John McCain

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. It has been a great time. We are going to do it again, a lot, between now and the time the vote is forced, and the American people are on our side.

Mr. McCAIN. We are here.

Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, as much as I would like to put the last Presidential campaign behind me, we seem to be continuing to dredge it up in a totally false manner, time after time. I ask unanimous consent that my campaign position paper on a specific plan of action lowering health care costs be printed in the Record.

Mr. McCAIN. Then I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a statement from FactCheck.org, of October 20, 2008, that says: ``Obama's False Medicare Claim,'' which were the attacks on me which were not based on fact. I quote from FactCheck.org: These claims are false, and based on a single newspaper report that says no such thing. McCain's policy director states unequivocally that no benefit cuts are envisioned. McCain does propose substantial ``savings'' . . . I did propose savings, and we can make savings. Nowhere in my wildest imagination did I ever believe we were going to cut benefits in order to create a $2.5 trillion new entitlement program when the system is already going broke. I will have those put in the Record.

Mr. McCAIN. The Senator from Massachusetts wants to distort my record, and that is fine. But it gets a little----

Mr. McCAIN. As Ronald Reagan once said: Facts are stubborn things.

Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Massachusetts be allowed 3 additional minutes and I be allowed 2 additional minutes.

Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts. This has been a vigorous debate. I see my prime adversary, the Senator from Illinois, on the floor, whom I look forward to doing battle with additionally, as well as my friend from Massachusetts. The fundamental point, I would say to my friend from Massachusetts, is that I never envisioned, nor do I believe the American people ever envisioned, we would be ``cutting'' benefits or, as the Senator says, making savings in order to transfer that to a brand new entitlement program. That is what the debate is about, whether we are going to take a failing system that in 7 years is going bankrupt, according to the Medicare trustees, and then take all this money, no matter how these savings are made--and I believe they are cuts of huge magnitude--and then fund a brandnew entitlement program. That is what this real debate is about. I thank my friend from Massachusetts for his courtesy. I look forward to the rebuttal from the Senator from Illinois, as well as the Senator from Montana. Thank you. I yield the floor. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Yes. For those who missed Senator Hatch's important statement last night, which he will add to today, I point out that he was able to take a trip down memory lane. In June 2003, when the Medicare Modernization Act was before the Senate, several of our colleagues, including Senators Schumer and Kerry, offered a bipartisan amendment on the floor to provide additional funding for benefits under the Medicare Advantage Program. But amnesia is not confined to one side of the aisle around here. I ask my friend from Tennessee--you know this discussion about Medicare Advantage--we have to better understand what is this program and why is it so popular. Is it because it offers seniors a chance to get additional benefits? Maybe the Senator can give a short definition of that. I think the American people may not be totally clear on what we are discussing here and why 11 million Americans--over 300,000 citizens in my own State--have chosen Medicare Advantage, and that has prompted, according to Bloomberg, Senator Casey of Pennsylvania, to say, ``We are not going to be able to say 'if you like what you have, you can keep it.''' ``That basic commitment that a lot of us around here have made will be called into question.'' The title of that is ``Dem Senator Says Medicare Advantage Cuts Break President's Pledge.'' Maybe the Senator from Tennessee can give me a brief outline of what seniors get under Medicare Advantage and why it is so popular with 330,000 senior citizens in my State and 11 million in the country.

Mr. McCAIN. Lower income seniors.

