John Barrasso

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. I also heard the majority whip come to the floor and say the Republicans have only offered four amendments. I offered 19 amendments. So I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that I be allowed to call up my amendment No. 3148 to protect individuals facing skyrocketing premiums.

Mr. BARRASSO. The purpose of this amendment is----

Mr. BARRASSO. Regular order.

Mr. BARRASSO. So we have a 383-page amendment brought to the floor, read on the floor yesterday. I worked my way through it, along with my staff--383 pages. And the majority whip comes to the floor and says the Republicans have not offered amendments. I just tried to offer one, unsuccessfully, and it has been objected to. So I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that I be allowed to call up amendment No. 3153 to protect young, healthy persons from increased insurance premiums.

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending--and these are--I just heard the comments--these are amendments that are aimed to keep the President's words that we will get insurance premiums under control, people will notice their premiums go down, that we will make it better for people, easier for people. The Democrats ought to accept all these amendments because they are intended to do just that. I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that I be allowed to call up amendment No. 3146. This amendment deals with individual mandate penalties and creates personal accounts for young people who are penalized and they have to pay a fee and a fine if they do not obey the individual mandate, and that would go into an account for them so they could use that money to buy their own health insurance.

Mr. BARRASSO. Regular order.

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I understand this is going to improve Medicare. I heard the chairman of the Finance Committee say this is going to make Medicare stronger. I believe Medicare patients ought to have the freedom to contract and the right to privately contract for medical services with the physician of their choice. If, as the chairman of the Finance Committee has now recommended in his statement, it doesn't work out the way it is suggested--I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and I be allowed to call up amendment No. 2984, Medicare patient freedom to contract.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Following along what the Senators are saying, that is why the support of the American people for the bill is at an all-time low. It is at the lowest level of support ever. According to this NBC poll, fewer than one out of three Americans support this bill. They don't know all that is in it, but they don't like what they see so far, because they believe, in overwhelming numbers, that the cost of their own care will go up, that this will add to the deficit, it will hurt the economy, and their health care would actually be better if we pass nothing. So why would the American people support a bill that is going to cost them more personally and when their health care will get worse? That is not the value the American people have ever wanted. That is what I hear from patients at home, and it is what I hear on telephone town meetings. That is what we are hearing in all of our States. This is what the American people continue to say: Do not pass this bill. As our leader said, we do need health care reform, and Dr. Coburn certainly knows that. But it is not this reform that we need.

Mr. BARRASSO. The American people are saying: Don't cut my Medicare, don't raise my taxes, don't make things worse than they are right now, and this bill cuts Medicare, raises taxes, and for people depending on a health care system in this country this makes things worse.

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I agree completely. As a practicing physician taking care of people in Wyoming for 25 years, I have great concerns about this bill, what we know for sure is in it, which is $500 billion of cuts in Medicare to our patients who depend on Medicare, and that is a system that we know is going broke. That is why there is a front-page story in one of the Wyoming papers: ``Doctors Shortage Will Worsen.'' It is going to be harder on rural communities and others around the country if this goes through, and we know that because the folks who have looked at the parts of the bill we have seen have said that one-fifth of the hospitals in this country will be--if they are able to keep their doors open--operating at a significant loss 10 years from now. That is not the best future for health care in our country. I had a telephone townhall meeting. People from all around the State of Wyoming were calling in and asking me questions, and they asked: What is in the bill? What is coming to the Senate? We don't know yet. We haven't seen it. They said: Well, when you find out, come home and let's have some more townhall meetings so we can have some input. That is what we ought to do as a Senate. We ought to know what is in the bill and then let us go home and share it with our friends so they know. Because right now what the American people have seen of this bill, the 2,000-page bill, they rightly believe this will increase the cost of their own personal care.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. I am grateful to the Senator for bringing this up. I had a telephone townhall meeting last night, and this specific motion the Senator is bringing today came up with great praise from the people of Wyoming who said: She is doing it right, leading the good fight. After I answer the question, I will ask: How do we know the money is even going to be there? That is the question that came up in my telephone townhall. People of Wyoming are concerned, if this passes, it will make health care harder for people in rural States, such as Wyoming and Montana. My colleague from Montana is on the floor. The doctor shortage will worsen. This is the headline on the front page by the Wyoming Tribune Eagle: ``Doctor Shortage Will Worsen.'' There is a lot of concern for the folks in Wyoming and communities where there is a sole hospital, a sole physician provider trying to recruit nurses and physician assistants and nurse practitioners. The doctor shortage will worsen as we see a situation where they will be cutting Medicare $500 billion, raising taxes $500 billion, and people who had insurance on this telephone townhall were very concerned that their insurance premiums are going to go up, in spite of the fact that the President has promised families would see insurance rates go down. We know those rates are going to go way up for people who buy their own insurance. People say: Don't cut Medicare, don't raise taxes, don't make matters worse than they are right now. For the people of Wyoming, they are afraid that matters will be made worse. The Washington Post had a major poll in the paper today specifically asking seniors the question about Medicare. We are talking about health care quality, the quality of care. The question is: Do you think health care reform will strengthen the Medicare Program or weaken the Medicare Program? They asked specifically and broke it down to seniors. Only 1 out of 8 seniors in this poll said it actually would get better. But the rest are saying: No, it is going to get worse. The seniors who watch this most carefully know what it means to try to get health care under the Medicare Program, a program that we know is going broke. Yet they are taking all this money not to save Medicare but to start a new program. We know the quality of care is going to go down. That is what the people of my home State and the people I talked to from around the country are concerned about. They are delighted the Senator offered this motion. I did a poll in the townhall meeting: Are you for or against the bill? Some of them say: What is in it? We don't know. Which is exactly what the junior Senator, a Democrat from Indiana, said in today's national press release: We are all being urged to vote for something, and we don't know the details of what is in it. The junior Senator from Indiana is a Democrat. He doesn't know what is in it. The people of Wyoming don't know what is in it. But they do know taxes start immediately, benefits not for 4 years. That is why they are happy you offered this motion. They want to know: How do we know the money will be there 4 years from now?

