Member of Congress

Judd Gregg

Role
Former Senator
State
NH
Party
Republican

Speeches

HEALTH CARE AND EDUCATION RECONCILIATION ACT OF 20102010-03-24

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. I thought we were told insurance rates were not going to go up.

Mr. GREGG. I assume that is not just going to be people with incomes over $200,000.

Mr. GREGG. Isn't it equally likely that a large number of small employers will get frustrated with the rate increases they are getting in order to support people on Medicaid that they will simply drop that and push their membership, their employees over into this new exchange?

Mr. GREGG. We have basically a multiplier effect----

Mr. GREGG. In the area of costs being driven up as a result of this new policy of adding a huge number of people to an uninsured system that cannot afford it right now, Medicaid. The costs are going to multiply on people in the private sector. The effect will be higher premiums, less opportunity for your employer to give you insurance and, in the end, a higher tax rate for you, Americans who are just working Americans, not people with high incomes.

Mr. GREGG. Then they do not even take care of the doctors. They cut the doctors 21 percent on top of all this.

Mr. GREGG. That is the goal, isn't it?

Mr. GREGG. The Senator is absolutely right. Isn't it true one of the ultimate cost shifts is to claim that the health care bill is fiscally responsible when it ignores the fact that the doctors are being cut by 21 percent and does not even attempt to address that huge problem which represents $65 billion over 3 years?

Mr. GREGG. So I guess I would get on to the next question because it is pretty obvious we have to correct this problem with the physicians. In fact, as I understand it, the next bill immediately that we will consider will correct it for 30 days. Why wouldn't we correct it right now for 3 years, get that 3-year consistency in the system so physicians can have some confidence in their reimbursement rates, fully paid for? What possible, conceivable reason would there be not to vote for this type of amendment?

Mr. GREGG. Well, I think the Senator is absolutely right, but I would also suggest that maybe there is another reason they haven't paid for it in this bill or put the correction in this bill, which is that if they did that, the bill would fall because it would be out of compliance with the budget because it is a $285 billion cost over 10 years. Therefore, aren't they sort of trying to pull the wool over somebody's eyes here? Aren't they trying to act as if this bill that we know exists for our doctors, that we are never going to pay for it? We are not going to pay; we are just going to act as if it doesn't exist? We know as soon as this bill is over, we will have to do something about it, at least for the next 30 days.

Mr. GREGG. I see the Senator from Arizona has arrived.

Mr. GREGG. The Senator is absolutely correct, and that does call into question the representation that this bill is not a tax increase on Americans that we need 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce it.

Mr. GREGG. Well, you are going to need one IRS person for everybody in America who doesn't have insurance, I guess, or however the ratio works out. Everybody has to buy insurance under this bill, and your local IRS agent is going to show up at your door to tell you that you better do it or else you will have to answer to the IRS. We know there are no new taxes in this bill because that has been represented to us a number of times.

Mr. GREGG. I thank the Senator from Arizona, who has been one of the most cogent and thoughtful speakers on the issue of what this bill really does. He has hit the nail on the head time and time again with his points. They are all absolutely accurate. Has the Senator completed his statement?

Mr. GREGG. No, it is not deficit neutral if you actually score the number of years of income against the number of years of expenditures or you include the doctors fix. Either one would throw this into a deficit-negative situation.

Mr. GREGG. That is right.

Mr. GREGG. That is correct. And it is a bit of a scam, as you say. I am going to have to reserve the remainder of our time here for a moment, but I understand the Senator from North Carolina wants to bring up an amendment. Amendment No. 3652

Mr. GREGG. What is the time situation?

Mr. GREGG. Let me make two quick points. The only way CBO gets to the conclusions they reach, and they had to get to those conclusions, is because of the facts put before them. One of those facts, they have to presume Medicare is going to be cut $500 billion in the first years before full implementation, $1 trillion in the second 10 years during full implementation, and $3 trillion during the first 20 years of full implementation--$3 trillion. All that money is going to be taken out of Medicare and moved over to start new programs, new entitlements to benefit people who are not senior citizens and who, for the most part, have never paid into Medicare. That is a serious problem. You can score that positively if you wish, but first off I do not think it will happen. I think what will end up happening is, it will get put on our children's backs as debt. But second, if it does happen, it is wrong because Medicare has to be fixed and you are taking the money that should be used to fix it, if you believe in these types of cuts in Medicare, and you are spending them on a new entitlement.

Mr. GREGG. On your time you may ask a question, including my answer, which may take 24 minutes.

Mr. GREGG. I certainly don't question their professionalism. They are an extraordinarily good organization with a wonderful leader who is fair and unbiased. I don't question their conclusions because what they have to score is a fact pattern that was given them and the fact pattern given them by this bill is, on its face, not believable relative to what is going to happen in the outyears, even though they have to score it as believable. It is a fantasy.

Mr. GREGG. I simply ask the time of the Senator from Arizona come off ours and the time of the Senator from Montana for his answer come off his.

Mr. GREGG. I simply note the Senator from Montana made the case for my amendment rather eloquently because my amendment does address the doctors fix and it is paid for. Therefore, I certainly hope the Senator might consider voting for it. At this point, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Georgia.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the Senator from Louisiana. Amendment No. 3553

Mr. GREGG. What is the time situation?

View in Record