Mr. McCAIN. I thank my friend. The reason I ask this, he mentioned that Medicare Advantage would allow seniors to have dental care, vision care, hearing care, physical fitness--it is fascinating. This allows our senior citizens to have dental, vision, hearing, and physical fitness care, and that is a little strange because, as was pointed out to me, that is exactly what we have here in the Senate. About 100 paces from here, if I need some doctor care immediately, if I need some vision care, if I need some dental care, I can get it. Next to my office in the Russell Senate Office Building, for the last several months--and I don't know at what cost, but I would like to get entered into the Record how many tens of millions of dollars it is. But they are renovating a gym. So my colleagues yesterday voted against keeping the Medicare Advantage Program, when we have, right here, the best Medicare Advantage Program ever heard of in the world--free hearing, free vision, free dental--and they are expanding a gymnasium in a many- months-long project. I will get the cost of that, although that may be hard to do. Let me get this straight. Again, the American people should understand this. We voted to cut drastically a program that seniors have taken advantage of, which gives them additional hearing, vision, dental, and physical fitness care, while we practice it here every single day. Every day, there is a physician on duty--more than one--not very far from where I speak, who is ready to give us instant care. If hospitalization is needed, we can get instant transportation to the Bethesda Naval Hospital, where we will get free care. Incredibly, the Senate, on largely partisan lines, yesterday voted against senior citizens in this country, most of whom have paid a lot more into the program than we have. We are going to deprive them of what we have every single day we are members of the Senate. That is an exercise in hypocrisy. The Senator from Pennsylvania has it right, because the President, time after time, said to the American people: If you like the insurance policy you have today, you can keep it. How many hundreds of times have we heard him say that at townhall meetings? And his administration mouthpieces say the same thing. The Senator from Pennsylvania is right when he says, ``We are not going to be able to say if you like what you have, you can keep it. That basic commitment that a lot of us around here have made will be called into question.'' I will say a couple words, and I will talk more about this later. Every time the Senator from Montana and others are on the floor, they talk about the fact that AARP now supports this blatant transfer of funding from the Medicare Program, which the seniors have earned, into a brandnew entitlement--a $2.5 trillion entitlement program. That is what this bill is all about. For your information, AARP has received $18 million in stimulus money. There is a job creator for you. AARP, which has given its full- throated support to the Democratic health care legislation, even though seniors remain largely opposed, received an $18 million grant in the economic stimulus package for a job training program that has not created any jobs, according to the Obama administration's recovery.gov Web site. That is astonishing to me because from everything I have ever seen, they have created millions of jobs, including in the ninth congressional district of Arizona, where they said they created thousands of jobs. Unfortunately, we only have eight congressional districts, but that is OK. In February, Politico reported that AARP was putting pressure on Republican Members of Congress to support the stimulus package. Since then, AARP has moved on to lobbying for passage of health care legislation, even though Democratic proposals have called for several hundred billion dollars in cuts to Medicare--a program that the group typically defends tooth and nail when Republicans propose cutting it. It turns out that AARP is also in a position to benefit financially if the health care legislation passes, because seniors losing benefits as a result of cuts to Medicare Advantage will be forced to buy Medigap policies, which is the main source of AARP revenue. Barry Rand, chief executive of AARP, was a big donor to the Obama campaign and has retained a cozy relationship with the administration. That is shocking news. So, my friends, also I might add that in 2006, AARP received $18 million from the Federal Government, and we are reserving additional Federal moneys that they get. The most important thing is this, and let's make it clear: AARP will receive direct benefits because seniors who have cuts in their Medicare Advantage and other Medicare programs can buy--guess what--a Medigap insurance policy from AARP--in other words, to cover the things being cut back under this legislation, and it costs $175 a month. The Medicare Advantage premiums are zero for most seniors or $35 a month. Again, if the Medicare Advantage plans go away, people would have to buy a Medigap plan sold by--you got it-- AARP. And some low-income seniors could not afford $175 a month. That is why the Senator from Tennessee stated that if we drive people out of Medicare Advantage, we are harming low-income seniors all over this country. We are harming them. We are doing them a great disservice. If you think with 17 percent real unemployment in my State that seniors who are unemployed and down on their luck are going to be able to afford the AARP Medigap policy for $175 a month, come and visit my State and I will tell you they can't. It is interesting, the conversation about high-income seniors, and how we are going to tax people with Cadillac plans and all of those things, when what we are doing is harming the lowest income seniors in rural areas of America.

Mr. McCAIN. Yes.

Mr. McCAIN. All of the things we routinely use in the Senate. I hope those who voted to harm the seniors in this country and not allow them to have dental, vision, and other health care would unilaterally disavow the use of the physician care and vision care and hearing care available to all of us 24 hours a day right here in the Senate.