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. The Senator from Idaho had a picture of a woman making $50,000 and the health benefits that resulted. My concern is not just her taxes; my concern is also her job. It is also a fact that she would still have a job. What I hear from the people of Wyoming is: Don't raise my taxes, don't cut my Medicare, don't make matters worse than they are right now in this economy where we have 10-percent unemployment. Like the Senator from South Dakota, I am a member of the National Federation of Independent Business. I have been a member for years. They are telling us that as these taxes are raised and collected in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, in 2010 we are going to lose 400,000 jobs in America, and in 2011 another 400,000, and another 400,000 after that, and another 400,000, as the taxes continue to be collected. So we would be losing in this country 1.6 million jobs as a result of these increased taxes all Americans are going to have to pay. I ask the Senator from Idaho, isn't it even more critical that we pass his motion in addition to the fact that we do not want these taxes? They are going to hurt our economy across the board.

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask my colleague this: I was reading a national publication yesterday, and the headline is ``Making Nightmare Out Of Health Care.'' It says taxes will go up. This also says the proposed overhaul contains, at last count, 13 different tax hikes. It goes on to say the Joint Tax Committee said that for any one person who may end up paying lower taxes, there will be nearly four times as many--close to 70 million people--who will pay higher taxes. That is why I have been waiting for a week now to vote for the Crapo motion. This was introduced last Tuesday. A whole week has passed, and the Democrats have been filibustering and preventing us from voting on this very important amendment, which the American people agree with-- that we ought to eliminate these taxes and stick with what the President promised the American people. As a result of the President's promises, I read a recent CNN poll. It says that 61 percent of Americans oppose this bill the Democrats are proposing. It gets to the specific question of tax increases and the President's promise. It says: Do you think your taxes would or would not increase if this bill passes? And 85 percent of the Americans polled said they believe their taxes will go up. I ask my friend from Idaho--it seems to me the American people get it; they realize they are going to be hit hard with this $500 billion of tax increases, 13 different taxes, which will get put on the backs of the hard-working people of our country. Why is it that we are not allowed to vote on this motion? I will vote for it. I appreciate the Senator from Idaho bringing this motion forward because, clearly, the support of the American people is behind him.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. It seems, as we are on the Senate floor talking--

