Mark Begich

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, today I wish to recognize a milestone for my constituent Pat Vezina. On Friday, December 4, 2009, Pat will mark the 50th anniversary of her arrival in the State of Alaska. Alaska became a State in January 1959 and Pat made it her home less than a year later, one of thousands of people who have built our State over the last half century. Pat was born in Wallsend, Northumberland, England, on June 4, 1931, to Clement and Constance Boothroyd. She grew up in Jesmond, Northumberland, and was evacuated for a short time during World War II before returning home to live with her parents for the duration of the war. After attending nursing school in Leeds, England, she emigrated to Canada and then to Alaska Pat worked as a registered nurse in the labor and delivery department at Providence Hospital, one of Alaska's finest institutions. She began her Alaska nursing career at ``Old Providence'' hospital where hundreds of new Alaskans, including me, were born. After marrying and having two children of her own, she returned to nursing at ``New Providence'' where she worked for 30 years before her retirement in 1996. Pat has an abiding love for the beauty of Alaska. She enjoys walking on the beaches of Homer, buying summer flowers for her garden in the greenhouses of the Matanuska Valley, picking berries at Sheep Mountain Lodge, and an afternoon with a friend at Summit Lake Lodge. She is loved by her children Karen and John and by the close friends she has made over the last 50 years. Madam President and colleagues, please join me in honoring and recognizing Pat Vezina on the 50th anniversary of her arrival in Alaska.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank Senator Stabenow for her leadership. Last night, I had the honor of presiding while she spoke. I heard her first comment after she heard the other side describe the bill, saying it is so big they cannot read it, but they had great detail, for some reason. She even said she wouldn't support a bill as they described it. I agree with her. After hearing the last hour and what they described, I wouldn't support it either. But that is not what this bill is about. This bill is about saving lives and saving money, protecting Medicare and stopping insurance companies and their abuse. I sat here for a few days--and I preside quite a bit, and I enjoy the opportunity to watch. I see the props brought out by our opponents. They always bring out the bill. It is almost always taller than they are. It is interesting that the prop is not realistic. The American public should know that. They make it look like it is such a large bill that they are incapable of studying it and reading it in a fashion--something that drives one-sixth of our economy. I learned one thing. In the last 11 months, I have gotten so many different books on different issues, and it is amazing. I took the bill--one of the pages out, page 114, and I was curious and thought, if we converted this into a regular book page similar to the ones we read on a regular basis--or all the books I get that people want me to read--I said, how big would it be? Well, it is just about as big as the book I have here. It is not hard. If you want to do it--and former Senator Martinez, who left us recently, I took his book, and it is an easy read. Maybe you would have to read it twice. It is not as they describe--like it is some complicated, huge document that is bigger and taller than they are. It is not a fair representation of what we are doing. As you know, we have lots of pages here who work hard every day. I know they were surprised when I grabbed one of their textbooks for just one subject matter that they are required to study in order to be proficient. If you converted it into bill language, it would be four times the size of that document that they stack next to them. We ask our young people to be well educated, to learn the topics, and understand what they are referring to when they are tested. It is a simple thing. I encourage our colleagues on the other side to not be so extreme in the way they display the bill. It is not accurate. I think it is important to recognize that. This book is short. Probably people cannot see this book because it is so low on this table. The other thing, as a new Member, I am learning the elements of the process here. I heard some colleagues on the other side talk about the process. The motion to proceed is a simple issue. It is an issue of are we going to debate this in earnest. Are we going to put ideas on the table rather than just talk about it and talk about it? We tried this a few weeks ago on the Medicare fix. The idea was a motion to proceed so we could move forward and debate how we were going to pay for it. The Medicare fix is critical to Alaskans. We have Alaskan seniors who want to make sure the reimbursement rate is the right one to ensure long- term coverage. But they didn't want to move on the motion to proceed. Therefore, we never debated how to pay for it. We couldn't get there with the amendments that many of my colleagues on the Democratic side were anxious to put forward. That is where it is. To the American public and for folks listening to this forum here, it is important we keep to the facts, and they are very simple. This bill saves lives, money, protects Medicare, and stops insurance abuses. It is proconsumer, pro-patient. It creates more affordable access to health care. It strengthens Medicare, as I said. It is fiscally responsible. We have a long way to go. I hear, again, my colleagues on the other side say rush, rush, rush or, as the Senator from Michigan said, they always want to wait, wait, wait. The fact is, we are going to have weeks of debate, and there are items I will bring forward to improve this, similar to many of my colleagues on both sides who will bring forth amendments. That is what we should let happen in the process--debate it, discuss it, and end up with a product that will improve the health care system of this country. That is the goal. When I hear, on the other side, that somehow this bill will be rationing, delaying, and denying care--I don't know about you, but I get letters every single day about people who have been denied care by their insurance company, who have been rationed out because they have preexisting conditions. They cannot get coverage because of the delay of the private insurance companies and the techniques being utilized. It is important to know the debate on this side of the aisle on this bill is about ensuring that we will no longer have insurance companies denying or dropping coverage. We are asking insurance companies in this bill not to place limits on your coverage and ration your care. As I said, there will be no discrimination for preexisting conditions, and there will be preventive care, making sure people can access their health care and their insurance. As was said by Senator Stabenow, who clearly understands the job issues because of the struggle in her State, there is a report--I will cite a few things, and I know Senator Merkley from Oregon has many items, because as we have sat here as freshmen talking about health care, I know he has more to share from the small business perspective. My wife has been a small businessperson for many decades. A report was done by the Small Business Majority, working with MIT. Here is the basic data. The largest employers in this country are small businesspeople. Small businesses will pay $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years for health care costs for their workers. With minor reform, I believe that is what we are offering, at minimum. It will save them as much as $855 billion. That is not me or a bunch of politicians coming up with this; it is people in the small business community working with folks to do the research who determined this. That means more small business can employ people and raise capital, expand employment, create new jobs. As described earlier, it saves real money for small businesspeople. I can tell you my brother-in-law who owns and manages one of my wife's operations has diabetes, a preexisting condition, and he has a $15,000 deductible. He pays an enormous amount each month, with no preventive care or chronic maintenance. It is a program that will not do much for him until he ends up in a hospital in a severe condition. This bill is not just about making sure the insurance companies are held accountable and do the right thing for people who buy and have insurance today; it is also about creating jobs and making sure the private sector continues to grow. The last thing I will mention right now--and we talked about this--is protecting Medicare. This bill protects Medicare. Why I know this is because I have looked at that component of the bill and, most recently, I had to explain this to my mother who is on Medicare; she is 71 years old. She discussed this with me just this week, as I visited her at her home in Carson City, NV. She described