health insurance. we have to understand that those of us who have health insurance pay more for our health insurance because some 47 million americans don't have health insurance. they present themselves with the doctors -- to the doctors and hospitals and in this caring nature we treatment and the bills are absorbed by a system that spreads them around for the rest of us to pay. it's about $1,000 a year. it's a hidden tax for families. $1,000 more each year on health insurance premiums it take care of the uninsured in our country. now we have a chance to bring the uninsured into coverage. and by bringing them into coverage, will not only give them peace of mind, make them part of the system, will reduce that thowd t t that every family -- hidden tax that every family pay that's has health insurance. so we have an opportunity here to do something positive about health insurance. for those who are following this debate closely, they probably

heard this mentioned by others, you but i want to make a point of it. there's an important article for people to read and they can go online to find it it is from the june 1st "new yorker" magazine, a man who is a surgeon in boston, an indian surgeon, wrote an article about health care in america today. he won't go into detail about what he found, but it's an eye opener. because he went to one of the most expensive cities in america when it comes to treating medicare patients. it's mccowen, texas, and he couldn't figure out why they were spending $15,000 a year for medicare patients, dramatically more than other towns in text and around the country. what he found, unfortunately, is that many of the doctors in that city were treating elderly patients by running up their charges, by ordering unnecessary tests, by ordering hospitalizations and things that

weren't being ordered in other cities. the reason is that there was a financial incentive. the more tests, the more procedures, the more hospitalizations that you can charge to medicare, the more the doctor was paid. well, the doctor went down to meet with the doctors, confronted them, there was no ex ma -- other explanation, that was it. then he went to mayor clinic in rochester, minnesota, a place that treated my family and treated them well. he found out the cost of treating medicare patients in rochester, insocietia is a -- minnesota is a fraction of what it is in texas. why? well it turns out it is pretty basic. the doctors who are on the staff of mayo clinic are paid a salary. they are not paid by the patient or by the procedure. so their interest is not in running up a big medical chart

of tests. their interest is getting that patient well and effectively. and they do it with fewer procedures and less money spent and better results at the end of the day. so now we have a choice in this health care debate. do we want to continue the example of mcallen, texas, which is abusing the system, charging too much and not getting good health care results, or do we want to move to a mayo clinic model, one that is basically much more efficient and effective, keeps people healthier at lower cost? i hope the answer's obvious. it is to me. i would like to see us move towards incentives like the mayo clinic system. the president spoke to the american medical association in chicago last week. it was a mixed review. they were very courteous to him. there were a few people dissatisfied with his remarks, but it's a free country. you can expect that. some of those doctors in that room understand it's time for change and some of them don't. some of them think that change is going to be bad for them and bad for our country. but most of us understand that

if we work together in good faith and conscientiously, we can change this health care system for better, reduce its costs, preserve our choice of doctors and hospitals, make certain that quality is reward rewarded, also make certain that we cover those 46 million or 47 million uninsured americans and really come up with a health care system that doesn't break the bank, not for families, not for businesses and not for governments of the future. mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. ms. klobuchar: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be vitiated. i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, i'll be joined on the floor today by some of my fellow women senators to talk about the president's nominee for the supreme court. i will note that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle came to the floor yesterday to, as one news report described it "kickoff their campaign" against her. so we want to take this opportunity to get the facts out, to correct any miscon exceptions,