Sherrod Brown

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I say to my friend from Maryland, the Speaker asked me----

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I thank the Speaker. [[Page H 12211]] Madam Speaker, a month ago, Speaker Gingrich speaking about Medicare to a group of insurance executives, most of whom will benefit mightily from the Gingrich Medicare $270 billion in cuts to give tax breaks for the wealthy, said to this group, ``Now, we didn't get rid of Medicare in round 1 because we don't think that's politically smart, and we don't think that's the right way to go through a transition. But we believe that Medicare,'' parenthetically I would add, Madam Speaker, section 1862 which we are debating today and is part of Medicare, ``but we believe,'' Speaker Gingrich went on to say, ``that Medicare is going to wither on the vine.'' That is my concern, Madam Speaker, that we need to discuss this bill on the floor because 1862 is part of this bill, and I do not quite understand why people in this body are so afraid of quoting the Speaker of the House.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, what is the other party afraid of when I quote the Speaker? I do not understand. Maybe I am missing something, Madam Speaker, if you could clarify your ruling.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I thank the Speaker. I will make the nexus again that the Speaker, speaking to an insurance executive group in, I do not know, perhaps in Washington, in October, talking about section 1862 and Medicare as a whole, said, ``We don't want to get rid of Medicare''---- point of order

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. The ruling has been made in support of our position again, Madam Speaker?

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, it is not my fault that the Speaker was speaking to a bunch of insurance agents who are going to benefit by the passage of this bill and that he said that he wants Medicare to wither on the vine. I did not write his speech, Madam Speaker.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I have mentioned section 1862 in almost every sentence of my discussion here.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, it concerns me when we talk about section 1862 and we talk about this bill. Again I applaud the gentlewoman from Nevada [Mrs. Vucanovich], the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis], and the Committee on Commerce chaired by the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bliley] in their support of this legislation. I would hope that when we talk about Medicare and talk about section 1862 that we do look at the entire Medicare package. That is, are we going to save Medicare? Are we going to follow the words of the Speaker of the House who says that it is politically not smart now to get rid of Medicare, that is why we need the Gingrich plan now, so that we can begin the process of Medicare withering on the vine. That is what concerns me, Madam Speaker, that this entire bill, whether it is section 1862---- point of order

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time, the fact is that this order was made by the Chair because a Member asked for this, because it is pretty clear that some people in this House do not want to debate Medicare on this House floor, did not want to debate Medicare and have hearings in the Committee on Commerce, did not want to debate Medicaid and Medicare in the Committee on Ways and Means. We have wasted 15 minutes talking about nothing when we have a Speaker of the House who said, ``We don't want to get rid of Medicare in round one because we don't think that is politically smart. We don't think that is the right way to go through a transition.''

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Ward].

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, was all of this debate when the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis] raised his point of order, was that all subtracted from our time?