her sister, my Aunt Audrey, who has a disease. She is in the doughnut hole, where she has to pay for prescription drugs that she had no idea she would have to pay for. Today, this bill is trying to rectify and fix that problem and make sure seniors who are struggling out there don't end up having enormous out-of-pocket expenses. This issue around Medicare is not real. What we are trying to do is solve the problem and make sure to extend its length of stability but making sure seniors get more. They have earned it and they deserve it. This bill moves it forward. Again, I wish to reemphasize the point that this bill reduces the deficit. It has a positive impact for this generation and future generations--$127 billion in the first 10 years, $650 billion in the next 10 years. That is what it does. You will hear all kinds of numbers--and I am sure people who watch this get confused, as I do at times, listening to all these numbers they throw out. But that is the fact. That is not decided by us as Democrats or Republicans; that is the independent office of CBO that made that determination. They determined that is the positive impact to the deficit. We need to push aside all the debate and rhetoric that is out there that is not factual and focus on what is right. Again, as we move forward on health care and insurance reform, there will be a lot of stuff put on the table. There will be items I will put on the table to work to improve health care and to protect Alaskans--yes, I will be parochial at times--but also look to the greater picture for America. This will be a great debate. It won't end Saturday at 8 o'clock; it will continue on and on, probably to some folks' dismay because it will be longer than people want. The fact is, we will debate this issue. We will struggle with it. We will struggle with it within our own caucus of what the right decision is. But when done, our focus is the American people, improving the system--the status quo is not acceptable--and ensuring that we save lives, save money, improve Medicare, and hold our insurance companies accountable for their actions.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, I rise in support of S. 1963, the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2009. I am pleased we are now considering this bill. S. 1963 is comprehensive legislation that addresses many of the needs of our veterans and our Nation's heroes. The bill before us is a compilation of two earlier bills introduced by Chairman Akaka to improve veterans health care and provide much needed benefits to their caregivers. I thank the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee for his leadership on this bill and in committee. He understands the importance of providing the Department of Veterans Affairs the necessary tools and policies to serve the needs of veterans. This legislation ensures that wounded warriors returning from Iraq and Afghanistan can receive care in their home by providing caregivers the necessary benefits to stay at home and care for them full time. This is especially important in rural States such as my State of Alaska where obtaining a caregiver from remote areas is extremely challenging. In those areas, families take care of their injured servicemembers. To further help rural veterans, this bill will allow servicemembers who are severely disabled or require emergency care to seek medical attention at non-VA facilities without being billed. For a veteran in one of the many remote villages of Alaska, this is especially important, for they already face many economic challenges. The bill takes other steps to alleviate shortfalls in rural veterans health care. Telemedicine progam expansion, authority to collaborate with Indian Health Services and community organizations are just some of the additional efforts taken. In addition to providing for caregivers and improving health care for rural veterans, S. 1963 will finally require the Department of Veterans Affairs to identify and take action on shortfalls in health care for women veterans, mental health care, and outreach to homeless veterans. Thirteen veteran organizations support S. 1963 as introduced by Chairman Akaka. Unfortunately, one of my Senate colleagues disagrees with me and my other Senate colleagues and the 13 veteran organizations about this initiative and this bill and whom they serve. My Senate colleague has offered an amendment that almost doubles the cost. Although he claims the bill is discriminatory against veterans from previous wars, the expansion of rural, women's health, mental health, and homeless initiatives are not limited to any particular group of veterans. Additionally, my colleague's amendment offsets the cost of the bill by requiring the Department of State to transfer money to the Department of Veterans Affairs from the United Nations. Sitting here for a few minutes listening to my colleague, I have to say a couple comments that are not written here. First, my colleague, who voted for the war supplementals that had no funding at all other than to make the cost there and no offset to them, sent people to war. When you do that, you have to also remember the costs associated over the long term. I wasn't here during those votes. I wasn't here when $1 trillion went to the richest of the rich for tax breaks that had not one dime of offset. I am paying for that. My son is paying for that. So it is interesting to hear this debate now. We have to think long term. We have to think when we go to war, there are costs. If we don't fund them on the front end, we have to deal with them on the back end. That is what we are doing now. I think his amendment is worthy to a certain degree, but I disagree with the funding source. Listening for the last 2 minutes as a new Member surprises me. My Senate colleague is forcing us to make an inappropriate choice with this amendment that will cost us more in the long run. He is asking us to choose between providing for veterans and maintaining America's essential role in the world. His amendment pays for this bill by breaking U.S. international obligations. If his amendment passes, it would threaten ongoing peace operations in Haiti, Sudan, and Lebanon. By breaking our international promises, we undermine our national security by opening opportunities for instability, conflict, and strife. If there is instability, conflict, and strife, then it means more troops will have to serve and more come home wounded. Then we will have to pass another bill to pay for those troops and their care when they return. U.N. peacekeeping operations are eight times less expensive than U.S. forces, according to a GAO study in 2006. If my Senate colleague were truly concerned about costs, he would not have chosen, as I mentioned, to cut accounts, which undermines our national security and breaks international obligations. His amendment just does not make sense. It is fiscally and politically irresponsible. I urge him to withdraw this amendment and to remember he has voted for billions of dollars in funding that was not offset for these wars. Funding the wars is just as important as fulfilling our promises to our veterans when they return. So many issues facing our veterans today are addressed in S. 1963. Passage of this legislation and its enactment into law will improve and increase services for our veterans and acknowledge the sacrifice of their caregivers. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment and support passage of S. 1963 as it has been introduced. Again, I thank the chairman, Senator Akaka, for his unwavering support and advocacy for our veterans. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I wish to remember the life of an extraordinary resident from my home State of Alaska, Juanita Lou Helms. Ms. Helms passed away on November 7, 2009, in her hometown of Fairbanks. She was 68. Ms. Helms was active in local community organizations, politics, and most importantly, was devoted to her husband, their four children, and grandchildren. Juanita began her public service on the borough assembly in 1980, but she is most well known in the community for becoming the Fairbanks North Star Borough's first female mayor in 1985. During her two terms, Mayor Helms sheparded the Borough through difficult financial times. As an ``open door'' mayor and terrific listener, she inspired the trust needed to find common ground among her constituents. Among her accomplishments was the construction of the community's convention center, improving air quality, and helping thaw the ``ice curtain'' by establishing a sister city relationship with Yakutsk in Eastern Russia. Away from the political realm, Ms. Helms was involved in innumerable civic endeavors, especially parent-teacher groups in Fairbanks. She also held an assortment of jobs in the community from carhop to court clerk to rental property manager. In her personal life Juanita was an avid dancer who was loved by her family and all who knew her. She and her husband Sam were devoted to their children Fawn, Selene, Ren, and Karisse. They were so deeply involved in their lives and those of their many grandchildren that the number of events they attended and participated in are virtually countless. Juanita will be missed by her family, friends, and all of the people she touched in the State of Alaska.