[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1834-1835]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, the Affordable Care Act is working. It is 
working better, frankly, than many of us who were there at its 
inception believed it would at this early stage in its implementation. 
The numbers are pretty hard to argue with. You have got now upwards of 
10 million people who are on either private insurance with tax credits 
to help them get that coverage, or are on Medicaid through different 
State plans.
  That is a big deal, because in just about 1 year, we have reduced the 
number of people without insurance by 25 percent in this country. In my 
State of Connecticut, which probably has the best-run exchange in the 
country, we have actually reduced the number of people without 
insurance by 50 percent.
  Better news is the quality is getting better. Some of the 
measurements we most closely watch to decide whether people are getting 
better care--things such as hospital-acquired infections and 
readmission rates after surgery--are going down. That is really good 
news. Of course, maybe the best news of all is the taxpayers are saving 
money, an extraordinary leveling off of health care inflation.
  Health care spending never goes down from year to year. We used to 
have 7-percent to 8-percent increases in spending on an annual basis. 
We are now seeing 2-percent or 3-percent increases. In fact, the lowest 
rate of increase since we started tracking health care spending 
happened in this last year. Federal taxpayers are saving, on average, 
$1,000 per Medicare beneficiary compared to what the Congressional 
Budget Office thought we would be spending when we passed the 
Affordable Care Act.
  That does not mean we do not have a lot of work to do. But it does 
mean the conversation we should be having today is about perfecting the 
Affordable Care Act, making it work even better, not repealing the 
Affordable Care Act.
  It is not just me. I have been down to the floor over and over again 
to make this case, that the numbers simply do not lie. The press, 
universally, perhaps, reporting on this overwhelming avalanche of data, 
tells us that the Affordable Care Act is working. I literally in the 5 
minutes before I came to the floor did a quick search to see what 
people were saying. New York magazine: ``Four new studies. ObamaCare is 
working incredibly well.''
  Forbes: ``More solid proof that ObamaCare is working.''
  Washington Post: ``Despite the critics, ObamaCare works.''
  Business Insider: ``Major new study says ObamaCare is working.''
  Rolling Stone: ``ObamaCare: It's working.''
  I could do a full 10 minutes just on the headlines that tell you the 
Affordable Care Act is working. But instead of talking about making it 
work better, today we are talking again about repealing it. The House 
took, I think, their 56th vote to repeal all or part of the bill. This 
morning several of our colleagues unveiled a proposal to replace the 
Affordable Care Act.
  Now I give my colleagues credit. It has been 5 years. This is the 
first time we have seen even a memo on what would be this replacement 
we have been hearing a lot about. But it is still a memo, as far as I 
can tell. We do not have any legislative text or any CBO score. But I 
wanted to come to the floor and talk for a minute about what this 
replacement would mean.
  The replacement memo we looked at this morning, offered by two of our 
Senate colleagues and one of our House colleagues, all really 
thoughtful legislators on this issue--I want to give them credit for 
putting this on the table. It would really mean the retraction of 
health care coverage for millions of Americans. People who have finally 
been able to afford health care because of the Affordable Care Act now 
would go back onto the rolls of the uninsured.
  Why? Well, for two major reasons. Their plan reduces the number of 
people who would be eligible for the subsidies by millions, and then 
greatly reduces the amount of the subsidy. They

[[Page 1835]]

admit that is the best way to get coverage, so we are not arguing any 
longer, at least, over whether providing tax credits in order for 
people to buy private insurance is the right way to go about expanding 
coverage. They want to lessen the amount of money we are providing in 
tax credits, meaning a lot less people are going to get insured. So you 
would have millions and millions of people who would go back onto the 
rolls of the uninsured, people who would once again be at the mercy of 
insurance companies, would lose everything, their house, their savings, 
their car, just because their kid got sick.
  But the second thing it does is really puts insurance companies back 
in charge of our health care. It gets rid of the prohibition on gender 
rating, which is a complicated way of saying that in the old system, 
insurance companies charged women more just because they were women. 
The Affordable Care Act does not allow that any longer. But that is 
what we would go back to under this alternative. It used to be that 
insurance companies would say: You are only going to get a certain 
amount of insurance per year and then we cut you off. Well, for a 
family I know in Simsbury, CT, whose son has a fairly rare blood 
disorder, that meant they had to pull out of their savings every year 
in order to afford his expensive drugs. That discriminatory treatment 
would come back.
  While the bill tries to address the issue of preexisting conditions, 
it seems to say that you would have a one-time chance to get on an 
affordable care policy if you had a preexisting condition. But if you 
did not sign up in that opening moment, in that special offer, then you 
would not be able to sign up later on. So if you got sick later on, it 
would be too late for you, or if you lost your coverage at any point, 
like, on average, 89 million Americans have over the last 3 years, you 
would not get the chance to have insurance with a preexisting condition 
at the same rate as people without preexisting conditions.
  What this bill is about is people paying more and getting less. It is 
about going back to the day when people could not afford health care 
and they lost everything simply because they or a loved one, a spouse 
or a child, got sick. Never mind the fact that some of the pieces I 
thought we all agreed on are repealed in this proposal. The doughnut 
hole is an outrage, the idea that seniors who are trying to buy 
prescription drugs on Medicare get a little bit of coverage, then no 
coverage, then a lot of coverage. Middle-income seniors cannot afford 
that gap in coverage.
  Well, the Affordable Care Act effectively eliminates the doughnut 
hole. That has saved seniors $11 billion since 2010. This memo we have 
seen from the Republican side would apparently get rid of those 
savings, putting the doughnut hole back, putting millions of seniors 
back on the hook for all of these costs when they lose coverage. This 
effort to replace the Affordable Care Act is a giant step backwards for 
millions of American families.
  Here is the conversation we should be having: We should be talking 
about how to make this law work even better. It is a major concession, 
frankly, from the Republicans that tax credits are the appropriate way 
to get people more insurance. It is a concession that we should be at 
least addressing the issue of discrimination against sick people. But 
the protection they are offering is minimal, and the expense that would 
be passed on to seniors, families, hard-working Americans is immense.
  So I am looking forward to seeing this introduced as a piece of 
legislation. I am looking forward to seeing the CBO score on it. 
Clearly the American people do not want us to have this debate over 
repeal any longer. They are sick and tired of it. They want us to be 
talking about creating jobs, protecting this country, making college 
more affordable, and making small, meaningful changes to the Affordable 
Care Act to make it work even better.
  The data does not lie. The numbers do not lie. The increasing stories 
of people all across this country who are benefitting from the 
Affordable Care Act do not lie. The Affordable Care Act is working. We 
should stop having this tired debate over repealing it and replacing it 
with something that is much lesser coverage for much more cost and 
invest in a conversation about how to make sure the good news continues 
about the Affordable Care Act working for millions of Americans.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________