Mr. McCAIN. Could I mention one other thing? I will not spend that much more time on AARP. But the reason I do is because every time the Senator from Montana stands up, he talks about AARP endorsing this rip- off of the American people. Let me quote again from a Bloomberg article entitled ``AARP's Stealth Fees Often Sting Seniors With Costlier Insurance.'' I quote from the Bloomberg article just briefly: Arthur Laupus joined AARP because he thought the nonprofit senior-citizen-advocacy group would make his retirement years easier. He signed up for an auto insurance policy endorsed by AARP, believing the advertising that said he would save money. He didn't. When Laupus, 71, compared his car insurance rate with a dozen other companies, he found he was paying twice the average. Why? One reason, he learned, was because AARP was taking a cut out of his premium before sending the money to Hartford Financial Services Group, the provider of the coverage. . . . AARP uses the royalties and fees to fund about half the expenses that pay for activities such as publishing brochures about health care and consumer fraud--as well as for paying down the $200 million bond debt that funded the association's marble and brassstudded Washington headquarters. In addition, AARP holds clients' insurance premiums for as long as a month and invests the money, which added $40.4 million to its revenue in 2007. . . . During the past decade, royalties and fees have made up an increasing percentage of AARP's income, rising to 43 percent of its $1.17 billion in revenue in 2007 from 11 percent in 1999, according to AARP data. This is a Bloomberg article. This is not from the Republican Policy Committee. The point is, who gains? Who gains from this legislation? Who is going to make hundreds of millions of dollars more because they provide the Medigap policies people will be deprived of when we kill off Medicare Advantage? AARP.

Mr. McCAIN. May I ask the Senator again, he described the benefits that are provided under the Medicare Advantage program that seniors can have if they want, right? Are those same benefits--dental, vision, hearing, and fitness care--available under regular Medicare today?

Mr. McCAIN. In Montana, there are 27,000 enrollees who will see a 24- percent decrease. In Connecticut, there are 94,000 enrollees who will see a 14-percent decrease. By the way, some special deals have been cut for three States I understand--Oregon, New York, and Florida. We are going to try to fix that. There is no reason one State should be shielded any more than another from these draconian measures. We are going to try to fix that situation. The reason I bring up this issue, present-day Medicare beneficiaries do not have vision, they do not have dental care, they do not have fitness. Yet we in the Senate enjoy it every single day. So yesterday we voted to deprive seniors from the ability to have the same privileges that we enjoy every single day in the Senate. I would argue that is an exercise in hypocrisy.

Mr. McCAIN. May I say it is my understanding that Dr. Barrasso has actually seen Medicare Advantage patients. He and Dr. Coburn are probably the only two. Maybe we could let him give us the benefit of his experience and also not only the benefit of his experience, but I am sure he is going to tell us what the impact is going to be on the low-income seniors from his State.

Mr. McCAIN. Just as we do.

Mr. McCAIN. I don't think they have as nice a gym, though, as we are going to get.

Mr. McCAIN. Let me get this straight. Basically, by removing the choices that seniors have as a part of Medicare Advantage--dental, vision, hearing, fitness--we are taking away from them what we ourselves enjoy every single day in the Senate?

Mr. McCAIN. Could the Senator from Texas and I go back to one of the things I mentioned earlier, because in Texas, how many are under Medicare Advantage?

Mr. McCAIN. Five hundred thousand in your State, and there is no ``shielding.'' According to this Bloomberg article and according to our knowledge, it says: Senators Charles Schumer of New York, Bill Nelson of Florida, and Ron Wyden of Oregon are among those who secured special provisions shielding constituents from cuts. Casey-- Referring to Senator Casey of Pennsylvania-- says he wants ``very comparable'' protections for his State-- surprisingly enough--where more than one-third of Medicare beneficiaries participate in Medicare Advantage. ``It's the kind of thing that will likely be addressed on the floor,'' he said. Well, I eagerly look forward to working, on the other side of the aisle, with all the Members from those States, with the exception of New York, Florida, and Oregon, who have earned special shielding from these cuts. I look forward to working with them, and let's fix it for all of us; right, Senator Hatch?

Mr. McCAIN. And was that shielding done on the floor of the Senate, in open debate and in discussion of the issue?

Mr. McCAIN. It was done in an office over here, where we still await the white smoke.

Mr. McCAIN. I would say this is probably the classic hometown protectionism that we see in earmarking and benefits that we see in the earmarking process. But also, I would remind the Senator from New Hampshire, as we have all discussed several times, a year ago last October, our then- candidate for President said: It is all going to be on C-SPAN. Well, the C-SPAN cameras are still waiting outside Senator Reid's offices to go in and film these negotiations so that, as President Obama said, all Americans can see who is on the side of the pharmaceutical companies and who is on the side of the American people. C-SPAN, keep waiting. We are going to try to get you in.