tv [untitled] CSPAN June 11, 2009 10:00am-10:30am EDT
10:00 am
10:01 am
which tries to find the lowes common denominator. we desire true unity with its bountiful diversity. help our lawmakers to create an environment for such harmony. give them the wisdom to appreciate each other and to honor differences. may they see the good even in those who oppose their views. knowing that out of differences can come th the truth that represents maximum wisdom and influence. empower them to serve one another in a way that honors you. we pray in your loving name.
10:02 am
amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. >> i leaning allegiance to the -- i pledge allegiance to the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands with one nation under god indivisible with liberty and swrut for all. -- justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., june 11, 2009. to the senate under the provisions of rule 1 paragraph 3, i appoint kiresten gillibrand to perform the duties of the chair. signed
10:03 am
senator byrd. reid the senate will be in morning business until 10 p.m. with senators allowed to speak four ten minutes each, and the time will be equally controlled with the republican controlling the first half and the majority the next half. following morning business the senate will resume consideration of h.r. 1256, family smoking prevention tobacco criminal act. time until 2:30 will be divided and controlled as indicated, that is, from 2:00 to 2:30 between senators dodd and enzi and at 2:30 we will vote on passage of the bill. madam president, there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the titles of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 12312 to amend the federal food, drug and cosmetic act with respect to the importation of prescription drugs and for other purposes. 2751, an act to accelerate motor
10:04 am
fuel savings nationwide and so forth. mr. reid: madam president, these are the drug reimportation legislation that has been around for a number of years and we're trying to move forward on that. with senators dorgan, mccain, snowe and a number of senators are very interested to that legislation and we will try to work it out and have this on the floor administration early as possible. the other is the so-called cash for clurchgers. i object to any further proceedings with respect to these bills en bloc. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. reid: madam president, yesterday -- the presiding officer: the bills will be placed on the calendar. mr. reid: madam president, yesterday this city and our country experienced a terrible and horrifying tragedy. a man by the name of stephen johns went to work every day for six years at our most moving museums, a living memorial to one of our world's more horrific atrocities, the holocaust
10:05 am
museum. while standing guard yesterday at that united states holocaust museum, mr. stephen johns was killed protecting thousands of others who were inside the building. protecting them from the same fate that he suffered. his death is shock, upset and anger for the senate, our nation and all who detest senseless bloodshed. mr. jones was murdered in a place build to memorialize humanity's most unspeakable murders. he was a victim of violence and hatred in a place dedicated to teaching us the evils of violence and hatred. he was a target of intolerance in a blaze created for reflection on the consequences of intolerance. his death remind us we have much more to do, much work to do. stephen johns was just 39 years old. he had a wife and a son. he grew up in temple hills maryland, a few miles south and
10:06 am
east of where i stand today. he still lived in that communi community. stephen johns started working at the holocaust museum after spending a year in new articles in the aftermath of hurricane katrina. those who knew mr. johns called him "big john," a genera gentle, friendly and helpful. even those who did not know him are deeply saddened by the loss and inspired by hi the heroism. it is our duty to keep alive his memory. today the holocaust museum is closed. flags fly at half-staff. when it opens tomorrow it will continue to serve as one of our nation's most poignant reminders of the inexcusable racism, hatred, violence and cruelty we must never stop working to erase from the world. when it opens tomorrow, and every day thereafter, stephen
10:07 am
johns, courage and courtesy, will be mixed. madam president, our plan to fix america's broken health care system is based on a simple premise: when it comes to keeping ourselves and our loved ones healthy, people -- not corporations -- should be at the driver's seat. we have a land to right that rock. that plan is guided by three goals. the number one, lower the high cost of health care. number two, ensure every american has abscess to quality, affordable -- has access to quality, affordable care; finally, people can choose their own doctors, hops and health plan. one choice should be a public option. this has two primary benefits. first, people can choose to get their insurance from someone other than a greedy private insurance company; two, the very existence of that public option means there is more competition in the market and, as a result, the private options will have to serve their customers even
10:08 am
better. republicans often like to pretend your government will force you to take the public option every time you hear themcy that. every time you hear them say that, you know they are not interested in honest debate. after all, it's right there in the name, "public option." "public option." so talking about government forcing anyone to do anything is simply unfair and not accurate. it's a public option meaning you have choices. if you have coverage and you like it, you can keep it. you should be able to choose the best coverage for your family. you should be able to compare benefits, compare prices. stefd surrendering to out-of-control corporation -- instead of surrendering to out-of-control corporations you should be in control of your own family's health decisions. i'm confident both private uncompanies and the option of public plan can live in harmony. madam president, when you send a
10:09 am
birthday present to a relative to -- say i want to send something to one of my children in nevada, the products that i choose can be sent by fedex, u.p.s., d.h.l. or the united states postal service. the postal service may not be perfect, but the public option is there, and the private companies, fedex, u.p.s., know they cannot rip you off or slacking on their service. just like our proposal for the health care system. you don't have to choose postal service. but it's good to know it's there and for some it is all they can afford. i hear from nevadans asking for help: people turned down for health cox by insurance providers who -- health coverage by insurance providers who care more of profits. people who lost health coverage when they lost their job and now have no means of getting it back. people who play by the rules and rightly demand our health care system be guided by commonsense.
