Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, as I indicated earlier today, Senator Lott and I and others have been discussing the manner under which we might be able to proceed to the bill. Earlier today, the unanimous consent request to proceed to the bill was not agreed to. We have been discussing the matter throughout the day. I think I am now prepared to propound a unanimous consent agreement that reflects an understanding about the way we might proceed later this week. I ask unanimous consent that at 9:30 on Thursday, June 21, the Senate vote on a motion to proceed to S. 1052, the Patients' Bill of Rights, and that the time between the completion of that vote and 12 noon be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees for debate only, and that at 12 noon the Republican manager or his designee be recognized to offer an amendment.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, this is an important day--and one that has been a long, long time coming. It has been nearly 5 years since President Clinton, at the time, appointed an independent panel of health care experts and asked them to come up with a Patients' Bill of Rights. It has been more than 4 years since President Clinton urged Congress to pass a Patients' Bill of Rights reflecting the panel's recommendations. It has been more than 3 years since the first bipartisan Patients' Bill of Rights was introduced in the House. And, it has been nearly 2 years since the last time we debated a real Patients' Bill of Rights here in the Senate. We have talked long enough. There is only one thing left to do. We need to pass a real, enforceable Patients' Bill of Rights now. The reason we are debating this bill is because so many people-- inside and outside of Congress--refused to give up. I especially want to thank the Senate sponsors: my colleague, Senator Kennedy, who has spent his entire adult life--nearly 40 years--working to improve health care for all Americans; my colleague, Senator John Edwards, who has played an indispensable role in finding an honest, honorable middle ground on the difficult question of liability; and my colleague, Senator John McCain, for having the courage--once again--to disregard party labels and challenge the special interests in order to change what needs to be changed. This bill matters--deeply matters--to America's families. More than 70 percent of all Americans with insurance and 80 percent of all Americans who get their insurance on the job--are now in some kind of managed care program. To them, this isn't a political issue; it can be a life-or-death issue. This bill ensures that doctors, not insurance companies, make medical decisions. It guarantees patients the right to hear all of their treatment options--not just the cheapest ones. It says you have the right to go to the nearest emergency room when you need emergency care. It guarantees you the right to see a specialist if you need one. It gives women the right to see an OB-GYN without having to see another doctor first to get permission. And it guarantees that parents can choose a pediatrician as their child's primary care provider, if they need one. But rights without remedies are no rights at all. That is why our bill guarantees people the right to appeal decisions by their HMO to an independent review board, and to get a timely response. Finally, if the HMO ignores the review board, our bill allows people to hold HMOs accountable--the same way doctors and employers, and everyone else in America is held accountable for their actions. The 85 million Americans enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid and other Federal health programs already have each of the protections in our bill. So does every Member of this Senate. Our bill extends them to all privately insured Americans--no matter what State they live in, or what insurance plan their employers choose. Opponents claim that guaranteeing these rights will cost too much. They say people will lose their insurance because insurance premiums will go through the roof. But the facts show otherwise. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, our bill would increase employee premiums an average of about $1.20 a month for real rights that can be enforced--$1.20 a month. Many things have changed since the first time this Senate passed a Patients' Bill of Rights. The bill itself has changed. We started with a bipartisan compromise: the Norwood-Dingell Patients' Bill of Rights. This bill is a bipartisan compromise on a bipartisan compromise. One of the most important compromises concerns liability. This bill says very clearly that employers cannot be held liable unless they participate directly in a decision to deny health care. The only employers who can be held liable are the small fraction of companies that are large enough to run their own health care plans--less than 5 percent of all American businesses. Small businesses never make treatment decisions, so they would never be sued. We have also compromised on where people can seek justice. Instead of allowing all disputes to be heard in State courts, this bill says disputes about administrative questions should be heard in Federal courts. Only cases involving medical decisions should go to State courts--just like doctors who make medical decisions. Support for a Patients' Bill of Rights has grown--inside and outside of Congress. In the Senate, we have Senators McCain, Edwards, and Kennedy. In the House, we have Congressman John Dingell and two conservative Republicans, Charlie Norwood and Greg Ganske. Outside of Congress, 85 percent of all people surveyed--and 79 percent of Republicans--support the protections in this plan, and so do more than 500 major health care, consumer and patient-advocate groups all across the country. There has been one other significant change since the first time we debated a Patients' Bill of Rights. Before, we could only guess what would happen if people were able to hold HMOs accountable. Now we know. Texas and California have both passed Patients' Bills of Rights. Texas passed its law in 1997. In nearly 4 years, 17 lawsuits have