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I rise today in remembrance of Annie ``Akkuluq'' Ashenfelter. I am saddened to announce with her passing on October 8, 2009, the village of White Mountain and the great State of Alaska lost an elder of great cultural knowledge, wisdom, and language. The magnitude of this loss is better understood by recalling the immense contributions she gave her family, community, and region. Annie was born in White Mountain on January 24, 1913. She spoke Inupiat as her first language and learned English when she went to school. She completed the third grade. Annie lived a subsistence life, reliant on the land and its resources to sustain her family. Annie's steadfast connection to her Inupiat identity ensured her children, grandchildren and her many generations to follow would remain grounded in those same cultural roots and values. Annie loved to go camping and fishing, living off the land, spending 90 years of her life sharing this love with her family. She enjoyed preparing Native food and sharing what she had with others. Annie was a talented sewer, of both children's clothing and animal skins. She made all 10 of her children's clothing: pants, shirts, parkies, mukluks, and mittens. Annie was a pillar of her community. She had strength of character, embodied knowledge of the land, and symbolized the resilience of the Inupiat people. Her kind heart has left a permanent mark on the lives of countless individuals. Annie was easy to laugh, had good memories, and enjoyed the simple things in life: getting up in the morning, having her morning cup of coffee, sitting at the window and observing life in White Mountain. Annie never had a bad word to say about anyone, ever. Even during the difficult times, she lived her life with grace, humor, love, strength, joy and understanding. Annie was a strong Fish River Inupiaq woman. Mr. President and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Annie ``Akkuluq'' Ashenfelter, whose love and wisdom will forever be in the memories of those who loved and knew her.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, I rise today on the eve of Veterans Day to honor all those who have and are now serving to protect our freedoms, especially the service men and women of my State who have such a vital role in our Nation's defense. At trouble spots across the world--from Afghanistan to Korea, Iraq to Kosovo--Alaskan servicemembers are on the front lines. Today, I welcome the opportunity to praise Alaska's service men and women, their families who are such a key part of our communities, and the thousands of veterans who have chosen to live in the 49th State. Nearly 75 years ago, Air Force GEN Billy Mitchell testified before Congress and famously said: Alaska is the most strategic place in the world. General Mitchell's pronouncement might have been an eye-opener for Members of Congress in 1935, but the importance of Alaska's strategic location has been well known to Alaskans for centuries. Shortly after Alaska's purchase from Russia in 1867, the U.S. Army was dispatched to help administer the new American territory. Within 10 years, a significant presence was established in Alaska by both the Navy and the Reserve Service, which later became the U.S. Coast Guard. The Army helped maintain law and order during the turn of the century Gold Rush, which saw thousands scramble north in search of fame and fortune. With the buildup to World War II, Alaska's vital role in the Nation's defense grew dramatically. Alaska's Aleutian Islands were the only American territory occupied by the Japanese during the war. Dislodging them in brutal conditions cost American and Japanese troops more than 6,000 casualties combined. Servicing Alaska's strategic military needs during the war required construction of the 1,400-mile Alaskan-Canadian Highway, known as the ALCAN. This road was built largely by three African-American regiments, and their success helped spur the Army to end segregation among its ranks. Some of the Nation's most essential eyes and ears during the war were soldiers of the Alaska Territorial Guard. These Eskimo volunteers, capable of living off the land as they guarded against invasion, knew every nook and cranny of Alaska's coastline. Today, some two dozen of these scouts are still with us--most in their eighties and still living largely off the land through subsistence hunting and fishing. As a member of the Armed Services Committee and working with my colleague, Senator Murkowski, we guaranteed in next year's military budget bill that these brave guardsmen will receive proper Federal benefits and recognition for their service. Today Alaska is home to some 30,000 Active-Duty service men and women. Another 30,000 Alaskans are the family members of these soldiers and airmen. Alaska's major military installations include Elmendorf, Eielson, and Clear Air Force Bases, Army Forts Richardson, Wainwright, and Greely, and Kulis Air National Guard Base. Through these bases, about one in five Alaskans has a personal tie to the military. To maintain these vital posts, the Department of Defense spends in excess of $1.5 billion a year in our State. That is a huge part of Federal spending in Alaska, which constitutes about 18 percent of the State economy. Alaska is also proud to have the highest per capita population of veterans of any State. The more than 75,000 veterans who call our State home comprise 11 percent of our population. Alaska's bases support the latest and greatest in the military's arsenal: from the F-22, the Air Force's latest fifth generation fighter aircraft; the C-17 cargo aircraft; the Army's Stryker vehicle; and the Ground-Based Midcourse element of missile defense. Today more than 4,000 servicemembers stationed in Alaska are supporting overseas contingency operations around the world. Just last month, we welcomed home the 1st Stryker Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division based at Fort Wainwright. This brigade spent 12 months in Iraq's Diyala Province doing a remarkable job protecting the people of Iraq. Still in Iraq is the 545th Military Police Company of the Arctic Military Police Battalion that continues to patrol the streets of Baji. The Alaska National Guard also has a vital role in that theater. The Guard's 207th Aviation Regiment continues to fly C-23 Sherpa military aircraft missions, delivering more than 1 million pounds of cargo throughout Iraq. Back home, the Guard plays a significant role in the defense of our Nation around the clock. At Fort Greely, they staff the operations center for the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system, protecting the United States from ballistic missile threats from countries such as North Korea and Iran. The Guard also provides invaluable search and rescue support and other vital missions to ensure the safety of our citizens in our vast State. Alaskans continue to serve in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq. The 4th Airborne Brigade Combat Team of the 25th Infantry Division operates in Afghanistan's Regional Command-East in support of the International Security Assistance Force. These soldiers are bravely serving on the front lines, hunting down al-Qaida terrorists, securing the border, and trying to establish governance in this vital part of the world. Since their arrival in February, the 4-25 BCT has suffered significant casualties. In fact, since the 9/11 attacks on America, 143 servicemembers from Alaskan units deployed in support of the global war on terror have paid the ultimate sacrifice. Madam President, I would like to honor those based in Alaska who were killed in action since September 11, 2001. The pictures beside me which I show in the Chamber are of those who have fallen in the past year, just since Veterans Day 2008. Just 2 weeks ago, a lifelong Alaskan paid the ultimate sacrifice. On October 23, in Afghanistan's Helmand Province, two U.S. aircraft collided in midair in the predawn dark. Marine Corps Cpl Gregory Fleury was the crew chief aboard one of those aircraft. Corporal Fleury was just 23 years old, a graduate of Anchorage's Service High School. He had already served two tours of duty in Iraq as a combat helicopter mechanic and gunner. The helicopter crash that took the young corporal's life was a bad one. But the Marines were able to recover one item that belonged to him--an Alaskan flag. I spoke to Corporal Fleury's grandfather last week to thank him for his grandson's service on behalf of this proud Nation. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the names of all the Alaskan troops who have made the ultimate sacrifice since September 11, 2001, be printed in the Record.

