthest among two core Democratic groups: women and Americans who make 
less than $50,000 a year.
  He goes on to say:

       Those are also the two groups that are most likely to pay 
     attention to health insurance issues and possibly the ones 
     most likely to be affected by any changes. That may be 
     particularly true for lower-income Americans who are most 
     likely to have part-time jobs, be on Medicaid, or not 
     currently have health insurance and thus be the first to have 
     to navigate the new system.

  So there is the story from CNN polling yesterday: Support for the 
President's health care law appears to be waning.
  I have spent a lot of time, as the Presiding Officer has, over the 
last month traveling around my State, listening to constituents, 
hearing what is on people's minds. That is what I did back in Wyoming 
over the last month. I do it every weekend, meet with lots of people. 
We have had lots of county fairs and rodeos, townhall gatherings.
  One thing that came up just about everywhere I went was the concern 
that so many folks still have about the President's health care law. 
Some are confused, many are upset, and many more are angry, angry that 
the law is doing serious damage to middle-class jobs and to people's 
paychecks. Even the insurance coverage many people already had and 
liked, there are things they are going to lose.
  Republicans have warned from the beginning that the President's law 
created too much redtape, too many new taxes, new fees, and expensive 
mandates. As a result, people are going to end up paying a lot for 
health insurance.
  Well, for months now, Americans have been seeing exactly that. One of 
the latest numbers that really stuck out was from Delta Air Lines. They 
say they are going to be paying about $100 million more to cover their 
employees next year. All of the mandates in the health care law, the 
President has said so many of these are free. They are not free. 
Somebody has got to pay for them. Just covering workers' children up 
until age 26--it is about 8,000 young people covered by Delta Air 
Lines, added to their policy--is going to cost them an extra $14 
million next year.
  Remember, the President said health care costs were supposed to go 
down, not up. He also said that for 85 to 90 percent of Americans who 
already have health insurance, the only impact, he said, of the law was 
that their insurance was better than it has ever been before.
  Well, that does not seem to be the case. All you need to do is pull 
out today's New York Times business section, first page, B-1, above the 
fold, ``Unions' Misgivings on Health Law Burst Into View.'' Labor 
delegates level criticism at Congress and the President. It seems the 
President's promises to people who believed him that they could keep 
what they had if they like it--they are now saying: Mr. President, 
something has to change here. You know, you have not leveled with us. 
What we are seeing now coming out of this administration is not what 
you promised us.
  It is not just the New York Times. Today's Investors Business Daily, 
above the fold, first page, ``ObamaCare Hitting Union Members--And 
They're Upset.'' Unionized part-timers losing health insurance; full-
timers losing hours. That is not what the President promised.
  What this means is people are not just losing their health care, 
their insurance, it is affecting their jobs and it is affecting their 
paychecks.
  Another step some employers have had to take is to drop coverage for 
spouses who can get their insurance elsewhere. The President said that 
was not going to happen. He said, if you like the insurance you have, 
you will be able to keep it. But once again the President has failed to 
see how much harm his health care law will do to middle-class 
Americans. Those hard-working people are now paying the price. In a 
recent memo to employees, the shipping company UPS said it plans to 
exclude 15,000 spouses from its insurance plan. They cited the health 
care law as the top reason for the switch.
  It is not just businesses. The University of Virginia recently 
announced plans to drop spousal coverage for some of its employees too. 
The President is berating colleges about the cost of tuition, but yet 
his own mandates are making it more expensive for colleges to provide 
insurance for members of their faculty. So, of course, they pass those 
costs on to the students. The school said the President's health care 
law would add $7.3 million to the cost of its health plan in 2014. So 
just like UPS, if a worker's husband or wife can get insurance from 
their own employer, the University of Virginia will not be covering 
them anymore, even if it is insurance that they have and they like, the 
President said they could keep. The school directly laid some of the 
blame on the health care law. It is not something the President 
admitted might happen, and it is not something he is eager to talk 
about now.