been filed--about five a year. In the last 6 months since California passed its law, 200 disputes have gone through the independent appeals process. None--not one--has gone to court. And two-thirds of the disputes were resolved in favor of the HMO. Experience from the two largest States--the two best laboratories--show that the scare tactics used by opponents of this bill are simply that: scare tactics. There are some important things that have not changed in the years since we started this debate. Americans are still being hurt by our inaction. Every day that we delay passing a real Patients' Bill of Rights, 35,000 Americans are denied access to specialty care--and 10,000 doctors; see patients who have been harmed because an insurer refused to pay for a diagnostic test. Despite the growing support inside and outside of Congress, we still face formidable opposition from the special interests. HMOs and their allies reportedly are spending $15 million on ads to try to kill this bill this week. We welcome an honest and open debate on the issues. We hope opponents will resist the temptation to kill this bill by loading it up with amendments that make passage difficult. Our hope is that this debate will be like the one we had not long ago on another important reform--campaign finance reform. In fact, I have personally suggested to Senator Lott that we take up this bill under the exact same understanding that we took up campaign finance reform; that we have a good debate on amendments; that we offer the motion to table, if that would be offered; if it is not tabled, that it be subject to second degrees. I think it worked as well on the campaign finance reform as any bill I have recently had the opportunity to consider, and I hope we can do the same thing for the Patients' Bill of Rights. I am hopeful our Republican colleagues will agree to that this afternoon. There is one more important change that has occurred since the first time we debated a Patients' Bill of Rights. We now have a new President. Members of his staff have said President Bush will veto our bill if this bill makes it to his desk. We remain hopeful that the President will decide to join us once he hears the debate and sees what our bill actually does. In the second Presidential debate, then-Governor Bush said: It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for people. . . . It's time to pass a national Patients' Bill of Rights. We agree. The American people have been waiting too long. Working together in good faith we can end this wait and pass a real Patients' Bill of Rights. I announce to all of my colleagues that it is my intention to stay on this bill for whatever length of time it takes. Obviously, we have this week and next week that are full weeks for consideration of the bill. My expectation is that if we finish the bill a week from this Thursday night, there would not be a session on Friday preceding the recess. If we are not finished Thursday night, we will then debate the bill and continue to work on it Friday, Saturday, Sunday. We will not have a session on the Fourth of July, but we will pick up again on July 5 and go on as long as it takes. We will finish this bill. It is also my expectation that if we finish this bill in time, I would be inclined to bring up the supplemental appropriations bill following the completion of the Patients' Bill of Rights. Those two pieces of legislation are bills I have already indicated to the Republican leader would be my hope that we could complete before the July 4th recess. In fact, it is my expectation and absolute determination to finish at least in regard to the Patients' Bill of Rights. We will see what happens with regard to the supplemental in the House and here in the committee.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 111 submitted by Senators Lott and Daschle.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until the hour of 1 p.m. Monday, June 18. I further ask that on Monday, immediately following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of the proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there be a period for morning business with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that S. 1 be considered as having been read the third time.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent, notwithstanding passage of H.R. 1, on previously agreed-upon amendments where language was affected by amendments agreed upon later, that it be in order for these amendments to be included in the bill as previously was the intent of the two managers.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the previous consent with respect to technical and conforming changes be vitiated.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I now ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I understand that S. 1052, introduced earlier today by Senators McCain, Edwards, and Kennedy, is at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 112 submitted earlier by Senators Allard and Hutchison.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 110 submitted by Senators Lott and Daschle.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 72, 97, and 107; that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be laid on the table, that any statements thereon be printed in the Record, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate return to legislative session. Before the Chair rules on this request, I want to add that we are prepared to clear four Treasury Department nominations on the calendar, as well as one military promotion. The remaining two nominations will require floor time and rollcall votes. We are working on those agreements. I simply note that because I have said from the very beginning of my tenure as majority leader that I am prepared to move nominations forward. We would have been prepared to move virtually all but two nominations. As I understand it, there are objections to the four Treasury Department nominations on the Republican side, as well as an objection to one military promotion. Given those objections, clearly we are not prepared to move to them today. It is not as a result of any particular objection on our side. We are prepared to move to them just as soon as the Republican matters can be resolved. I ask for their consideration.