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California [Mr. Stark] for a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, when you talk about these pacemaker devices, you are talking about Medicare. You are talking about how you pay for these pacemaker devices, how Medicare pays. If Medicare premiums are increased, does that mean that if the Gingrich plan wants to go over 25 percent double over the next 7 years, does that mean that people will not be able to afford these pacemakers? I think it is a discussion, frankly, in spite of your misreading of the rules, I think it is a discussion that people in this country want to have, what they are going to pay for Medicare, what is going to be covered by Medicare, what regulations surround Medicare and Medicaid or whether it is the cost of premiums. That is a discussion that people in this country want to have, Madam Speaker, and it is a discussion that we have been denied in committee and it is a discussion that we ought to have.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I will do that, Madam Speaker, and I will continue to talk about how we correct Medicare, because part of this corrections day calendar is to correct one section of Medicare, and I think that the way to correct Medicare certainly is to pass this bill, and we will have a total of 1 hour of debate to do that. But as we move on, the real way to correct Medicare is not to destroy it by increasing people's premiums 25 percent and by making $270 billion in cuts in order to give major tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, we are talking about Medicare, we are talking about that section. I ran for Congress understanding that on the floor of the House you could talk about issues that affected people's lives and issues that affected the particular legislation you are working on. On this side of the aisle I control my 30 minutes. My friend from Florida can talk about what he wants in his 30 minutes.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, for months Speaker Gingrich has threatened to shut down the Government in order to score political points and to give tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country. The President has vetoed these bills because he is unwilling to increase Medicare premiums 25 percent and because he is unwilling to cut student loans to middle-class families. It is simply wrong to increase Medicare premiums and to cut student loans so that Speaker Gingrich can bestow huge tax breaks on the largest corporations and the wealthiest people in this country. Let us take Medicare and student loans off the table and work together in a bipartisan way to run the Government the way that it should be.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, for months Speaker Gingrich promised to shut the Government down so he could score political points. The Washington Times earlier this year said, ``House Speaker Newt Gingrich vowed yesterday to create a titanic legislative standoff with President Clinton by adding vetoed bills to must-pass legislation increasing the national debt ceiling.'' The Washington Times, in April of 1995, said the President will veto a number of things and will then put them all in the debt ceiling and then he will decide how big a crises he wants. Five months later leading up to this budget problem we are in now and this close-down-the-government threat, Speaker Gingrich said, ``I don't care what the price is. I don't care if we have no executive offices and no bonds for 30 days, not at this time.'' An Ohio Congressman, Ohio Republican Congressman said, If we close down, people will listen. An Ohio Congressman also said, I do not see the Government shutdown as a negative; I see it as a positive, if things get righted. A Nebraska Republican Congressman said, If we have to temporarily shut down the Government to get people's attention, then so be it. The question, Mr. Speaker, is, why are they doing this? What is the point of this? The answer is, the Gingrich plan [[Page H 12164]] cuts $270 billion from Medicare and billions of dollars more from student loans in order to pay for a tax break for the wealthiest people in this country. Say it again, the Gingrich plan cuts $270 billion in Medicare and billions more in student loans aimed at middle-class families in order to give a tax break for the wealthiest people in this country. Mr. Speaker, no Congress in our history, in the history of this country, has ever demanded an increase in Medicare premiums as a condition of keeping the Government open. What I do not understand is the feelings that some Members in this body have, notably the Speaker, toward Medicare. Medicare, Mr. Speaker, has been in effect for 30 years and a few months. It was created in 1965 when Lyndon Johnson signed the Medicare Act in July of that year. At that time 50 percent of America's elderly had no health insurance. Today between 1 and 2 percent of America's elderly have no health insurance. This is a successful program. It is expensive, but it has helped people live better and helped people live longer. It is a Government program that works. It is probably, very possibly, probably the Government program that has done the best things for the people of this country, perhaps of any program in the history of this country. Yet Speaker Gingrich said, speaking to a bunch of insurance executives who will benefit monetarily in a big, big way from the Gingrich Medicare plan, he said, ``Now, we don't want to get rid of Medicare in round one because we don't think that is politically smart. We don't think that is the right way to go through our revolutionary transition. But we believe that Medicare is going to wither on the vine.'' This is a man that took the oath of office to the people of this country. Yet all of us, I think, have an obligation to the people of this country to make sure that we honor the trust, the agreement between the American people and this Government that Medicare be there and work for people. Medicare works. It is a program that works. It has insured a huge number of elderly people in this country and made a difference in keeping their lives healthier and helping them live longer. The other attack from