[[Page 13473]]

  He is also not eager to talk about his promise to cut the price 
people pay for insurance. President Obama promised that by the end of 
his first term he would lower people's premiums by $2,500 per family 
per year. He did not say this once; he said it over and over, at least 
19 times. He did not misspeak. It was a practiced line, an intentional 
line, an intentional part of his stump speech.
  He did not say premiums would go down if Congress passes a perfect 
law that takes effect the first day in office. He did not tell the 
audience it would be $2,500 less than the projected rate of growth 
someone estimated we would have otherwise. He chose to ignore all of 
that, to leave out every caveat he could have included. He said, $2,500 
less by the end of his first term, period.
  Every person, every audience, knew what the President was promising. 
Well, now we know President Obama broke that promise, like so many 
others. He and his supporters should stop trying to explain it away and 
admit they failed.
  According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, the average family premium 
has soared by almost $3,000 since the President took office. That is 
not a prediction about what will happen over the next 4 years; it is a 
simple, indisputable fact about how much more people are already 
paying. So you have people who are losing their insurance plans that 
the President's health care law taxes too heavily. You have other 
people losing the insurance they have now because employers are 
dropping coverage for spouses. You have some people who will keep their 
insurance but they are going to have a lot less money in their paycheck 
because costs are going up, thanks to the health care law. You have a 
lot of people the President's health care law is really hitting in the 
wallet. It is because we are continuing to see towns and counties and 
school districts having to cut back the hours of their workers. They 
need to keep more employees at a part-time status in order to reduce 
the burdens and expenses of the health care law. Over the past month, 
even more places have had to take these steps.
  Middletown Township in New Jersey said they would cut the hours of 25 
people. A county in Texas said it would do the same. Another county in 
Florida figured it would cost them more than $1 million to cover all of 
their part-time workers under the health care law. So they are already 
reducing the hours for some of these people and they are planning to 
make additional cuts.
  The Obama administration is brushing off these reports. They are 
saying it is only anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal? These are not 
anecdotes, these are people's jobs. One of the analysts out there found 
258 different employers have cut work hours, cut jobs, or taken other 
steps to avoid ObamaCare's costs--258 employers across the country, 
many of them school districts, counties, communities, some private 
businesses, and more are coming forward every day. They are limiting 
the hours they can pay busdrivers, librarians, coaches, substitute 
teachers, and middle-class workers. The Obama administration says, 
everything is fine because some of these workers will get a subsidy to 
help buy their expensive insurance.
  Well, the people I talk to are not looking for a subsidy, they are 
looking for a job. They are looking for more hours. They are looking 
for the ability to take home a paycheck comparable to the paycheck they 
may have had last year but it is going down because their hours have 
been cut. They want the Obama administration to stop making it so tough 
for them to find full-time work. They want to go back to the insurance 
they had before the President's health care law went into effect. 
Instead, they are getting more bad news, more signs that the health 
care law is a trainwreck that is going to hurt the middle class even 
more.
  We all knew the health care system in this country had problems and 
needed to be fixed. Costs were rising year after year. Too many people 
were having trouble getting the care they needed. Democrats could have 
sat down with Republicans to write a law to help those people. Instead, 
President Obama and Democrats in Congress, who were in charge of the 
House and the Senate, passed their plan, a one-sided plan, a plan that 
today is failing the American people. They did it without Republican 
support, and they did it without seriously considering our ideas.
  Washington Democrats promised reform, but the reform they promised is 
not what is delivered in this 2,800-page health care law. With over 
100,000 pages of regulations, it is hard for anyone to understand or 
comply with.
  Republicans have voted to repeal this failed law and start over with 
reforms that solve the biggest problems families face today. We are 
going to keep trying to get that done. If Democrats are serious about 
helping middle-class Americans, they will join us.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. COATS. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, since its inception, ObamaCare has remained 
consistent in one regard: an alarming pattern of delays, glitches, and 
overturned provisions, not to mention failure to meet certain promises 
that were made when this bill was passed.
  First, Congress repealed the law's 1099 mandate after realizing this 
provision would drastically increase expenses on every business, 
charity, and local government entity. Then Congress repealed the law's 
long-term care program in 2012 after the administration admitted this 
wouldn't work.
  Next came a slough of waivers. Rather than admit ObamaCare would 
drive up costs, the administration created a program that has granted 
more than 1,700 waivers covering more than 4.1 million people. A lot of 
other Americans are saying: Hey, how about our waiver? Why did these 
1,700 waivers covering 4.1 million people go to them and not to us?
  Even meeting its own deadlines for implementation seems to be too 
difficult for the White House. According to the Congressional Research 
Service, as of May 31, 2013, the administration had yet to meet half, 
only 41 of 82, of the deadlines legally required by the Congress under 
this legislation.
  But in June 2013, President Obama claimed: ``I think it is important 
for us to recognize and acknowledge this is working the way it's 
supposed to.''
  Really? There are 1,700 waivers for people who couldn't comply with 
this, repeals enacted by Congress, and it is working the way it is 
supposed to? Is that what they intended when they passed the bill? It 
is not what they promised. A month later the President's team announced 
the delay of another key ObamaCare component, the employer mandate--a 
1-year delay--while maintaining implementation of the individual 
mandate. Individuals, yes; employers, no.
  We know they are not able to comply, that the downside of complying 
with this under this timetable doesn't work, so we force individuals to 
comply with the law and the mandate to buy health insurance or pay a 
tax, but we take that burden away from employers. Is that fair? Is that 
fair, to give it to part of the country, give it to employers? How 
about the other half, the employees? How about the other individuals 
who don't fall under those plans? Yesterday the nonpartisan 
Congressional Budget Office released a report of 19 instances in which 
portions of ObamaCare had been changed, rescinded, repealed, or 
delayed--19 separate times when it has either been changed, repealed, 
rescinded, or delayed.
  The report specifically found the President has signed 14 laws, 
several of these with multiple provisions, that each amend, rescind, or 
repeal part of ObamaCare. The administration also has delayed at least 
five significant provisions of the law.
  What does all of this tell us? It tells us that even the President 
and his administration recognized the health care law they wrote and 
they passed--not one single vote of support from the opposing party. 
They recognize this is not going as promised or planned.