10:10 am
nearly two-thirds of all bankruptcies are caused by medical problems. and the bills that ensue. many of the foreclosures that are both a cause and effect of the global credit crisis can be traced back to health insurance costs. if you agree we already have enough economic problems on our hands, you want to agree that we can't wait another year while 50 million americans live without on aptio option to stay hope, yw we do not have anymore games. far too many cannot afford this. if we are going to fix our broken system we have to return control to the people who need that care. i yield the floor.
10:11 am
mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: madam president, the american people are frustrated with the u.s. health care system but they're also increasingly concerned about some of the proposals coming from washington. now the alarms are sounding. as reported in today's "the new york times," the nation's doctors have strongly opposed to the so-called government plan that appears to be gaining steam here in washington. the american medical association says the government plan threatens to restrict patient choice by putting out of business existing health plans that cover nearly 70% of americans. one estimate suggests 119 million americans could lose the private coverage they have as a
10:12 am
consequence of the government plan. moreover, the a.m.a. in a statement yesterday notes that "the corresponding surge in public planned participation would likely lead to an explosion of costs that would need to be absorbed by the taxpayers ." republicans and democrats alike agree health care reform is needed in our country. but a government plan is not the kind of reform the american people want. they want real reform for a system that's in serious need of it. ultimately what some in washington are proposing instead is the allusion of a reform that will replace what's good about health care in america with something that's far, far worse. instead of making health care more affordable and accessible, these proposals could make treatments and procedures that every day americans currently take for granted less accessible or even impossible to obtain even as these proposals would add to the colossal and
10:13 am
unsustainable debt that already 3wurdens the federal government -- burdens the federal government. i'm spoken about the dangers of government-run health care. by drawing on the experience of countries that have already adopted these government-run systems, i pointed out the serious problems government-run health care creates for millions around the world. i've noted that a common defect of the government-run plans is they deny, delay, and rash on health care. and i've noted that the primary culprit in almost every case is the so-called government board, the government board, that these countries have established to decide which treatments and medicines patients in those countries can and cannot have. this morning i'd like to focus again on the so-called government boards, so people have an idea of what they can expect from a government-run plan here in the united states.
10:14 am
britain's government board, the national institute for health and clinical excellence or "nice," is responsible for setting guidelines on the use of drugs and treatments for patients in that country. the government bureaucrats at this agency are supposed to weigh the effectiveness of a medicine or a treatment against its cost to the government. if the government thinks that a drug is too expensive it can refuse to make it available to patients regardless of any potential benefits. last summer the board in great britain denied patients in that country access to four kidney cancer drugs that have the potential to extend life. here's the chilling explanation it gave to justify the move: "although these treatments are clinically effective, regrettably the cost is such that they are not a cost-effective use of the resources."