this Government, from the Gingrich budget and the Gingrich plan, is an attack on student loans and middle-class families. How can we look to the future when we are cutting, taking away the ability, reducing the ability of middle-class families in this country to send their kids to college. Whether it is Ohio State, whether it is a private school, whether it is Lorain County Community College, students have needed those student loans, they have two parents working oftentimes. Often the student himself or herself is working but they need those student loans in order to go to college, in order to get the kind of degree to compete with people around the world. Employers around Lorain County in my district, in and around Toledo and my friend from Lucas County's district and around Ohio and around this country, employers tell us over and over that they have got $8- and $12- and $15-an-hour jobs out there and sometimes they cannot find people qualified to fill them. We have got to continue to put, to move forward in global competition. We have got to ensure that students get loans. This Gingrich budget goes right at the heart of middle-class America in cutting and reducing and eliminating student loan programs. It simply does not make sense, Mr. Speaker. I ask again this House for a clean continuing resolution, a clean debt ceiling resolution. It is absolutely senseless to hold up the Government in order to cut Medicare and in order to cut student loans. Let us move forward on these clean resolutions. Let us debate Medicare. Let us debate student loans and see what the country thinks and make those decisions separately and move forward the way we were elected to do.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago this Congress cut $270 billion in Medicare while increasing Pentagon spending $7 billion more than the Pentagon itself even asked for. Why? The Speaker has said and the Republican majority has said they want to preserve and protect Medicare. They want to save it by cutting it. Let us look at a bit to history. In 1965, when Medicare was created, 87 percent of Republicans voted against its creation. In the next 20 and 30 years, Republican Members of Congress continued to try to cut Medicare. In this year, Speaker Gingrich said, now, we did not get rid of Medicare in round one because we do not think that is politically smart, but we believe it is going to wither on the vine. That is why they are cutting Medicare. They are cutting Medicare in order to let it wither on the vine and they are cutting Medicare in order to give $245 billion in tax cuts to the wealthy. Mr. Speaker, it simply does not make sense.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, last week the Gingrich plan passed Congress. If you make $20,000 a year, your taxes will go up. If you make 10 times that amount of money, you will get a several thousand dollar tax break. The Gingrich plan cuts student loans to middle class families and cuts Medicare $270 billion in order to pay for a tax break for America's wealthiest people. Why do they want to destroy Medicare? Listen to Speaker Gingrich's own words when he spoke to a group of insurance executives: Now, we didn't get rid of it in round one because we don't think that that's politically smart and we don't think that's the right way to go through a transition. But we believe it's going to wither on the vine because we think people are voluntarily going to leave it. Madam Speaker, that is wrong to want to destroy Medicare, particularly at the same time that you say you are trying to save it.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out to the gentleman who just spoke, under this bill the State of Illinois will lose $3.5 billion in health care for the elderly and disabled, mostly nursing home care, which will have to be paid for by hard-working, middle-class families, and his vote will increase taxes for thousands of middle-class families at the same time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, now I get it. Now I understand why the Gingrich majority believes this bill is good for middle-class America. The gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Heineman] recently noted those with incomes between $300,000 and $750,000 a year are middle class. I get it: The middle class that this reconciliation bill will help has an income of $300,000 a year. The Gingrich plan cuts Medicare to give tax breaks to people making one-half of a million a year. Why? Well, Speaker Gingrich told an extremist group of supporters of his, ``We don't get rid of Medicare in round one, because we don't think that would be politically smart. We don't think that is the right way to go through a transition. We believe it is going to wither on the vine because we think people are voluntarily going to leave it.'' Shame on them, cutting Medicare, trying to destroy Medicare to give a tax break to people making one-half of a million a year.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, the previous speaker, the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Ganske], my friend on the Committee on Commerce, his hospitals in and around his district will lose $241 million over the next 7 years because of the Gingrich Medicare cuts.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me time, and I offer my condolences to my friend from Washington State about the Seattle Mariners. More importantly, Mr. Chairman, I offer my condolences to the elderly in his district who will suffer some $31 million in cuts in services to them; and to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Portman], in his district, $67 million in the next 7 years will be taken from the elderly in the Cincinnati area; and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert], in his district, some $143 million will be taken from the elderly in that area.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, the previous speaker, under the Gingrich Medicare plan, the hospitals in and around the district of the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. McCrery], will lose $158 million over the next 7 years under the Gingrich Medicare cut plan. [[Page H 10334]]

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?