[[Page 13474]]

  Recognizing the impact his health care law is having on job creators, 
the President decided to give relief to businesses. As I said before, 
don't all Americans deserve the same break? Don't we all deserve some 
relief?
  While it is a necessary step, even the delay of the employer mandate 
came too late for many Hoosiers, whose companies have been forced to 
drop employees or cut back their hours to less than 30 hours per week, 
the threshold at which ObamaCare kicked in for companies.
  In recent weeks newspapers across Indiana had been filled with 
stories of companies and school systems that have reduced hours to 
avoid the ObamaCare requirements. All this is coming at a time of 
continued, chronic, high unemployment. People are working two and three 
part-time jobs to keep their heads above water, only to barely keep the 
bills paid at a time when our economy is growing at half the rate it 
should.
  We are not putting people back to work and people are actually 
dropping out of the job search category. We add this burden on them.
  Let's take a moment and consider the contrast between these reports, 
the promises made by those who authored and those who have supported 
and voted for it. This administration continues to say it is working as 
planned.
  When President Obama signed his health care reform package into law 
back in March 2010, he said the reforms would ``lower costs for 
families and for businesses'' and ``help lift a decades-long drag on 
our economy.''
  A law that was supposed to help workers, employers, and families in 
our economy is, instead, doing the exact opposite. I have heard the 
same sentiments over and over--and I continue to hear from Hoosiers as 
I travel across the State--this law is not helping, it is hurting.
  We need to repeal this law and replace it step by step with reforms 
that lower costs, increase access to care, and empower patients, not 
bureaucrats in Washington.
  I have voted more than two dozen times to repeal, defund, and strip 
provisions from ObamaCare. It is a principle I share with all of my 
colleagues on the Republican side, and I will continue to support these 
efforts.
  However, I believe the best way to stave off this coming train 
wreck--as described by a Democratic Senator who was instrumental in 
writing the bill--is to delay implementation of the ObamaCare mandates 
for 1 year.
  The President has already determined he is going to delay the 
employer mandate, so let's add to that the delay of the individual 
mandate which essentially delays the implementation of this law for a 
year so we have the opportunity to do what we need to do legislatively. 
We need to repeal this law and replace it with sensible legislation--
rational and cost-effective legislation--that actually addresses the 
problem we are dealing with. It also gives the American people a chance 
to basically tell the White House: This ain't working.
  We need to make a difference here. This can be an issue American 
people can debate throughout 2014 while it is delayed and then express 
their concerns at the ballot box in November of 2014.
  As a consequence of this, I have introduced legislation, supported 
now by over 30 Senators, which would delay the individual mandate until 
January 2015. I am pleased the minority leader, Senator McConnell, has 
agreed to take up this bill to lead the effort, to join me in not only 
having this body examine this bill, debate it, and vote on it, but to 
join the House, which has already passed.
  My Indiana colleague in the House, Congressman Todd Young, introduced 
this legislation in the House of Representatives, and it passed with 
bipartisan support. Even the members of the President's own party have 
recognized this train wreck that is coming and have chosen, in 
significant numbers, to support the Republican effort of my colleague 
from Indiana, Congressman Young.