10:15 am
after a public outcry, nice reversed its position on one of the drugs but affirmed its ban on the other three. in new zealand a government board known as farm-act reviewses potential drugs and treatments and decides if it should b be prescribed to paties in that country. farm-act said that its goal is to use its -- quote -- "expertise" to decide which hospital medicines are cost effective. like the medical board in great britain, if farm act doesn't believe it is justified they can refuse to make it available to patients or doctors who want it. one doctoring that farm-act didn't think was worth the cost was herceptin proven to fight breast cancer. although farm act covered it in 2002, it refused to fund the drug for early stage breast
10:16 am
cancer. after a public outcry and reevaluation of the decision, farm act allowed it for early staged breast cancer in 2007 but only for a limited amount of treatments. these kind of decisions about which drugs should or shouldn't be covered are based on a method commonly known as comparative effectiveness. comparative effectiveness is not alien to the u.s. health care system. indeed the stimulus bill that congress passed this year included significant funding to lay the groundwork for just this kind of research here in the u.s. and in my view, the more research we do on the effectiveness of drugs and treatments, the better. doctors should have as much good information as possible in dealing with their patients. what americans strenuously oppose, madam president, however, is the government using this information to deny access to treatment or procedures that patients and doctors choose to
10:17 am
pursue. just as government agencies like "nice" and farm-act do in great britain and new zealand, americans oppose this kind of government mandated limitation on health care, they simply won't allow it. and that's why my friend, senator kyl, will propose a drug bill that will prohibit the government from ever using comparative effectiveness in this ways. it is a wise bill. and it should be included as part of any health reform we consider. americans want their doctors to have clinical information on which treatments work best and which ones don't. but government bureaucrats shouldn't be able to use that information to determine what treatments americans can or cannot get. that's a decision we currently leave between a patient and his or her doctor, and that's where it should remain. now, americans want to see changes in the health care system. but they don't want changes that deny, delay, or ration care.
10:18 am
they want reforms that control costs even as they protect patients. they want us to discourage frivolous liability lawsuits that limit care in places. they want to help people to overcome illnesses. and they want us to address the needs of small businesses without imposing new mandates or that kill jobs. all of us want reform. but the government-run plan that some are proposing here in the u.s. isn't the kind of change americans are looking for. we should learn a lesson from the problems we've seen in countries like great britain and new zealand. we should learn a lesson from the nightmares that so many people in these countries and their families have endured as a result of government-run health care and a bureaucratic government boards that almost always come with it.
10:19 am
now, madam president, i'm about to yield the floor. but before i do that, i see my friend from arizona is on the floor, and i just want to express to him my gratitude for his leadership on this very important issue. the most important issue that we'll be dealing with this year is the question of whether or not the government should literally take over and run 16% of our economy. we've seen the government take over banks, insurance companies, automobile companies, and now it appears as if there's an effort under way to take over health care as well. so i just want to thank my friend from arizona for the contribution he's made on this important issue in the past and just say we're looking forward to working together on this in the future. madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leader ship time is reserved. under the previous order there will now be a period of morning business until 2:00 p.m. with
10:20 am
senators permitted to speak up to 10 minutes each, with the first hour equally divided and controlled between the two leaders and their designees with the republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the second 30 minutes. the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: madam president, i rise to discuss two issues this morning, health care reform, and also the pending supplemental spending bill that, according to news reports does not include the senate language that explicitly allowed president obama to keep photos of detainee abuse during the bush administration confidential. i want to thank my friend, the republican leader from kentucky, who has shown such impressive leadership on as he describes probably the most important -- domestic issue, certainly, that will be addressed by this congress. i look forward to working with my colleagues over the next few weeks on legislation reforming our current health care systems.
10:21 am
america is looking to congress to enact health care legislation that's provides all americans affordable access to health insurance and the ability to choose the health insurance policy that fits each american's need. just yesterday it was reported that 62% of americans support congress enacting a major overhaul of the health care system according to a diego poll. i believe health care should be available to all and not limited to how much money you make. i believe competition should be used to provide the availablity of health insurance and match a person's needs. i believe american families, not washington bureaucrats or insurance companies, should be in charge of any health care decision. but i don't believe that we need to expand government's bureaucracy or to control
10:22 am
one-sixth of our economy to ensure that the uninsured get health coverage. nor do i believe that americans should be asked to pay more in taxes to cover the costs of any comprehensive health care reform legislation. last month "the wall street journal" stated -- quote -- "the democrats need the money to finance $1.2 trillion or more for their new health insurance entitlement. a sampler of ideas end or limit the tax exempt status of charitable hospitals or make college students in work study programs subject to the payroll tax. also targeted are medical residents perhaps on the principle that one day they'll be rich doctors." i agree that any real health care reform proposal must address the treatment of employer provided health insurance, but not in a way that forces americans to fork over
10:23 am
more known the federal government particularly in these difficult economic times. today individuals who receive health insurance through their employer are not taxed on their health care benefits, as we know. however, those who purchase coverage on their own don't receive such a tax break. that's unfair and regressive. it hits those who need the tax break the most. the self-employed or working poor whose employer does not offer health insurance coverage. to offset the taxable treatment of this income, i believe americans should have funds returned to them to a-- assist with the cost of acquiring health insurance. this treats individuals equally in stark contrast to the system we currently have. key to any proposal is policy that allows people to have accessible, portable, and affordable health insurance coverage. policy should address what i hear from americans everywhere i go, choice. americans want choice.