Mr. BEGICH. In addition to these fallen heroes, hundreds more servicemembers will forever contend with the physical and mental wounds suffered in service to our Nation. I have had the honor to visit several of these brave soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and at the Elmendorf Warrior Transition Unit also. It is critical that the transition of our servicemembers from the care of the Defense Department to Veterans Affairs is as smooth and as comprehensive as possible. We must ensure the VA is funded to meet the current demands of this generation of veterans. I am proud to have been one of the original cosponsors with Senator Akaka on a bill signed into law by the President last month which will ensure 2-year advance funding for the VA. This allows the VA to focus on providing care for our veterans instead of worrying annually about their funding. Today's veteran population is much different from all previous wars. Thanks to improvements in protective gear and equipment, many survive serious wounds which previously would have been fatal. We also have a much greater population of female veterans who have unique needs and require specialized care. Today's veterans often have families with exceptional needs. In World War II, nearly one in five Americans served in the armed services. Today less than 1 percent of our population currently serves. Still, some 25 million veterans live among us, representing every conflict since World War II. Our commitment to each and every one of these veterans must be full, honorable, and proud. We honor Veterans Day this week on the anniversary of the armistice that ended World War I. In my State, we also celebrate Women Veterans Day on November 9. On these occasions, let us rededicate ourselves to our commitment to our Nation's veterans and service men and women so their sacrifice is never taken for granted or forgotten. Thank you, Madam President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, I wish to commemorate the life of a very special resident of my home State of Alaska, former Anchorage Mayor George Murray Sullivan. Mayor George Murray Sullivan passed away September 23, 2009, after an extended battle with lung cancer. Mayor George Sullivan was the embodiment of a true Alaskan. He was born and raised in Valdez, honorably served in our Nation's Army, and assisted with the completion of the only road leading out of our State, the Alaska Highway. As a devoted public servant, Mr. Sullivan served in the Alaska Legislature and as mayor of Anchorage. Today, Alaskans are grateful to this remarkable man for his guidance and pioneering spirit. On behalf of his family and his many friends I ask we honor George Sullivan's memory. I ask his obituary, published September 27, 2009, in the Anchorage Daily News, be printed into the Record. The information follows: [From the Anchorage Daily News, Sept. 27, 2009] Anchorage Mayor George Murray Sullivan, 87, died Sept. 23, 2009, surrounded by his family after a long battle with lung cancer. A funeral Mass will be celebrated at 11 a.m. Saturday at Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church. Burial will be at the Anchorage Memorial Cemetery. George was born March 31, 1922, to Harvey and Viola Sullivan in Portland, Ore. He was raised in Valdez with sisters Lillian and Marion, and graduated salutatorian from Valdez High School in 1939. His father Harvey was the U.S. district marshal and mother Viola was the first woman mayor in Alaska. George had a wonderful life as a kid in Valdez, playing many sports, engaging in school activities and helping at the family store. In 1937, at the age of 15, George was hired at the Kennecott Mine, although the hiring age at the time was 16. He was strong and eager, so he was put to work on the tram. He navigated 750-pound ore buckets off the tram and into the grizzly crusher for 10 hours a day, seven days a week. He once estimated that he put in about 17 miles a day on the job. In 1938, George drove trucks for the Alaska Road Commission and hauled equipment and supplies to the workers active in the Richardson Highway construction project. He worked with the military troops to get the Alaska Highway completed and transported military equipment to the Tanacross airport for Bob Reeve to fly to the outlying bases. In July 1944, George was drafted into the U.S. Army for two years and was stationed at Adak in the Aleutian Islands. He married the love of his life, Margaret Eagan Sullivan, on Dec. 30, 1947, and moved to Nenana. George was the U.S. deputy marshal and Margaret was the U.S. commissioner. Aptly, George would catch the criminals and Margaret would try them. In 1952, George worked for Al Ghezzi's Alaska Freight Lines, trucking supplies to the DEW Line on the first ice road to the North Slope. He worked for Garrison Fast Freight. In 1955, he was elected to the Fairbanks City Council. George took a job in management with Consolidated Freightways and in 1959 moved the family to Anchorage, where he lived for the next 50 years. In 1964, he was appointed by Gov. Bill Egan to fill a vacant seat in the Alaska State Legislature. He was in Juneau when the 1964 earthquake occurred; Margaret was at home in Anchorage with seven children. George spent many agonizing hours trying to get on a plane home to his family. George finished his term in the Legislature and, in 1965, was elected to the Anchorage City Council. In 1967, he ran a successful race to become Anchorage mayor, a position he would hold for 15 years. Anchorage grew fast during those years, spurred in large part by the oil boom. In 1975, voters approved the unification of Anchorage's city and borough governments and elected George its mayor. The creation of the Municipality of Anchorage was an incredible undertaking. As mayor, George successfully merged the duplicative departments, boards, utilities. etc., into one government. After unification, the state was awash with money from the oil pipeline revenues. George and his administration had a vision of what Anchorage could become and what was needed to enhance the city's quality of life for its residents. He worked hard to develop what was known as Project '80s. George lobbied successfully in Juneau and received hundreds of millions of dollars for construction of the Egan Civic and Convention Center, Loussac Library, the Alaska Center for the Performing Arts and the Sullivan Sports Arena. This moved Anchorage into being a modern and vibrant community, which enhanced economic and community growth in the Southcentral area. George finished as mayor of Anchorage in 1982. He then worked for Western Airlines as senior vice president. In 1986, he was a founding member of the Sullivan Group, a consulting firm. He also worked as the legislative director for Gov. Steve Cowper. He received an honorary doctorate from the University of Alaska in public administration. George was never one to stay still for too long and remained active in community and state boards up until his illness in 2008. Over the years he was active on the Enstar board, AWWU, state PERS board, Anchorage Senior Center Endowment, TOTE Advisory Board, Military Advisory Board, Anchorage Wellness Court Alumni Group, Alaska Heart Association, Boys and Girls Clubs and many more. He was always willing to lend a helping hand to make Anchorage a little better for those less fortunate or in need. He had a strong faith in the Roman Catholic Church and often assisted at Mass and in the church's organizations, the Knights of Columbus and Knights and Ladies of the Holy Sepulcher. He was a member of the Elks Club, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Pioneers of Alaska. George had an incredible love for the community and worked on many projects to enhance the quality of life for all who called Anchorage home. He was a true public servant and visionary who strived to make Anchorage a better community for future generations while he was mayor and during his retirement. George's family said: ``Dad was blessed with a kind and generous heart. He and Mom gave so much to their family and community. Dad had a wonderful way with people. He was a great Alaskan with an Irish charm and humor that would put people at ease when they met him. He and Mom traveled extensively and held lifelong friendships that spanned the globe. He loved people and never forgot a name or face.'' George is survived by his sons, Timothy, Daniel (Lynnette), Kevin, George Jr., Michael and Casey (Paige); and daughters, Colleen (Ted Leonard) and Shannon (Christopher Adams). He is also survived by grandchildren, Tim (Terrill), Conor (Carey), Catherine and Moira Sullivan and their mother, Susan; grandchildren, Kelly, Patrick (Julie) and Erin Sullivan and their mother, Jean; grandchildren, Jennifer Sullivan; Matthew, Adam, Molly and Bridget Glenn; Jared Leonard; Declan and Shane Adams, and Tierney and Parker Sullivan; and six great-grandchildren with one on the way. His is also survived by sisters-in-law, Pat Franklin and Marge Eagan of Fairbanks; and many nieces and nephews. George was preceded in death by his parents, Harvey and Viola Sullivan; sisters, Marion and Lillian; son, Harvey; and Margaret, his wife of 59 years.