  I am carrying this ball here in the Senate. I am pleased the minority 
leader, as I stated, Senator McConnell, is willing to take this up. We 
already have the support of more than 30 Senators, and I expect that 
will grow and hopefully it will be bipartisan support.
  The bill is identical to legislation the Republicans passed in the 
House. I am proud that fellow Hoosier Congressman Todd Young has 
authored that bill.
  If Democrats, Republicans, and a majority of the Americans agree this 
law is not working, then let's do something now before ObamaCare's full 
impact on our economy takes effect.
  I urge the majority leader to allow a vote on this amendment that 
will be offered and give all Americans the same protection this 
administration has provided to businesses--to give that to individual 
Americans. After all, it is simply a matter of fairness. The 
administration, having decided to waive for a year the implementation 
of the employer mandate, needs to waive for a year the implementation 
of the individual mandate in fairness to the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. FLAKE. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. FLAKE. I come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to do 
everything we can to ensure ObamaCare is delayed. Like the Senator from 
Indiana who just spoke, we know this law is not ready for prime time. 
The President has delayed certain parts of it, a number of parts of it.
  The individual mandate has been delayed. If we are going to delay the 
employer mandate, it would make sense to delay the individual mandate 
as well.
  I have introduced S. 1490. This would delay by 1 year all provisions 
of the Affordable Care Act that are supposed to take effect on January 
1, 2014, or later.
  In addition, it would suspend all taxes, including the tax on medical 
devices associated with the law for 1 year.
  I am also a cosponsor of the legislation introduced by Senator Coats. 
The minority leader has offered this legislation as an amendment to the 
energy efficiency legislation which is on the floor now. It would also 
delay the individual employer mandates for 1 year.
  Like many of my colleagues, I have opposed ObamaCare from the 
beginning. I have voted against this legislation time and time again. I 
think the count is 37 times in the House to repeal it. Obviously I did 
not support it in the first place. Even the law's strong advocates 
agree there are issues with implementation under the current timeline 
and that a positive immediate next step for all Americans would be to 
delay this harmful law.
  January 1, 2014, marks a rollout of some of the most fundamental 
parts of the law. The CBO estimates some 37 million will join the 
individual exchanges that are scheduled to open their enrollment period 
in less than 3 weeks from now, and all of our constituents will start 
feeling the pain if the law isn't ready from the outset. As I 
mentioned, even the President has conceded the health care law is not 
ready by issuing a combination of waivers and delays for certain parts 
of the law.
  He did it for the employer mandate a while ago. If we do it for the 
employer mandate, it makes sense to do it for the individual mandate as 
well. Because of the delay of this employer mandate starting in 2014, 
many individuals will be using the honor system to verify their income 
and whether they have access to employer-provided health coverage. 
Without an appropriate verification system in place, individuals will 
have an incentive to report a lower income to receive more subsidies 
than they qualify for. This will ultimately raise the cost for everyone 
else.
  On the individual exchanges, just 2 weeks ago HHS delayed the signing 
of final agreements for insurance plans that are going to be sold on 
the exchanges starting October 1. This comes on top of a report issued 
by GAO this past June cautioning that the health care law could miss 
the October 1 open

