Bob Corker

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. I thank the Senator for his contributions, being down here on a Saturday on a very important issue. I know Senator Coburn is here. Senator Alexander is here. I don't know what order they may want to speak. It looks like it is Dr. Coburn. Again, each Monday, typically in his State, he is actually seeing patients. He knows something about Medicaid. He knows something about health care. Many of the reforms he put forth would give people a choice, low-income citizens a choice like we have. But, instead, this bill confines them to Medicaid. I know he is going to talk about that. I thank the doctor very much for being here.

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, did the Senator from Texas see this weekend where college students in California were having public protests about the huge increase in tuition out there? Yet here we are getting ready to pass something that is going to drive that up even more because the State of California will have to cover more Medicaid recipients without the money being provided. So this is going to exacerbate that situation. I don't know if the Senator saw it this weekend.

Mr. CORKER. Yes, it is the cheapest route for us and the most expensive way for the States. This has been mostly about moving money around. I have not seen a lot in here that has a lot to do with reform. I appreciate the comments about Medicaid and what it will do to your State. After having been a Governor, I know that Dr. Coburn, the Senator from Oklahoma, is here, and we have the Senator from Texas, who has been highly involved in every health care meeting we have had. Senator Hatch helped create SCHIP years ago. I think he knows that in this bill not only is there an unfunded mandate for Medicaid, not only are there taxes and Ponzi schemes, such as the CLASS Act, that have been put together, it doesn't fund an existing program such as SCHIP. That is another huge burden of $40 billion or $50 billion. I don't know if Senator Alexander wants to speak to that. I thank Senator Johanns for being here. I know he has a meeting off the floor.

Mr. CORKER. Our colleague from North Carolina has worked extensively on this issue. I think we have a couple Senators who have some business off the floor that is very important. I think Senator Barrasso may be one of those, and I think Senator Johanns is in the same boat. I know as a physician, the Senator actually knows something about health care.

Mr. CORKER. So I guess if you had Medicaid, it is kind of like, in many cases, you have something that is not usable; is that correct? I know Senator Alexander has spoken to an analogy in the past in that regard, but it makes it pretty difficult if you are a Medicaid recipient.

Mr. CORKER. I know to the people in Tennessee this doesn't pass the commonsense test--a whole new entitlement when we cannot take care of the ones we have. I know the people in Wyoming are also that way. The people in Tennessee know this bill will cause the private insurance they now have to go up, which is exactly the opposite effect Americans want. We have a former Governor here, who has important business off the floor in a minute. He has run their Medicaid Program. He wants to speak to this issue. I thank the doctor, Senator Barrasso, somebody who actually knows about health care, for being here to talk about this issue.

Mr. CORKER. I assume that by the Reid plan taking $464 billion out of Medicare savings and not using that money to deal with this huge doc fix issue--the fact that physicians are going to have a 23-percent cut in a year, they are not dealing with that. I know it costs about $247 billion to keep them whole. I assume that would keep many physicians, such as the Senator's former colleagues from--it would cause them to drop Medicare recipients, is that correct? (Mr. LEVIN assumed the Chair.)