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I rise in support of S. 1963, the Caregiver and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2009. I thank the chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Akaka, for his leadership on this bill and in committee. S. 1963 is comprehensive legislation that addresses many of the needs of our veterans, our Nation's heroes. Provisions are included to improve veterans health care, provide benefits for caregivers of wounded veterans, enhance outreach to homeless veterans, and expand health care for female veterans. The bill also provides for VA personnel improvement and quality management. Rural veterans, such as those in my State who face challenges accessing health care every day, will benefit from this bill. It expands telemedicine programs and provides the Department of Veterans Affairs authority to recruit and retain high-quality health professionals in rural communities. The bill also improves mental health care. Eligibility to receive readjustment counseling for Iraq and Afghanistan vets, including the National Guard and reservists, will increase. So many issues facing our veterans today are addressed in S. 1963. Passage of this legislation and its enactment into law will improve and increase services for veterans and acknowledge the sacrifice of their caregivers. Yet even as Veterans Day approaches, a Member of the Senate has placed a hold on this bill, denying better services for our veterans. I cannot imagine why this hold has been placed on this legislation. How can a Member of the Senate deny our veterans better care? How can my Senate colleague justify his hold on a bill that helps homeless and wounded veterans? How can my colleague deny veteran caregivers deserved relief and support? There is no excuse for not supporting our veterans and their caregivers. They have earned better than what we have provided to date. This bill gives us an opportunity to provide for veterans and to honor their sacrifices. This bill, on which my colleague has placed a hold, will eliminate copayments for veterans who are catastrophically disabled and allow the VA to reimburse these veterans for emergency care at non-VA facilities. How can my colleague deny disabled veterans easier and less costly medical care? Veterans have paid their dues, and it is our turn, our duty, and our obligation to take care of them. I am disappointed my Senate colleague does not share this same sense of duty and responsibility to our Nation's heroes who have sacrificed so much for our very right to stand in this body and debate this matter. There is no good reason or rationale for a hold to be placed on this legislation. I call on my colleague to remove this hold and ask my colleague to remember, as Veterans Day approaches, that those who have served this country deserve better. They have earned it. It is my obligation and his obligation to support our veterans and to always remember the sacrifice they have made. Senator Coburn, let the Senate proceed with recognizing and providing for our Nation's veterans by removing your hold on S. 1963. Again, I thank Chairman Akaka for his unwavering support and advocacy for our veterans. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank Senator Hagan for allowing me time this morning. I am pleased to join my freshman colleagues to once again state our case for health insurance reform in this country. It is truly long overdue and very much needed. I also wish to make a point. I have listened closely to the comments of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle over the last several weeks. A few weeks ago, I heard the Senator from North Carolina, Mr. Burr, talking on this floor about health reform. He acknowledged that we need to change the health delivery system, which I agree with, but then he said our Democratic ideas won't work. He said one reason is because government programs don't do enough innovation and wellness and they won't help people make the lifestyle changes needed to get true savings in the health system. Quoting from the Congressional Record, here is what else he said: Show me a government plan that pays for prevention, wellness, and chronic disease management, and I will quit coming to the floor and quit talking about the lack of reform. Mr. President, I have one. I have a great example of just such a government plan that pays for all of those things, almost the whole thing, and gets incredible results. It comes from my home State, from an Alaska Native program called the Nuka Model of Care. It is based in Anchorage at the Southcentral Foundation, a nonprofit health system serving about 55,000 Alaska Natives. The Nuka Model was developed about 10 years ago using the wisdom of Native leaders. They acted in response to what they saw as their own failing health care system. Like many other health providers in this country, the foundation recognized an alarming contradiction: As health costs continued to increase, the health status of their patients only got worse. More dollars going to health care only resulted in worse health outcomes. So they decided to change things. From the ground up, they built a system of customer-driven health care. That is their term, not mine-- ``customer driven.'' ``Nuka'' is a Native word associated with family, and that is certainly the approach. The Nuka model creates teams of health providers--doctors, nurses, medical assistants--to work with each patient. It requires doctors to listen to the patients, to really hear what customers are saying about their lifestyles, their jobs, their families, everything that affects their overall health. It makes medical access much easier, guaranteeing that you can see your chosen provider for anything you want--same day. In person, via phone or e-mail--whatever is easier for the patient--same-day guarantee. Let me repeat that: same-day guarantee. Here is another important point. Physician salaries are based on the team's overall performance. I want to make sure my friend, Senator Burr from North Carolina, hears this part. The Nuka model is funded almost entirely by the Federal Government--half by Indian Health Services and one-third by Medicaid or Medicare. It works, and it works very well. This chart covers some of the most amazing results since the program started: a 50-percent drop in urgent care and emergency room visits; a 53-percent reduction in hospital admissions; a 65-percent drop in the need for expensive specialists; a childhood immunization rate of 93 percent, well above the State and national averages; much better management of diabetes with 50 percent of patients kept in the prediabetes stage instead of worsening into full diabetes; and happy customers. The overall satisfaction rate among our patients for this program is 91 percent. The Nuka model has attracted attention from all over the world, as it should. Even as recent as last month, the former Speaker, Newt Gingrich, recognized this great program. I am sure there are similar government-backed success stories throughout this country. I think I have made my point, and truly my remarks are not intended to single out any one Senator. But I will say this: As we debate health insurance reform in this Chamber, let's arm ourselves with the facts and with open minds. Let's not say no just because of partisan differences. Let's celebrate examples of innovation and excellence that work no matter where they come from, and let's use the successful models to extend good, quality care to millions more Americans. I am proud of the Nuka model in Alaska, of the people who got it started a decade ago, and of the people who are making it work today. I yield the floor.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the leadership George Cannelos demonstrated during his 4 years of public service as Federal Cochair of the Denali Commission. From 2005 to 2009, George effectively used his extensive experience in rural Alaska to improve the delivery of affordable, reliable, and sustainable infrastructure to scores of Alaska communities. With his guidance, the partnership between the Denali Commission and the State of Alaska grew in significant ways and has become the cornerstone of the Commission's success and progress. His advancement of collaborative efforts helped find innovative solutions with a promptness for carrying out the Denali Commission's mission. In his first year as Cochair, a transportation advisory committee was created, composed of rural Alaska leaders with broad experience. Its successful implementation made it a useful model for committees to come. In 2007, the Commission opened its first rural office, taking a new approach with a remote site workforce. George has led the Commission with passion and dedication to using innovative strategies in rural Alaska. For 2 years in a row, the Denali Commission was recognized by the National Association of Development Organization for innovative program work. His contributions have moved the Commission forward, leaving a positive outlook for upcoming years. His efforts will continue to do good work and play a critical role in the quality of life and economic development of Alaska's most remote communities. Mr. President and colleagues, please join me in recognition of his outstanding accomplishments and important work in improving the quality of life, infrastructure, housing, access to health care, and economic opportunity in rural Alaska. We thank him for his service and wish him luck as he begins the next chapter of his life.