Mr. BARRASSO. That is what we are hearing from the deans of medical schools. It is what I hear at home all the time. People in Wyoming read this and say this is wrong. This is going to make it harder for doctors to practice, harder for us to recruit doctors, harder for hospitals to stay open. We are saying in Wyoming--the Washington Post said it on Saturday, ``Medicare Cuts Could Hurt Hospitals, Expert Warns.'' We are seeing that affecting the quality of care. We are seeing it in terms of will we have a doctor shortage? Will that worsen? We are going to deal with that at home, but people are seeing it all across the country because fundamentally this bill is flawed. It does not address the sort of concerns we have, and we are trying to get costs under control. This will drive up costs. We are trying to help improve the quality of care. This will not improve the quality of care. We are hoping to improve access for patients. This will make it harder. This will make longer waiting lines, this will limit people's choices, it will limit care in the rural community. I know about those in Wyoming. You know about them in Alabama. When we read the report by the Actuaries from the committee that oversees Medicare--and they didn't rush to do this. They are talking about the bill that now has been out, the 2,000-page bill that has been out for people to read for 3 weeks. It took them 3 weeks to do the report because they wanted to do a very thorough evaluation and they looked at it, and they said we think one out of five hospitals in the United States will end up closing within 5 years and one out of five doctors offices will close if this goes through. This is what the Democrats are proposing, something that is going to lead to one in five hospitals closing, one in five doctors offices shutting their doors, saying we can't continue to keep the doors open under these circumstances. This report has said the whole effort to drive down the costs of care is wrong. At its core it is wrong; that the cost of care is going up if we pass this bill that is ahead of us now, regardless of the little changes they may make at the periphery. At the core this is going to drive up the cost of care. At the core it is going to cut our seniors who depend on Medicare for their health care. Medicare is going broke. This is not going in any way to help that. It is going to make it worse. Then if they try to put more people into that Medicare ship that is already sinking, that is going to make it worse as well. Plus the way they try to solve this, to say we are going to cover all these new people, many of them, the majority of them are going to be put on Medicaid--Medicaid, a program that Governors across the political spectrum have all said is a failed program, a program that is driving the States into bankruptcy, a program that Governors call the mother of all unfunded mandates--that is the way they are trying to get the costs down, by putting the cost on the States. It is still the same people of America who have to pay those bills, whether you are paying your taxes here or there. Plus they are going to raise taxes. This report from the Medicare Services Group looked at that and said all of those taxes are going to go up, $500 billion in taxes. Of course those are going to get passed on, so people of all different income brackets in the United States, all people are going to get hit with those taxes. Some people may see a little benefit, but by 4 to 1, four times as many people are going to get taxed as people who are going to see any benefits. We are looking at a program, a core fundamental of a bill that to me is fatally flawed--fatally flawed--that will raise prices, raise insurance premiums for people who have insurance, cut Medicare and raise taxes. And you say, how could people support that? We need the solution to improve quality, get costs under control and improve access. This does not do any of those things. Plus it starts collecting taxes, as my friend from South Dakota said--it starts collecting taxes in 3 weeks but yet doesn't give services for 4 years.

Mr. BARRASSO. I have great concerns about the health care availability for the people of our great country. This is a front-page story in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle on the 13th: ``Doctor shortage will worsen.'' That is what I am worried about. I am worried about the patients at home. I am worried about the folks in Arizona, Alabama, and Tennessee. ``Doctor shortage will worsen.'' ``It is estimated that as many as one-third of today's practicing physicians will retire by 2020'' and provider shortages will continue to increase. It says that based on health care so-called reforms they are proposing, the strain on certainly Wyoming's physician shortage will even possibly lead to longer wait time for appointments as patients travel even farther for care. As I look at this bill that raises taxes $500 billion, cuts Medicare $500 billion, and causes people who already have insurance--insurance they like but they are concerned about the cost--they will see the cost of their premiums going up. There is very little in this bill that I think the American people would be interested in having for themselves. The President has made a number of promises. He said: I won't add a dime to the deficit. Eighty percent of Americans do not believe him. Recent poll, CNN: 80 percent of Americans don't believe the President on that point. How about taxes? With taxes, he said he won't add a dime to your taxes. Eighty-five percent of Americans don't believe him there. They believe their taxes are going to go up. Yet they don't believe the quality of their care will be better. So when we talk about a bipartisan solution, we want to improve access to care, we want to get costs under control. This bill raises costs.

Mr. BARRASSO. It seems to me, as we are on the Senate floor discussing the issue wide open--any American can come in here and listen to us--hidden behind closed doors is the other party, maybe sharing what is in the secret negotiations, maybe not, because it sounds as if a number of their members don't know. What I do know from practicing medicine for 25 years and taking care of families around the State of Wyoming is that people depend on Medicare for their coverage. There are seniors who depend on Medicare and Medicare Advantage. The reason they call it Medicare Advantage is because there are advantages to being in it. It coordinates care. It helps with preventative care, which is not part of the regular Medicare Program. Yesterday, I heard my colleague from Arizona say there are those who want to shut down Medicare Advantage--AARP, he said--because they are the ones to benefit and profit if, in fact, Medicare Advantage is lost to the seniors in this country. Madam President, 11 million Americans depend on Medicare Advantage. Yet they are losing because of a vote this body took. This body voted to strip $120 billion away from our folks who depend on Medicare Advantage. I know the Senator from Arizona has another important point he wants to make.