Mr. CORKER. Madam President, just to make sure people who may be watching the Senate floor understand what is happening, Republican Senators took all day yesterday and today to read the bill and to actually go through sections of the bill to discuss it and make sure all of us are very familiar with the various pieces of it. I think all of us are united in concern about the way this bill is paid for. It is hard for me to believe that anybody could suggest that taking $464 billion out of Medicare, which is insolvent, would be a way to fund a new entitlement; or that pushing down an unfunded mandate to States, which we are going to talk about in just one moment, makes any sense at all--$25 billion worth; or increasing the Medicare tax, which would not be a tax to make Medicare more solvent, but instead go to a new entitlement program--we all know Medicare is going to be insolvent by the year 2017; and to have a bill that pays for itself over 10 years by having 6 years' worth of costs against 10 years worth of revenue; and then to have something such as the CLASS Act, which I know the chairman of the Budget Committee has called a Ponzi scheme, where, in essence, you create a program that takes in premiums over a 10-year period on a new entitlement for long-term care--another new entitlement, I might add, in addition to the one we are talking about today--it takes in those premiums but bars any money from going out for 5 years. So what you have is, in essence, a collection system that creates $72 billion. So I think all of us are very concerned about how this is funded. But today we want to talk about our tremendous concerns with the Medicaid expansion that is taking place. I am joined by a number of Senators who have had vast experience in State government and vast experience in health care. I think the American people have now realized this bill insures, per the CBO, 31 million additional people. But the expansion that causes that to occur is that 15 million people now will be on Medicaid who are not on Medicaid. It is the largest expansion of Medicaid in U.S. history. What we are doing to make sure this works budgetarily is we are forcing States to pick up the tab. I got an e-mail last night from my State--and I know other States are going to be talking about that, or people from other States. But last night, the State sent me an e-mail and said this was going to cost our State almost $800 million. Our State has been well governed for years. The senior Senator from Tennessee was Governor in the middle-eighties. We have had both Republicans and Democrats who have governed our State very well. In our State, we do not expect our revenues to be back to 2008 levels until 2013. So you can imagine that our Governor, who is on the other side of the aisle, is very concerned about us here in Washington saying he has to expand his Medicaid Program. We are going to expand it around the country by 15 million people, and he has to pay for it. He is more than upset about that particular issue. I know people here in Washington--the Washington establishment-- generally speaking, are upset about the fact that States actually balance their budgets. We don't do that here, but in order to show almost disrespect for the way our States, in most cases, have to balance their budgets, what we are saying is we are going to make it more difficult on them by making sure that in order to reach a goal, we force our States, through an unfunded mandate, to cover an additional 15 million people under their Medicaid programs. Let me just mention that I thought we were actually going to do health care reform. I know there is probably a lot of laughter taking place in the halls of this building today because I thought when we talked about health care reform, that is what we were going to do. We know Medicaid is one of the worst programs that ever existed as it relates to health care. Let me just mention a couple stats. The Cancer Journal published that Medicaid recipients were two to three times more likely to die from the disease than people who were not on Medicaid. The American College of Cardiology in 2005 said Medicaid patients were almost 50 percent more likely to die after coronary artery bypass surgery than patients on Medicare or private pay. Forty percent of physicians in our country don't even take Medicaid. In urban areas, 50 percent of specialists have blocked patients from entering their program. So I wish to say just this and then I will stop because I want to hear from other colleagues who have been around here for awhile. But when I was back home during August, citizen after citizen said to me: I know we are going to have health care reform. What I would like is just to have what you, Senator, have. That is what I would like to have. I know Senator Burr worked on a bill that would do that. It would create the ability for people to participate, as we do, in choice. I know Senator Alexander worked with Senator Wyden and others, and I worked with Senator Burr in the first Congress to create legislation that did that. As a matter of fact, Senator Wyden, from the other side of the aisle, created a bill that did away with Medicaid. It gave Medicaid recipients the same kind of choice that we in the Senate have. But it seems to me, Senator Reid's bill goes in exactly the opposite direction. What it does, in order to add 31 million people to the rolls, 15 million people are being forced into Medicaid. So I would think, then, that in order to make sure we are treated just like our citizens, one of the first votes we might take is that we agree, as Senators, to be treated the way the majority of people in this program are being treated, and I assume that going on Medicaid with those same results for our families would be something we would embrace. I think all of us heard from citizens across this country that they want the same choices we have. But in the name of reform, we are going in the opposite way and, again, locking them into nonchoices, nonphysicians, bad outcomes, and going in exactly the wrong way we should be going and, to boot, making States pay for it. There is one class of people, though, who are not treated that way in this bill. I have tremendous respect for those immigrants who have come into our country in a legal way. Let me make sure people understand that. Sometimes my southern drawl confuses people. I have tremendous respect for people who have come into this country in a legal way. The Reid bill does this. He respects them too. What the Reid bill says is, if you are born in America and you are from 100 to 133 percent of poverty, then you are barred from receiving a subsidy and are forced to be on Medicaid, but if you come into this country as a legal immigrant, you actually can receive a subsidy to purchase a private insurance policy. I find that most interesting. I don't know if some of my other colleagues--I know Senator Burr has spent a lot of time on this. I find this reform very troubling. I know the Senator has worked hard to give Medicaid recipients the same choice as we have. I don't know how you feel about the reform that is before us.