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I rise today to honor thousands of our fellow citizens who do not receive adequate recognition for their enormous contributions to our nation, Alaska Natives and Native Americans. President Obama has declared this month Native American Heritage Month. He also hosts an important summit Thursday with our Nation's tribal leaders. I salute the President's initiative, which is designed to strengthen the special relationship between the Federal and tribal governments. This week, many Alaska Native leaders have traveled long distances to participate in this summit because they recognize the great significance of the Obama administration's historic initiative. These events are especially important to Alaska because we proudly claim the highest per person number of Native Americans in the Nation. Nearly 20 percent of Alaska's population, about 120,000 Alaskans, are Alaska Natives. From time immemorial, Alaska's Native people have developed a rich cultural heritage and sustained themselves by living close to the land in some of the most challenging geography and climate on Earth. Today, the diversity in Alaska's Native community is broad. In scores of tiny villages in some of the most remote regions of our Nation, Alaska Native people feed their families with subsistence hunting, fishing and gathering. This is a way of life practiced by their ancestors for generations. At the same time in downtown Anchorage, prosperous Alaska Native corporations help fuel our State's economy and employ thousands of Alaskans and other Americans from gleaming modern office buildings. This is thanks, at least in part, to actions taken by Congress to help lay a foundation for success by America's first people and to provide the opportunity for self-determination. The story of Alaska's Native people is one of great success against enormous odds. For me, this story is also personal because I was born in Anchorage barely 3 years after Alaska became a State in 1959. In that era, the status of Alaska Natives was bleak. Fewer than 20 percent had a high school diploma; less than 1 percent a college degree. Half lived below the poverty line. Fifty percent of Alaska Natives lived without indoor plumbing, collecting their waste in what we call a ``honey bucket.'' And nearly two-thirds lacked what we define today as a job. Most hunted, fished and lived off Alaska's land and waters to feed their families. Today, the lives and achievements of Alaska Native people have improved dramatically. The 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act was a completely different model than the reservation system of the lower 48. It established 13 regional for-profit Native corporations, hundreds of village non-profit corporations and empowered Alaska's Native people to take their destiny into their own hands. Subsequent amendments to the act, such as those permitting Alaska Native corporations to participate in the SBA's minority business 8(a) program, helped even more. I am proud to note that the Settlement Act was among my dad's proudest accomplishments during his single term in the House of Representatives. Now, educational attainment is growing, with about half of Alaska Natives earning high school diplomas and nearly one-third with at least some college. Less than 25 percent now live below the poverty line. Three-quarters live in homes with the basic clean water and sewer facilities we all take for granted. What is most impressive to me is the success of Alaska Native corporations and tribes. They were formed to help fulfill the Federal Government's obligation to Alaska's indigenous people. After struggling in their early years, all 12 of Alaska's in-state regional profit corporations are profitable, generating about $4 billion in revenues for their Native shareholders. ANCSA corporations are among our State's top employers, providing jobs for more than 30,000 people. And I submit that these companies are among the most socially conscious in the world. Alaska's Native non-profits and tribal organizations partner to enrich our State and their members in many ways. They provide the resources that help schools, families and individuals preserve 10,000-year-old languages, values and ways of life. They help address the health needs of Alaska Natives through local clinics and hospitals, research centers and by building coalitions with local, State and Federal partners. They empower self-sufficiency with short-term financial assistance when it is needed, helping low-income families afford heating fuel and electricity, nutrition services for elders and even burial assistance so that family members are treated with dignity and respect. Through increased self-governance, Native tribal organizations in Alaska can provide even more essential services, from law enforcement to tackling crippling social problems. One of my most rewarding moments so far as a member of this body was making sure that two dozen brave members of the Alaska Territorial Guard all distinguished Alaska Native elders, finally got the recognition they earned for their courageous service to this Nation more than a half century ago. Long before Alaska was a State and our country was engaged in World War II, men like Wendell Booth of Noatak, Paul Kiunya, Sr. of Kipnuk, and Victor George of Nulato answered their Nation's call on America's most remote front lines. Last month, the Senate approved an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010 I sponsored with my colleague, Senator Lisa Murkowski. With President Obama signing that bill into law last week, these 25 surviving Territorial Guardsmen finally will receive the retirement pay and recognition they earned so many years ago. Great progress has been made over the years in helping establish the means for rural and Native Alaskans to succeed. Yet much work remains to be done. At the top of my Senate agenda are three specific areas of focus to ensure Alaska's Native people continue to flourish. First, we must make energy affordable for rural Alaskans. Some residents of my State pay the highest energy prices in the Nation. Electricity in some Alaska villages exceeds $1 a kilowatt hour, compared to just a dime here in Washington. When east coast residents complain about high gas prices, consider that a gallon costs $11 in Noatak, one of Alaska's villages. This is a bitter irony when you consider that Alaska has long prided itself as America's energy storehouse, providing the lower 48 States up to a quarter of their domestic oil production. We are working to address these problems here in Washington. My off-shore oil development legislation is unique by providing that local governments and tribes get a share of any revenues from Federal Outer Continental Shelf Development. Also try- ing to kick-start the Alaska natural gas pipeline with Federal loan guarantees and other provisions in the Senate energy bill. Fortunately, local Alaska leaders are not waiting around for Washington to act. Regional leaders like Ralph Anderson of Bristol Bay Native Association, Tim Towarak through his position with the Bering Straits Native Corporation, and Michelle Anderson of Ahtna Development Corporation, already are developing comprehensive, regional tribal energy plans. A second major issue facing Alaska's Native people is subsistence, the time-honored practice of harvesting Alaska's rich fish and wildlife resources to put food on the table. For the last 10,000-plus years, Alaska's Native people implemented a subsistence model that worked to create abundance for subsistence users. That system is now in disarray. The Obama administration announced plans just last month to revamp that system and I welcome their initiative. We must preserve the rural subsistence priority in Alaska at all costs. Finally, a continuing major issue in rural Alaska is the lack of basic infrastructure. This includes water and sewer systems, so Alaskans don't have to live in Third World conditions. It includes expanded broadband technology, so all Alaska children have equal access to the educational wonders of the Internet. We are working to address these needs in Congress. One model for economic development in rural Alaska is the Denali Commission. For more than a decade, this innovative agency has been addressing vital needs from health facilities and energy to roads and water and sewer systems. I will be seeking the continued support of my colleagues for the Denali Commission. Mr. President, the largest annual gathering of Alaska Native people convened in Anchorage just last month as the Alaska Federation of Natives convention. Thousands of Alaska Natives from across our State met in Anchorage's new Dena'ina Civic and Convention Center, named in honor of the first people of that region. Their theme spoke to the historic journey of Alaska's Native peoples. A journey of overcoming enormous obstacles; a journey full of accomplishment and pride. I am honored to join my fellow Alaskans on that journey, and to salute the enormous contributions of Alaska's Native people on this, the first week of Native American and Alaska Native Heritage Month.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for 15 minutes.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I was here at the opening of the session, and I heard the Republican leader say--and I agree with his actual comment--that the American people have been taken for a ride. The Senator from Oregon just described the ride--the ride right over the cliff of cost of insurance that is no longer affordable, with 45,000 people who die every year because of their inability to access affordable health care. The Republican leader is right, the American people have been taken for a ride--a ride over the cliff. What we are showing today is innovation, new ideas, new approaches that bring quality, affordable health care to millions of Americans and the 45,000 Senator Merkley talked about who die each year because of lack of health care. I thank the Senator from Oregon for reminding us of those statistics and making sure we do not forget what we are here to do. Next, I am pleased to hear from Senator Kirk. The Senator from Massachusetts joins us to discuss the Community Living Assistance Services and Support Act, or the CLASS Act. Yesterday, the Senator made his first speech on the floor of the Senate. It was enjoyable, exciting, and very to the point when it came to health care. Today I look forward again to his comments regarding health care, especially the CLASS Act. I yield time to Senator Kirk.