Mr. BARRASSO. It is interesting because what you are doing now is fundamentally talking about the core of the bill, the core that cannot be changed as they drop this or add that. It is the core that led the dean of Harvard Medical School to say this bill, the core, is going to make spending worse. It is going to drive up spending and it is going to not improve quality. This physician at Harvard has said people who are supporting this are living in collective denial. It is no surprise that the American people are very skeptical, very suspicious. It is why the dean at Johns- Hopkins Medical Center this past week wrote an editorial that said ``this bill will have catastrophic effects'' and it will do more harm than good. We are talking about the health care of the people of our country.

Mr. BARRASSO. I would like to ask my colleague, we are talking about a job-killing bill, and we are not talking about a couple of jobs. The National Federation of Independent Business estimates that mandating that employers provide health care will cost 1.7 million jobs over the next 4 years, between now and 2013. We are not talking about a couple jobs, 1.6 million jobs when our unemployment rate is already 10 percent. When I look at this as a job-killing bill, bad for our economy at a time when the No. 1 issue I hear about at home are jobs and the economy, that is another fundamental reason to take a look at a bill that at its core is fatally flawed and say: Don't do that right now. Our economy can't afford it. The jobless rate, we cannot afford to see that number get worse.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. I have a couple of points I wish to add because I think you made a point, as does Senator Johanns. The concern is are there going to be enough doctors to take care of these patients. We are talking about 18 million more people placed on the Medicaid rolls, which is a huge unfunded mandate to the States. Having practiced in Wyoming for 25 years, in Casper, taking care of families, taking care of lots of patients on Medicaid, it becomes harder and harder for doctors to take new patients. There is an article in this week's Wyoming Tribune Eagle: Doctor Shortage Will Worsen. As many as a third of today's practicing physicians will retire by the time all of these additional 18 million get on to Medicaid. There is an article in the Wall Street Journal and it talks about a report from a research group, nonprofit, based in Washington, the Center for Studying Health System Change, and it says, as the Senator has previously stated: Nearly half of all the doctors polled said that they had stopped accepting or limited the number of new Medicaid patients. That is because many Medicaid programs, straining under surging costs, are balancing their budgets by freezing or reducing payments to doctors. That, in turn, is driving many doctors, particularly specialists, out of the program. For people in Wyoming, whether in Cokeville or Kemmerer or Casper, in all of these communities we are looking to try to recruit physicians. It is making it much more difficult when we look at this health care proposal the Democrats have, which is going to raise taxes, cut Medicare, cause premiums to go up for people who have insurance, and one of the reasons is because it underpays so much for things such as Medicaid. Yet they are talking about putting another 18 million people on Medicaid. This morning I called one of the offices of a physician group in Wyoming and said, What are the differences in terms of Medicaid versus regular insurance? For something like carpal tunnel, we know about overuse of the wrist and carpal tunnel surgery where the normal fee is about $2,000 for the surgery. Medicaid itself reimburses less than $500. Medicare--they are talking about putting a lot more people on Medicare--reimburses less than $400. It is very difficult if you are trying to run an office and you pay all of the overhead expenses and see everybody who wants to see you to do it on the fees alone that you get from Medicare or Medicaid. That is why I have great concerns. If we have all these people on Medicaid, will it actually help them get care? I think this Democratic proposal we are looking at fails. It fails in terms of getting costs under control. It fails in terms of increasing quality or increasing access, but those are the things we need in health care reform. I see my colleague from Florida is here, who has experience, having run a Governor's office as Chief of Staff. He may want to add to this discussion as well. I can't see any way this would be sustainable. As a matter of fact, a report that came out recently from the CMS, the group that oversees all of this, said it is not sustainable, that one out of five hospitals by the year 2020 and one out of five doctor groups will basically have to go out of business and close their doors.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President. Wyoming has lost a statesman. On Sunday, December 13, 2009, Ambassador Thomas F. Stroock passed away at the age of 84. Tom once said, ``I don't know why God gave me this wonderful life. Good fortune, I guess.'' Those of us who had the benefit of knowing Tom are certain that his wonderful life was a result of his determination, toughness, and confidence. Tom served our Nation as a marine in WWII. In 1948, he graduated from Yale University and then found his way to Wyoming. His first job was as a roughneck on an oil rig. The following year, the lovely Marta Freyre de Andrade agreed to be his wife. Tom was a man who saw possibilities and opportunities. He started his own oil and gas properties firm in 1952, Stroock Leasing Corporation and Alpha Exploration, Inc. It grew to be one of Wyoming's most respected and successful oil and gas businesses. While he was busy with his successful energy endeavors, Tom still had much to give Wyoming and our Nation. He served for 16 years in the Wyoming Legislature. He was chairman of the local school board, as well as the Wyoming School Boards Association and Wyoming Higher Education Council. Tom used his energy and business acumen to lead the industry though his service on the Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline Authority and the Enhanced Oil Recovery Commission. In 1989, his good friend and college classmate, President George H. W. Bush, tapped him to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Guatemala. It was a tough assignment. Guatemala was in the midst of a decades-long civil war. Tom approached this job as he did all of his other challenges--with forthrightness and courage. Ambassador Stroock provided challenge and support to our friends in Guatemala as they worked toward a more stable economy, a decrease in political violence and perhaps most notable to the outside world, increased internal safety measures. Tom helped bring about changes that greatly impacted the daily lives of Guatemalans. Tom Stroock's accomplishments were numerous. Throughout his lifetime of leadership and service, Marta was at his side. The couple, married for 60 years, served as a pillar of the Casper, WY, community. Their daughters Margie, Sandy, Betty, and Anne, are carrying on their father's commitment to business and public service. Mr. President, while we are saddened by the passing of Ambassador Thomas F. Stroock, we are left with the example of a life well lived.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. As my friend knows, small communities----