Mr. CORKER. Madam President, I know the time is slightly before the hour. I do not know if there are any Democrats who want to speak beyond the Senator from Michigan during this hour. With that, I think we are anxious to get going. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Republican speakers be permitted to enter into a colloquy during the time controlled by the minority, which I understand ends at 4 o'clock today. Is that correct?

Mr. CORKER. In essence, Medicare will become more similar to Medicaid because of this bill. Less physicians will be covering Medicare recipients because this bill, instead of using the $464 billion to make sure physicians are paid, will leverage a new entitlement. So my assumption is, this program, unless something else happens, will become more similar to Medicaid. Medicare will become similar to Medicaid.

Mr. CORKER. I thank the Senator very much for coming. No one in this body knows more about what is happening in public programs than he. We heard for the last 55 minutes from the Senators from Texas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Utah, North Carolina, Nebraska. I can't think of a better person to close us out this afternoon than the distinguished Senator from Tennessee. I am fortunate to serve with this Senator. He was a Governor, an education Secretary. He knows what he is talking about. I am proud the senior Senator from Tennessee is going to close us out on what I think has been an outstanding hour on the floor.

Mr. CORKER. I thank the doctor. It is so good to hear from somebody who has dealt, year after year, with Medicaid recipients with his compassion. Senator Hatch from Utah, I don't think there is a person in this body on this side of the aisle who has spent more time trying to make sure the poor children of our country have health care. No one has done that. I know he is here to speak today about this huge Medicaid expansion. I thank the Senator for the leadership he has shown in this body for years, ensuring that young children in this country have appropriate health care.

Mr. CORKER. I would be losing a lot of sleep right now. I know people all across the country who have to act responsibly, unlike us, are losing sleep over what we are getting ready to do to States across the country. Is the Senator finished? Is that the point?