[[Page 13475]]

enrollment date because of missed deadlines and delays in several 
areas. The administration has also delayed the cap on out-of-pocket 
expenses that was intended to go into effect in 2014.
  If this wasn't enough, there are also privacy and fraud concerns. 
There is great apprehension over the new Federal navigators who are 
hired by the Federal Government to help individuals weed their way 
through the new paperwork and enrollment guidelines of the Affordable 
Care Act. These navigators receive no antifraud training, and the 
administration recently announced the training for these individuals 
would be reduced from 30 to 20 hours. Further, these individuals will 
have access to consumers' private and personal data without having any 
minimum eligibility criteria or background checks.
  I could continue to list the pitfalls this law has already faced, but 
the point is clear: The law is simply not ready for prime time. 
Implementing this law before it is ready will only force taxpayers into 
a system riddled with potential fraud, certain gridlock, and increase 
costs for all. As lawmakers, we have a responsibility to our 
constituents. If a law is not ready, we need to delay it for everyone. 
That is why I urge my colleagues to support the minority leader's 
amendment coming up on this legislation on the floor today and any 
other legislative vehicle to grant taxpayers a 1-year delay for the 
Affordable Care Act to ensure the least harmful path forward.
  Simply put, I believe a total delay of ObamaCare is the fairest way 
and most realistic plan to prevent the law from wreaking havoc on all 
Americans.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I strongly support the previous two 
speakers in their attempts to delay a law that is clearly not ready for 
prime time. In that spirit, I again put forward my proposal to make 
sure there is no Washington exemption from ObamaCare. This, I believe 
more than anything else, will ensure that Washington doesn't impose 
something unduly burdensome--not ready for prime time--on America if it 
is living under the same rules.
  Unfortunately, that is not the case right now. This special OPM rule, 
which was made up out of thin air, in my opinion, and unveiled in draft 
form a little over 1 month ago, creates a huge Washington exemption--a 
special deal--particularly for Members of Congress and our staff.
  We need to say no Washington exemption, and my amendment on the bill 
that is on the floor now, and my separate bill of the same substance, 
the No Exemption for Washington from ObamaCare Act, will do just that. 
It will say all Members of Congress, all congressional staff, the 
President, the Vice President, and all of their political appointees 
have to go to the exchanges for their health care--the fallback option 
for every American--and they have to do that under the same rules, 
under the same parameters as every other American does--no special 
deal, no special exemption, no special subsidy.
  I urge my colleagues to support this measure as an amendment on the 
bill that is on the floor now or as a freestanding bill.
  With regard to the posture of the bill on the floor now, I have no 
desire to hold up any other amendments. I am eager to move forward with 
those amendments and with mine. I simply need assurance that my 
amendment will get a fair vote, particularly before October 1. This is 
very time sensitive because October 1 is when the OPM rule will 
otherwise take effect. I am eager to come to an agreement so all of us 
can move forward with this proposal and this vote and others in a 
constructive way, and I look forward to that happening.
  I would add this doesn't have to happen on this bill. This can happen 
regarding my stand-alone bill or in other ways, as long as that is 
assured before October 1.
  I yield the floor, and 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. WYDEN. 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.

                          ____________________