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. I would be happy to. OK, so we agree, it is the sense of the Senate. It is meaningless in terms of actually having the force of law. The Senator talked about the issues of the spending and the taxes, so we came up with a sense of the Senate. This is why we are asking people all across the country to read the bill. The sense of the Senate essentially means nothing. It says we kind of agree on this, but there is no law applied.

Mr. BARRASSO. Well, I do care to comment. I care to comment that the important thing is to get the taxes out of the bill--not what a sense of the Senate is, not some procedural maneuver. It is the specifics of removing the taxes from the bill. When the President says, ``My plan won't raise your taxes one penny,'' which was his quote, we need to be able to make sure the President is telling us the truth, that we need to remove these taxes from the bill. The Joint Committee on Taxation looked at this bill--specifically looked at this bill--and it said that 38 percent of the people earning less than $200,000 a year will see a tax increase--a tax increase under the Reid bill. So we want to make sure the President's words go with what is in the bill. So we need to actually remove the taxes--not just have a sense of the Senate. Then, when we look at the chief of staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, he was asked a question at the Finance Committee, and he said, when it all ``shakes out,'' we would expect people who are going to be paying taxes are going to have incomes ``less than'' the number the President said. So I want to get to the point of the Crapo amendment, the amendment that actually says: Get these taxes out of the bill. This is a bill that is going to raise taxes by $500 billion, and those are taxes that are going to impact all Americans. At a time when we have 10-percent unemployment, when the Senate is being asked to increase the debt level by another almost $2 trillion, the last thing we need to be spending our time on is a sense of the Senate. We need to actually get to those taxes that are going to affect the people, the hard-working people of America get those taxes out of the bill. So as we are looking at that Baucus amendment; it is very nice, but it reminds me of the Bennet amendment we had here last week, and I think everybody voted for it. The New York Times, in their editorial, said it was a meaningless amendment. I want an amendment with some teeth in it that I can vote for, and I am ready to vote right now.

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, it seems to me that what the Senator is doing with the Crapo amendment is actually trying to help people, trying to help the American people by taking this burden of $500 billion of taxes off of their backs, off of their shoulders, helping the American people. That is what I see he is trying to accomplish, at a time where with a gimmick they are going to start taxing immediately and when the taxes go into play--today is the 11th of December; in 20 days they are going to start collecting taxes for services they are not going to give for 4 more years. So it seems to me what is going on here with the Crapo amendment is it is saving the American people by keeping dollars in their pockets, keeping dollars in the pockets of the hard- working people of our country. I am not the only one who is saying that. There is a new CNN poll out today that specifically asks the question--because the President has made a statement about the fact that you wouldn't see your taxes go up--Do you think your taxes would or would not increase if Harry Reid's bill is passed, and 85 percent of the American people in a CNN poll out today said they believe their taxes are going to go up; 85 percent of the American people.