10:24 am
they want choices from their doctors, care, coverage, and employment freedom. freedom to seek employment that is not dependent on whether an employer provides insurance coverage or not. this is particularly important in today's difficult economic times when americans are uncertain about whether they'll have a job tomorrow. some, including the president, criticize this approach. however, "the w york times" reported -- quote -- "the obama administration is signaling to congress that the president would support taxing some employee health benefits." i appreciate the president's consideration of such a new proposal, it is not acceptable to turn this into a tax and spend health care reform. any new resources derived from changing the existing tax treatment of private health insurance should be devoted to a fair and more efficient mechanism for americans to provide private shall insurance. americans spent over -- spend
10:25 am
over $2.4 trillion on health care. health insurance premiums continue to rise as employer based coverage for families increase and medicare and medicaid spend $800 billion. and projected to reac reach $2.7 trillion in 2018. i want to mention something that should trouble every american and every member of this chamber. last week i spoke about what the special interests are doing to derail a much-needed health reform dealing with prescription drugs. a reform that is very bipartisan and any member in this chamber knows how to work across the aisle on policies that are important to the american people. health reform is one issue that fundamentally must be bipartisan. all americans are affected by what we do here. we should be working in a bipartisan manner. so it is with extreme regret that i read in "roll call" this
10:26 am
morning about -- about a meeting that the democrat staff threatening democratic lobbies or the organizations they represent against meeting with republicans and that attending meetings with republicans -- quote -- "will be viewed as a hostile act" unquote. this is outrageous. i hope the article is inaccurate. i hope the staff on the other side doesn't view health reform as a process they control by threats and hostilities. i hope we're above that. madam president, i ask unanimous consent, that the roll call article this morning be included in the record at this time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: now, madam president, i'd like to say a few words and i ask unanimous consent for three additional minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: madam president, it appears the house democrats, koght a -- according to a "roll call" article this morning,
10:27 am
about a supplemental bill, and i ask unanimous consent that -- concerning the war supplemental bill be included in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mccain: the war bill including a cash for chunkers incentive will eliminate language to keep photos of detainee abuse during the bush administration confidential. madam president, the graham-lieberman amendment that would classify these photos was accepted by voice vote. in other words, any senator who wanted to object or vote against it could have called for it, instead it was unanimously adopted. now, according to the "roll call" article i quoted, that provision will be removed from the emergency supplemental. and according to that article -- quote -- "one senior democratic
10:28 am
aide said that lieberman and graham's threat to hold up the supplemental indefinitely unless their provision was included was unlikely to last and predicted that defense secretary robert gates would likely pressure the two defense hawks to relent so funding for the war wouldn't run out." i think this democratic aide highly underestimates senator lieberman, senator graham and the rest of us. madam president, i had a conversation with general petraeus just the day before yesterday and i believe those conversations are confidential and i asked his -- his agreement to -- quote -- "if these photos are released, it will harm the ability of the united states military to pursue our national security interests and could put american lives in danger. " now that's a serious statement from the most respected military leader that this nation has. and i want to point out something very important.
10:29 am
today the president of the united states could issue an executive order classifying those photos and not allowing them to be released. he could do it today. it's time for the president of the united states to stand up to the left wing of his party for the good of the national security of this nation. so, madam president, i join others that if -- if that supplemental comes over without the provision, which was adopted unanimously by the united states senate to make sure that those photos are not released, because of the harm it would do to america's effort in combating radical islamic extremists throughout the world and put the lives of the men and women serving in the military in greater danger. so i intend to join my friend, senator lieberman and senator graham, in doing everything that we can to oppose such legislation. this war
183 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN2 Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on