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I will be very brief. I know there are very few Senators still here in the Capitol. Most people, as they should, have gone home to meet with constituents, something I will do a little later this afternoon. I realize there may be very few staff members who may be listening. I realize the other body is in session and may possibly take up the health care bill that all of us have been talking about for some time here on the floor. I want to make a point I made a few days ago one more time. Early this week I woke up early in the morning and was thinking about the health care legislation that is before this body--or will be before this body very soon. It has been the focus of the country, if you will, over the last several months. I thought about the provisions that are the base building blocks in this legislation. You have a piece of legislation that is taking Medicare savings, $400 to $500 billion, and using those ``savings'' to leverage a whole new entitlement, not using those ``savings'' to take Medicare and make it more solvent or to deal with the SGR issue so many physicians around this country are concerned about. I thought about the fact that not long ago, a couple of years ago-- and probably, Mr. President, even when you were doing the same thing I was doing and that is seeking this office--so many people were concerned about the unfunded liabilities we had in Medicare and Social Security. There seemed to be a bipartisan move to want to solve that problem for the long haul so we knew that those particular entities would be dealt with in an appropriate way. Here we have a bill that is taking $400 billion to $500 billion in savings, depending on which draft, whether it is the House or the Senate, and instead of making Medicare more solvent--it has $38 trillion in unfunded liabilities--we in this body are using those savings to leverage a whole new program. Second, we are using Medicaid and basically creating huge unfunded mandates for our States. I think all of us know that. In my own State we have a Democratic Governor who wants to see health care reform occur, as I do, but he is very concerned, in a State that expects revenues to be at 2008 levels in 2013, that all of a sudden he has this unfunded mandate. Third, this bill, as we know, is going to raise insurance rates because of some of the provisions wherein insurance companies have to take all comers but everyone doesn't have to bill health insurance. In my own State, it is a 60-percent increase projected in 5 years by an independent group. This is not something the insurance companies directly put together; an audit was put together to look at this. If I had drafted this bill, Bob Corker from Tennessee, a Republican, if any of the people on this side of the aisle had drafted this bill, there would not be one single Democratic vote for this bill if you look at those components which are the basic building blocks of this bill. This week, as I have come up here to vote, I have talked to numbers of my friends, like you, Mr. President. You are one of the specific ones. I don't want to throw you in this category, but you are my friend. I have numbers of friends on the other side of the aisle where I seek to find common ground and we cosponsor legislation together. You and I are working on something right now. As I rode the elevator up yesterday to the vote we had last night, I talked to some numbers of my friends on the other side of the aisle, both on the elevator, walking here, but on this floor. And I said: You know, guys, if I had offered this bill, or any Republican had offered this bill that we are getting ready to debate on the Senate floor, there would not be a single Democratic vote for it. That is not because of partisanship, by the way; it is because of what is in the bill itself. Almost to a person, there were a few who said they agreed. They said: You are right. If Republicans offered a bill that is at $400 to $500 billion of Medicare savings and did not apply it to making Medicare more solvent but took that to leverage a whole new program, there would not be a single Democratic vote for that bill. So I understand. We had a President of our party during the first 2 years I was here. I understand what happens when you are going to ``do one for the Gipper,'' if you will. You are going to ``do one for the President'' who needs this. But this is a very important piece of legislation. I do not understand--I really do not--on something that is going to be hard to undo, why so many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are supporting a piece of legislation that if they were left to their own accord and in a vacuum--did not have the President, did not have the majority leader, did not have the Speaker of the House pushing this legislation--if it was just presented to them if they were at a townhall meeting, they had never heard of this legislation before, and somebody said: Would you support a bill that does this, I do not think there would be a person on the other side of the aisle who would support this legislation. So as we move into this weekend--and I know this body is not going to take it up. I know the House is. I hope there are a few House Members listening. I hope people will think about this and step back away from it. I am one of those Republicans who wants to see responsible health care reform. I want to see us lower the costs of this delivery system, which this bill candidly does not do. I want to see more Americans have access--if not all--to affordable, quality health care. This bill, we all know, takes us in a direction, there is no question, that is not the right direction. I hope that together we will figure out a way to address health care reform in a way that will stand the test of time. This bill will not do that, and I know I have already talked to many of the people I mentioned yesterday who said: We realize we are going to create lots of problems. They are going to have to be dealt with down the road, but we cannot vote against this piece of legislation today. I hope the body will rise to the occasion. I hope the body will put aside a piece of legislation that I do not think anybody feels great about. I hope we will come together and do something that is in the best interests of our country. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I rise to speak as in morning business.