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, for the next hour, I will be joined on this floor by my freshman colleagues as we talk with the American people about the importance of health reform. We are committed to ending the status quo. We have had enough of constituents being denied coverage because of existing conditions. We are tired of skyrocketing health insurance premiums hurting small business. We have had it up to here with the lack of choices and affordability in our States. So today my colleagues and I will be talking about why health reform will work and how it is working already. There are many pilot programs, State initiatives, and private programs showing results right now. There are other very good ideas pending in the health reform bills. Our general theme this morning is innovation that works. First, we will hear from the Senator from New Mexico, Tom Udall, who will discuss how we must address the very real health care challenges facing rural Americans. Senator Udall will share with us rural health innovation that works. I yield time to Senator Udall.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank Senator Udall for once again pointing out how prevention and wellness works and how some real hard dollars make a difference in health care. As I close, I again thank my colleagues, the freshmen, for once again coming this week and making our point clear on innovation and the impact it will have on bringing accountability and a better product for the consumer, ensuring that we reduce costs through innovation. I heard this morning some one-liners from the other side that say ``rationing, delay, deny'' is what we are all about over here. Absolutely wrong. What we are about is ensuring that the current rationing going on by insurance companies, the delay by insurance companies, and the denials by insurance companies stop so our consumers have good-quality, long-term health care. As I said earlier when the Senator from Oregon was talking, I heard again this morning that the American people were being taken for a ride. My comment was that I agree with the other side; they are--right over the cliff. It is time to take action and have health care reform. Is it a perfect bill when we are all here on the floor at some point discussing it? It may not be. But is it better than where we are today? Absolutely, because today is literally taking the American people right over the cliff. So it is in the best interests of the American people to move forward and create a better system that is more accountable with better quality. I appreciate my freshman colleagues for standing up today and laying out new, innovative approaches that are working across this country. I yield my time.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Colorado for talking about the importance of why we need to do this but also reminding us of the small business component of all this and how important it is not only for the individual policyholder but the small business that is struggling every single day. I thank him for reminding us, and I will now make my comments, and talk a little about what people have said today but also to hopefully blunt a few of the myths. I want to thank my freshman colleagues who have spoken this morning. It is truly wonderful to hear the many different ideas, innovative reforms that are already working, and about the new proposals that will help us achieve the overall goal of reform: Tens of millions more Americans covered, with access to more choices and premiums that individuals and small businesses can afford. In these final few moments of my time, I want to preempt what may come on the floor from the other side of the aisle later today, from those who will have listened to these presentations about innovation and excellence. They are likely to respond the way they have always responded to reform ideas--by just saying no. The bill is still being written, but we have already seen the tactics of the other side. They say this is a purely partisan exercise and that the Democrats are not listening to Republicans. They bring a big, thick, mock bill to the floor and say it is too big and we will never read it. They say the bills need to be on the Internet or democracy is somehow in jeopardy. With all due respect to my colleagues on the other side, the Republicans, I beg to differ. For starters, I brought my prop--actually it is not a prop; it is the real deal. What I am holding are the actual Republican amendments that were accepted to the HELP bill; 161 amendments, 300 pages of the bill--almost a third came from them. This is the stack that doesn't even include the additional Republican amendments accepted in the Finance Committee. These are not proposed amendments; these are the Republican amendments that were accepted and reported out of the HELP Committee. I have two questions. First, are the critics of health reform saying that the size of the eventual bill really matters, that the Senate leadership somehow should be embarrassed because a major piece of legislation that will affect one-sixth of our entire economy is not offered in some big-type Cliff Notes? We are already hearing that. By the way, all the bills have already been on the Internet for weeks, in some cases for months. The merged Senate version will be on the Internet and so will the final bill from the conference committee after the House and Senate work out their differences. My second question is this: I wonder how many of my colleagues across the aisle have actually read these Republican amendments, because there are some very good ideas. I know the Republicans are quick to say the committee only accepted technical amendments, but that doesn't appear to be true for all cases. An amendment by Senator Burr says the HELP Committee's community health insurance option must follow State insurance regulation. This is not trivial. It refers to important matters such as solvency, consumer protection, and much more. The amendment helps to ensure a level playing field between the public option and all the other health plans in each State's insurance market. That is hardly technical. The bipartisan amendment supported by Senators Gregg and Enzi and Alexander allows employers to give bigger incentives to employees who participate in workplace wellness programs, which I think is a great idea. It is something I implemented when I was the mayor of Anchorage, AK. My own Alaska colleague, Senator Murkowski, had other good ideas to add to the HELP bill, including improving student loan repayments to help medical professionals who agree to work in medically underserved areas--another very good idea. I hope my point is clear. There is a lot to be done by all of us, and there has already been good work by Members on both sides of the aisle. So let's talk about the merits of health reform, let's debate the policy, and let's lay out our legitimate differences and then work together on solutions. My freshman colleagues have described it well over the past hour. When it comes to reform, there are many examples of excellence already underway. We need to support such innovation, expand it, and make it part of a nationwide effort to give all Americans access to health insurance and basic medical care. There is still time for all of us to work together. We need health reform now, and we know it will work. I yield time at this point to the Senator from Colorado, Mark Udall.

Mr. BEGICH. I thank Senator Hagan for once again showing this morning another innovative approach to reducing health care costs for Americans today and into the future; and how wellness and prevention are critical for the long-term benefits of the American people in reducing health care costs--not by just a small amount but significant amounts, as she laid out. Next we will hear from our colleague from Colorado, Senator Bennet, who joins us to discuss how innovation and patient-centered care can improve our health care system. I yield time to Senator Bennet.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank Senator Kirk for describing the CLASS Act, an important program for long-term care, and the legacy of Senator Kennedy and his work regarding that innovation. At this time, we will hear from my colleague from North Carolina, Senator Hagan, who will discuss how wellness programs are a key component of comprehensive health care reform and how they have an impact on long-term outcomes for American citizens. Senator Hagan.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New Hampshire again for addressing innovative health care, to reward quality, create innovation, reduce costs and making sure we are accountable for our actions in regard to health care. This is what this side of the aisle is for--innovation and new ideas to bring some competitiveness to the process and lowering the cost of health care. Next, we will hear from Senator Merkley of Oregon. My fellow freshman joins us to discuss how critical it is for the Senate to act now on health care reform because the cost of inaction is too great. I yield time to Senator Merkley.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank Senator Burris for his comments. The words he uses--``rewards quality, innovation, reduced costs, accountability, and competition''--are what we stand for. The other side does not. By the comments the Senator has laid out, he has detailed his views and what competition can do in controlling the costs. Next is Senator Shaheen, who will join us to discuss three health care innovations in her State of New Hampshire. She will share the success of the Center for Informed Choice, the medical home pilot and community partnership for improved public health. I yield to Senator Shaheen.