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, before I begin with the wrap-up items, I announce that all the matters that I am about to propose have been cleared on the Republican side.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I compliment the distinguished Senator from Alabama for his comments. I agree with much of what I heard. I think he is absolutely right. This is a real accomplishment. And for people who care about education on both sides of the aisle, we made real progress today. I am proud to be a part of it. I appreciate his comments. Madam President, I want to acknowledge the leadership of Senator Lott, our Republican leader. He was majority leader when we started. We had a number of discussions as we considered how to take up this bill. It was Senator Lott who said: We are going to take it up, and we are going to let amendments roll. We are going to let amendments be offered. We are not going to use extralegal parliamentary devices. We are going to stay with the agreement we had under the power sharing. He did it, and he did it with real style. The day should not end without a recognition of Senator Lott's commitment in that regard and the leadership he provided to allow us to complete the bill today. Senator Judd Gregg from New Hampshire also deserves special recognition. He stepped in at the end, completed the bill, as the Republican manager. I acknowledge his leadership as well.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I did not have the opportunity to hear all of the remarks made by our distinguished colleagues, but I also come to the floor to congratulate our colleague, Senator Kennedy, for the remarkable job he has done in getting us to this point. I think it is fair to say--I hope the country understands this--this bill would not be where it is today, we would not have passed it 91-8, if it were not for his persistence, his incredible leadership, and the ability he has to once again bring both sides together. I have had the good fortune now to work with our colleague from Massachusetts on so many things, and I am awed, I am inspired, and I am, indeed, grateful for his friendship and for the extraordinary leadership he provides. So I thank him and congratulate him in particular. Let me also congratulate our colleague, Senator Jeffords. He has gone through a very difficult period. He began by providing us with leadership on the Republican side as we took up this piece of legislation--now as an Independent, caucusing with us. He has voted and supported this legislation all the way through. His leadership, his commitment, his work also deserve special recognition. He is not in the Chamber at this time, but I just want to say, on behalf of the entire Senate, we thank him for what he has done and the manner in which he has done it. Of course, there are many others who have been very active. I cite especially Senator Lieberman and Senator Bayh for their efforts in working with Senator Kennedy. They have been extraordinary in their efforts to find common ground. We started in our caucus in some ways divided. We ended this whole debate more unified on education than we have been in a long time, and it is in part because of the work they have done. Senator Dodd, with his passion, his commitment, deserves special recognition as well. I salute him for the efforts he made to find ways to address the concerns he has with the bill. I thank him for his participation. Let me finally say, as Senator Kennedy has, and others have already noted, the one person who is not on the HELP Committee who probably had as much to do with getting this job done as anybody has--or ever will on a piece of legislation--is our assistant Democratic leader. You can only love Harry Reid if you know him. And I don't know of anybody who does not love him and have the affection for him that I do. He once again demonstrated his value not only to our caucus but to the Senate and to the country with the manner and the tremendous ability he demonstrates in working with us each and every day. He is the single best person any manager could ever hope to have as they work to try to resolve outstanding differences, scheduling conflicts, and the array of challenges we face in trying to work through any bill. So I acknowledge and congratulate our dear friend, Senator Harry Reid, our assistant Democratic leader, for the work he has done in getting us to this point. I will have a number of matters to raise as we prepare to close, Madam President, but at this point I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, this will be the last vote of the week. There will be no session tomorrow. We begin again on Monday. There will be no votes on Monday. For the information of all Senators, the first vote will occur sometime on Tuesday, but we will be in session on Monday. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, as I understand, each side now has 1 minute to make their presentation prior to the vote on the Sessions amendment.

Mr. DASCHLE. I urge its adoption.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, is it now not in order to move to the Sessions amendment?

Mr. DASCHLE. I only asked Senator Byrd be recognized to make the unanimous consent request. Following that, we would go to a vote on the Sessions amendment. After the Sessions amendment is disposed of, we would recognize Senator Boxer for purposes of offering another amendment.

Mr. DASCHLE. That will be offered. Then we will also have the Sessions amendment vote.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, we have been discussing this matter over the last few moments. I ask, after I have given a description of our circumstances, that Senator Byrd be recognized for a unanimous consent agreement. Just for the notification of our colleagues, we would then recognize Senator Boxer who has the right to offer a second-degree amendment. It is a freestanding, side-by-side amendment.