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I know there has been a lot of discussion throughout our country and probably some here on the Senate floor regarding the elections that took place last night and what that means. I think most of it has been centered around politics. I wish to suggest something. I think that much of what the country is in some degree of upheaval about is the policies we are discussing here on the Senate floor and the things that are moving through committees. Obviously the major issue of the day is health care, health care reform. We have a bill over in the House, we have one that can essentially be on the Senate floor in the very near future. I would like to sort of create a picture, if I could, for my friends on the other side of the aisle. As I look at the bill, the health care bill that seems to be coming together, that I think again will be put together soon, I know, No. 1, there is a lot of hesitation. I know our majority leader is having difficulty finding 60 votes to actually move the bill ahead. What I wish to mention to my friends on the other side of the aisle is this: If Republicans had put forth a health care bill that took $400 to $500 billion out of Medicare to leverage another program that was not used to make Medicare, which is insolvent, more solvent; if Republicans had put forth a bill that created an unfunded mandate for States by making States raise their Medicaid levels--in other words, we are mandating that in my State alone it is going to cost $735 million; and if Republicans had put forth a bill that we knew was going to raise premiums--in our State it is going to raise premiums by 60 percent over the next 5 years based on an independent study; if Republicans had put forth a bill that had the exact same building blocks as the bill that has been put together through our Finance Committee, that is now being merged with the HELP Committee bill, I do not believe there would be a single Democratic vote for that bill. I absolutely do not believe that if Republicans put forth exactly the bill we have been discussing here in the Senate, I do not think there would be one Democratic vote for that bill. What I am suggesting is that I know there is a lot of unease on the other side of the aisle regarding this bill. There is tremendous unease on our side. I do not think we have a single Republican today who feels in any way good about the legislation that has been discussed. A lot of times we as parties make a lot of mistakes by ``doing one for the Gipper,'' through supporting our President. Republicans have done that in the past where sometimes we get behind a policy that maybe we were uneasy with, but our President, our leader, wanted a particular policy to be brought forth. My sense is that is exactly what is happening right now with my friends on the other side of the aisle and our sitting President; that is, for political victory people are seeking this health care reform. But I believe, again, if Republicans offered exactly this same bill with the same fundamental funding mechanisms, there would not be a single Democratic vote. For that reason, there has been a message sent to this body by the recent elections that have taken place. People across the country are concerned about the policies this health care bill we have been discussing puts forth. I say to my friends on the other side of the aisle: Let's stop what we are doing right now. I know there is a lot of unease. Let's get this right. I am one of those Republicans who would like to see health insurance reform. I campaigned on that when I ran for the Senate in Tennessee. I was commissioner of finance for our State in the middle 1990s and dealt with many of the issues of people in our State not having health insurance. I would like to see us do the right thing. I would like to see us have a policy that will stand the test of time. I say to my friends on the other side of the aisle: Let's throw this bill aside. You wouldn't vote for this bill if we offered it. You should not vote for it just because your leadership and your President want to see it happen. Let's step back and do something that will stand the test of time. I hope my colleagues on the other side, who I know are incredibly uneasy about this legislation that has very poor building blocks, I hope they will listen. I hope together we can step back, and I hope we will put in place some policies that, again, will benefit Americans and stand the test of time. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORKER. I will not take 27 minutes. Thank you for letting me know that. Madam President, I was on the Senate floor last week, which is a rarity for me. I spend very little time on this floor. Most of my time is spent in committee hearings. But I rise today to speak regarding the proposed Stabenow bill, a bill that is designed to pass on a $\1/4\ trillion in unfunded liabilities to future generations. As you know, we have been talking about health care reform in this body for some time. I have met numerous times with almost every official involved in health care reform and talked about how I thought it was unwise to look at taking $404 billion out of Medicare and not using that money to deal with the issue of SGR or the ``doc fix,'' the fact that physicians across this country are going to see a 21-percent cut in fees in the very near future, and what that would do to the Medicare population depending upon these services. I talked to the President on July 15 about how this body and the House were putting together pieces of legislation that did not make sense. I urged the President to use a responsible approach as it relates