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank Senator Udall for his comments about ECHO and HERO. It shows what is happening at the grassroots level. We are for innovation that works and brings quality of care, lowers the cost, and getting better delivery of the services out there. I thank the Senator for bringing those examples of what is working in his own State to the American people and stating what we are for in this process. Next, my colleague from Illinois will join us, Senator Burris, who will discuss the important competition in the health care reform debate and how it can improve innovation.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. I say to Senator Merkley, I am going to follow up on your points as to small businesses, and they are very good points. In Alaska, 52 percent of our population is self-employed, in some form or another, or they are self-employed and employ many individuals. Again, I am pleased to be back here with our freshman colleagues to talk about why America needs health insurance reform and why we need it now. Last week, we busted myths being pushed by the opponents of reform. Today, we join forces to describe the undeniably positive aspects of reform--how it will help our friends, our neighbors, and our loved ones. I rise to address the unquestionable link between health insurance reform and economic recovery in America. All of us on this floor have heard from those who say we should not do health reform now, that with the economy still hurting, we should wait. Some of that commentary comes from loud and angry naysayers looking for any excuse to kill reform. But that concern has also been raised by average Alaskans at our townhall meetings. It is a legitimate question, and here is how I answer my constituents: If we want to do this right, economic recovery and health reform have to go hand in hand. You cannot have one without the other. There are already signs in this country of our economic turnaround in progress. That is welcome news for American breadwinners going back to work, for businesses racking up new sales, and for manufacturers ramping up production to fill new orders. But there is more work to do, more progress to make. That is where health insurance reform comes in because the status quo is directly at odds with the possibility of continued economic growth. Here are a few examples. Businesses, big and small, have been saddled with skyrocketing health care costs for their workers. You have heard many examples this morning. The average health insurance premium in Alaska has risen 102 percent in the past decade--more than doubled. No matter which State you are from, those premium increases take a toll on business. Money that could go to innovation, investment, pay raises or added staff is going instead to insurance. Today, employer- provided family premiums in Alaska average more than $14,000, about the annual pay of one new minimum wage job. Household budgets are also strained. In this decade, health insurance costs for Alaska families have risen five times faster than wages. That is a loss of purchasing power that could be going instead into our local economy or to education to improve individual earning power. Of course, my Alaska examples are happening in States all over this country. The statistics are troubling. Today, one-sixth of the entire American economy is devoted to health care costs. Think about it. That is more than $2 trillion each year that does not go to job creation or business innovation or investments in infrastructure. If we do nothing to reverse this trend--if supporters of the high cost of insurance manage to kill this reform--this problem will get much worse. By the time my 7-year-old son is raising his family, one- third of the entire U.S. economy could be consumed by health care. Yesterday, on the floor of the Senate, one of our colleagues in opposition to health care reform put up a prop--which we will see over and over again--a large bill that was put on the desk. It is about 1,500 pages of the Finance bill, and over time that will change. But when you think about it, one-sixth of the economy will be decided by that bill--1,500 pages. To me, that is a small amount of work, in the sense of the legislation, to deal with one-sixth of our economy. But, again, we will see that prop over and over again. But I hope the American people will see through that and see how important dealing with one-sixth of the economy is and how having a bill of that length is important. How can we expect American businesses to shoulder such costs and be truly competitive in a global economy? Here is one example. Right now, General Motors reports that health care spending adds $1,500 to the cost of every car it produces. Of course, its chief overseas competitors do not have to worry about health care costs because their countries dealt with this years ago. We can and must do better. Economic peace of mind is fundamental to our democracy. It is the goal of every family in this country. It is a cornerstone of the American dream. Let me say again, if we are serious about economic recovery in this country, then we must be serious about health insurance reform. It is a package deal. Mr. President, I thank you and yield back the floor to the Senator from New Hampshire.

Mr. BEGICH

Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Colorado for his presentation, especially on small businesses and the impact health care reform will have on them. The Senator from Colorado has done a great lay of the land on the impact to small business, and I wish to step it up and talk about what I heard as I sat here and listened to several of my colleagues on the other side, the Republicans, talking about what is going to happen if we don't do something or if we do health care reform. In that regard, I wish to talk about at least one myth that I hear over and over from the other side that will impact not only small business but impact everybody. I am pleased to join my fellow colleagues and talk about the importance of health insurance reform in general, but the myth I wish to talk about today, which I have heard stated over and over, involves scare tactics and, in particular, a word which I think belongs in the soup lines of the Great Depression--``rationing.'' Opponents of health insurance reform have resurrected the word to suggest that Americans will get less care when reform legislation passes. Is there anything more cynical than telling Americans their health care will be rationed because of reform; that they will lose or get less care when Congress and the President finally take action? Defenders of the status quo ought to be embarrassed. They know the opposite is true--that more Americans will have access to more health care when reforms are finally adopted. Rationing is not some roadblock waiting down the road for the vast majority of Americans, it is what is happening right now. Let's use my State as an example--a State where 52 percent of the folks employed are from small businesses. When I came into the Senate at the start of this year, the Census Bureau said 123,000 Alaskans were uninsured. But new data came out last month--just a few months after the earlier statistic--and that number is up to 133,000. In other words, 10,000 more Alaskans have been rationed out of their coverage. Insurance companies no longer cover them. Unable to pay the skyrocketing insurance premiums, or maybe their employers can no longer afford it--as laid out so well by the Senator from Colorado--people and businesses are struggling to make sure they can afford their insurance premiums for their employees or they are rationed out of the system because they have switched jobs. Then, when they apply for new insurance, they are disqualified because of a preexisting condition or perhaps the annual cap on how much their insurance company will pay is so low people get sick and hit their limit early. From that point on, they can't afford to see a doctor for the rest of the year or ensure their coverage or their quality of care is maintained. This is another form of rationing, and it is real. By one estimate, 14,000 Americans lose their health insurance every day. These are friends and neighbors and loved ones and it is inexcusable. Maybe the reasoning for rationing is even more outrageous--the cases where insurance companies revoke coverage by a process of rescission. Unfortunately, that is very real. A report by the House Ways and Means Committee says insurance companies saved themselves $300 million over 5 years through this practice of rescission. So, again, let's put the word ``rationing'' in proper context. It is the status quo, and the insurance industry is making lots of money because of it. Let's talk about what will change when we pass health insurance reform. As you can see on the chart, reform will easily take care of many of the issues Americans face: Tell insurance companies they can no longer deny coverage because of preexisting conditions; stop them from setting low annual or lifetime caps and refusing to pay the care after that; reform will offer Americans more choices by creating health insurance exchanges--as so well described by the Senator from Colorado. As I like to call it, it is health insurance Expedia. As we do with travel, we can do with health insurance. It will require insurance companies and Medicare to pay for more preventive care so people can have regular checkups and screenings. This means we can recognize and even prevent oncoming chronic illness. Of course, this is better for the patient, and it saves us money. Let me say it again: The scare tactic of so-called health care rationing is just that, a tactic trotted out by those who want to kill reform. The truth is, health insurance reform will give Americans more--more people have more access to more health care. Mr. President, I yield the floor.