to health care reform. I have met with the chairman of the Finance Committee, the distinguished Senator from Montana, numerous times to talk about the Ponzi scheme that is being created by the Finance Committee in looking at how we finance something that is going to be a part of our citizens' lives for years to come and certainly a tremendous strain on the American budget. I have been told from day one that in fact we were going to put together a health care reform bill that will be paid for. I think most people know now the way that is being looked at is we are going to take $404 billion out of Medicare, which is an insolvent program, and leverage a new entitlement program--something the people of Tennessee do not believe makes much common sense. I know you are aware of the fact that in addition to trying to solve this problem by taking money from an insolvent program, we also are planning to pass what Tennessee's Governor has called the mother of all unfunded mandates; making States, if you will, increase their Medicaid rolls at their expense so we in Washington can say we have reformed health care. But I have to say one of the most sinister moves I have seen take place in my 2 years and 10 months being in the Senate is the Stabenow bill. The Stabenow bill seeks to say we are going to deal with SGR, that we are going to deal with our obligation in Medicare to pay physicians at least the rates they are making today. We are going to pass on a $\1/4\ trillion bill to future generations in order to get support from physicians across our country. I talked to physicians in our State this weekend, a meeting at Tennessee Medical Association--the American Medical Association was on the line--and I was shocked at the response. Today the Hill cited a meeting where Senator Reid and others met with physicians in order to buy their support. I know we all know the selling of one's body is one of the oldest businesses that has existed in the history of the world. So the AMA is now engaged in basically selling the support of its body by leveraging--by throwing future generations under the bus, by in essence urging that we as Congress pass this week a $\1/4\ trillion spending bill, unpaid for. If we would do that, we might get their support in health care reform. I have to tell you, I have never witnessed something more sinister than the Stabenow bill. It is my hope that this week Senators on both sides of the aisle will come together and realize we have to graduate. We talk fondly about the ``greatest generation,'' our parents and others, who did so much in the way of sacrificing for this country to make sure that generations who came after had a better way of life. I am sad to say that--while I consider it the greatest privilege of my life to serve in this body, and I thank the citizens of Tennessee for allowing me this lease, this 6-year lease to serve in this body to try to conduct myself in a way that will put our country's long-term interests first--I am sad to say I serve during what I would call the ``selfish generation.'' The political leadership we have today, of which we are a part, no doubt embodies the most selfish policies this country has seen in its history. There is no question that is the case; that for short-term political gain, in order to make some constituents happy, in order to give people what they want with no sacrifice, we are willing to throw future generations under the bus. It is my hope, this week even, this body will graduate from that selfish existence, doing things we know absolutely are undermining the future of this country, and that we will come together and look at this legislation in the appropriate way. I hope there will be Senators on both sides of the aisle that revolt at the majority leader's push to purchase the support of physicians all across our country by, in essence, creating legislation that puts our country another $\1/4\ trillion in debt. Madam President, I wanted to say this is not at all what the President said he would do. This President has said he would offer health care reform that balanced the budget. The American people understand by doing what the Stabenow bill seeks to do this week, that is absolutely not true. This administration absolutely is not living up to the commitment it has given the people of this country. This body needs to stand up and do what is right. I hope we will do that this week. I hope we will defeat the Stabenow bill as it now has been introduced. I hope we will work together to do those things that are responsible. I absolutely agree physicians around this country do not need to take a 21-percent cut. I have probably been the most outspoken person on that issue in the Senate since I came here. But what we need to do is balance our resources, not continue to do things we think make sense on one hand to the detriment of future generations. It is my hope this will be embodied as part of the overall health care reform package. This gets to my point I have been making on this floor and in committees and other places for months; that is, it makes absolutely no sense to use $404 billion out of Medicare to finance health care reform and not deal with SGR. I hope other Senators will join me in revolting against this most sinister act that, hopefully, will not come to fruition this week. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. Thank you, Mr. President. I also rise today to speak about the debate before the Congress right now, which is health care reform. I believe we need health reform in this country and health insurance reform in this country. I would love to see us embark on a set of time- tested, budget-neutral principles. I absolutely believe we ought to address the issue of preexisting conditions. I absolutely believe we ought to look at exchanges where citizens all across this country have access to the same kinds of choices I have as a Senator. I hope we will address the issue of cross-state competition where people in States are not just stuck with the choices that exist because of the monopolies that occur within their State boundaries. So I would love to see some cross-state competition. I absolutely believe we ought to have Tax Code changes. I think we ought to limit the amount of tax-free benefits individuals can receive from their employers. I will just throw out a number. If that number was established at $17,000, for instance, about $450 billion would be generated over a 10-year period that could be used as a voucher or refundable tax credit to enable 15 to 20 million Americans to be able to access private, affordable, quality insurance. I think we ought to address tort reform. We know there is so much in the way of medical procedures that are done, in essence, for defensive medicine so that they are not sued or the victims of junk lawsuits. I am one of those people who absolutely believes it is time in this country that we had certain health reforms and health insurance reform. I think now is the time to debate and put into place those sensible, time-tested reforms. My guess is, if we sat down in a bipartisan way, which I know is not occurring at this moment, we could go 50 yards down the field in a way to create access for Americans in our country that all of us want to see and, again, do so in a way that doesn't push off costs into future generations. I have serious problems with what is being discussed in the Finance Committee today as far as how we are going to pay for the many reforms that go beyond what I just discussed. In many cases, it is very unnecessary. Let me go over a couple of those. No. 1, I think most people are aware by now that the Senate Finance Committee mark is basically causing States to have an unfunded liability. The Governor of our State, who is on the other side of the aisle, just sent me a letter yesterday and told me he expects the revenues in the State of Tennessee to be at 2008 levels in the year 2013. In other words, there has been a tremendous decrease in revenues for State government. Yet per the mark before the Finance Committee today, they are pushing off on the citizens of our State a $735 million unfunded liability. That doesn't sound like a lot of money in Washington, but I can assure you it is a lot of money for the State of Tennessee. As you can imagine, as the years go out that number increases tremendously. It is my belief there are States all across this country that are going to be coming to us asking why we are pushing off an issue to the State. I think that is incredibly irresponsible. I think we need to ensure that does not occur. I have to tell you, an issue I have an even greater problem with is the fact that we all know we have a $40 trillion unfunded liability as it relates to Medicare. Two or three years ago, there was a broad consensus, on a bipartisan basis, that we needed to address the unfunded liability that threatens our country under the entitlement programs--mostly Medicare, which is $40 trillion. This bill takes $400 billion to $500 billion from Medicare and uses it to create a whole new entitlement. Instead of doing those things that would strengthen Medicare, which the trustees have said is going to be insolvent in 2017--instead of doing that, which is the responsible thing for us to focus on today, this Finance Committee mark would take money from a program that is insolvent and use it to leverage a new entitlement program. I think that is the most irresponsible, shortsighted thing this Congress can do. In addition to that, it doesn't even deal with the issue of the doc fix. We all know physicians and providers who serve seniors today, to make the same money in 10 years they are making today, would cost $285 billion. Instead of dealing with that issue, the can is being kicked down the road, and we are not dealing with that. I think the American people respect--and I respect--the people who came before us who are called the ``greatest generation.'' Sometimes they are called the ``greatest generation'' because of their sacrifices and their military efforts overseas. Sometimes it is because they saved and made the tough choices that have helped make this country great. But I believe if this Congress acts to take money from Medicare, which is insolvent, and doesn't use those cost savings to make Medicare more solvent, we will be contributing to the fact--and there is no doubt in my mind that the political leadership that exists today in this country is undoubtedly the most selfish that this country has ever seen. We are witnessing that today. We are a part of that today. It is my belief if we continue to throw future generations under the bus, which is what we are doing with legislation like is being proposed today--we are throwing future generations under the bus to score a political victory that we all know is not paid for--the wrath of the American people is going to come upon us, and it should. Mr. President, I have a letter from our Governor. I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record. It talks about the costs this program will put on the State of Tennessee.

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, do I have 10 minutes allocated?

Mr. CORKER. It sounds as if I have 9 minutes.

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. CORKER

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.