another casualty of this is the restaurant equipment industry which is a uniquely american industry. that industry has been devastated by this recession. furthermore our lenders require us to maintain levels of profitability, our mortgages, leasts and franchise agreements are 15 to 20 years long. they do not go away in 2014. those are obligations we cannot walk away from. other parts of the law causing harm, i may not be able to offer the courage are currently offer my management staff due to the compensation nondiscrimination rule in the law. there are other examples of issues that were raised today. issues with the hsh plans, taxes and investments, taxes on health insurance and the cadillac tax which will hit everyone. to that end we are asking the congress to repeal this health care law.

if that cannot be achieved we urge you to address the major problems with the law. it is a ticking time bomb that will devastate our industry. change of course now could end this uncertainty. i am asking you to introduce passed legislation that will repeal the employer mandate. the members of the chamber of commerce will work tirelessly to help pass it. i think the members of this committee for the opportunities is testified today and i will look forward to working with you in the future to fix the problems created by this law and implement a real market-driven solutions. >> joe olivo, you are recognized for five minute tenure written statement as a permanent part of the record. >> thank you to the committee not just for the opportunity but the honor to provide my testimony. my name is joe olivo. i am a small-business owner and i appreciate being able to relate to you the concerns i have with the health care legislation. already began inspecting my

company and problems as the plan is fully implemented. i am the president and co-owner of perfect printing in new jersey. i own the company along with my wife, two brothers and my mother. it was started in 1979 as a coffee center. i run the business for the past 23 years. we have been very fortunate we have enabled to grow it as high as 54 employees prior to the economic downturn and we currently have 45 employees. an area of great concern to me that was spoken today is the 1099 compliance requirement. simply put i do not have the resources in place to implement this law. the resources are will put in place with more software programs calculating and managing receipts are much more than i have the resources to do but it is important when you look at the burdens of the

legislation's on small-business, in the context of businesses like mine in a good year, three on every dollar we earn. every time there's a new regulation put in place such as this it typically comes out of that profit margin with less resources to which i and world my business and give my employee's wage increases and contribute to their benefits. akee issue for any employer is how and when to grow the business. my company is on the cause of the employee mark which we were there two years ago and at that point i would be legally bound to offer my employees' insurance or face a penalty for not doing so besides being ridiculously complex. it is my understanding that once i go over the 50 employees mark i can face penalties if one of my employees eligible for the subsidized plan even if i am providing insurance i am still in the process of trying to

compute the exact ramifications of this part of the law but based on my current premium rates the penalty is actually less expensive than the premium rates so i find it ironic that the part of the law that is -- mandates me to provide insurance to my employees is an incentive not to provide insurance to them at all. this issue of what we currently offer our employees i am able to pay 100% of the premium costs for my individual employees. i pay 56% of the family portion. i am able to do this because we use a high deductible health savings account instituted six years ago. this is important because during the debate prior to passage of this legislation we heard time and again that my employees would be able to keep their existing coverage. within 30 days of the law's passage i received a notification from my insurer

that my plan would no longer be offered. because of the preventive care requirement and how this was treated under a high deductible plan was no longer in compliance with the law so after 20 years of myself voluntarily providing insurance to my employees and paying most at my own costs are am now told this is no longer acceptable to the government. another area of concern is the tax credits that have been mentioned that promise the small business owners to help us pay for insurance. the point was made over and over and persuaded some in the small business community to support this plan because they felt there would be a net positive for them. i can say that i checked the tax credit for my company had 45 employees and we are not eligible for a single dollar in tax credits. i learned from fellow small business owners i spoke to a woman who owns a bridle for with

three employees and spoke to her county she is not eligible for a single dollar in tax credit. these are the issues that i know and it has begun affecting my business but the unknown causes me greater concern. when i grew my business, when i take financing, increase investment on my business i put my personal assets on the line. i put my home on the line as collateral, my family's home on the line as collateral. when you have this much unknown and a known cost certainty in a lot and i challenge anyone on this committee to tell me what my health care costs will be two years from now it creates less incentive for me to take necessary risks. my story is personal but is by no means unique. there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of small business owners across the country facing the same issues. how can we ask those businesses

to help the economy prosper if it puts a drag on the main engine of economic growth? >> we will now go to the questioning period. we will pick up where we left off. >> i want the record to reflect that i respond promptly to e-mails and letters from dean heller and even shelves in the elbow. douglas holtz-eakin the digital i am sure you watched the speech the president gave. one of the thing that struck me is his presentation of a straw man argument which is the assertion, we even heard that asserted today that we don't want to go back to the days of folks being pressed out and not included on pre-existing conditions. there is nobody that is proposing that. house republicans, chairman camp offered a far--thoughtful piece of legislation that dealt with

that through high risk pools. can you comment generally on this whole notion of two different visions? in responding to mr neil, the underlying premise of this new law is to expand coverage by putting people on medicaid. you alluded to this in your brief opening statement about entitlements outpacing the economy in general. give us a few thoughts on that. >> i think it is a straw man argument. you roll the clock back to the beginning of the debate there with a bipartisan agreement that it would be desirable to control health care spending in the united states and cover more americans with affordable options. that is a bipartisan objective. the difficulty is this what doesn't control costs. unless that is done you will never be able to control insurance costs, even hazard

insurance will find it and affordable. there are severe problems using medicaid as a source of coverage expansion. having a piece of paper that says i'm a medical beneficiary does you no good if you can see a provider. medicaid beneficiaries are denied providers at higher rates than medicare or private insurers. half can't find primary-care physicians so they end up in the emergency rooms. that is not a solution to a coverage problem. if there is a competing visions, the other vision is genuinely control health-care costs. give people control of their money. use their resources wisely. allow them to choose insurance that fits their family circumstances, their life style and make insurers compete whether it is across state lines or vigorously with in state so we get decent insurance options and underlying control of costs. it is a shared goal. >> the previous witness said

there was a great deal of confusion about the health care law. i was thinking about that and listening as he asserted that and one element i would agree with. there is confusion. there's a great deal of ambiguity about who gets exemptions from the administration. there are 200 businesses or other groups that have been exempted apparently some exemption program only based on their initiative. you have to ask for it. it is not a blanket exemption and is not a permanent exemption. it is a one time exemption so there's a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty and you alluded to that. and another level there's a real sense of clarity about the health care law. for example you figured out the cost pressures on you are making a dynamic such that it might make more economic sense to your bottom line not to offer coverage and to have folks go into the pool. you figured out you are knocking

on the door with 45 employees. once you hit a 50 employee trigger your world changes on a host of things. can you reflect on how it is that the health care law and that sense of clarity i articulated is driving the business decision for you and your family as they try to move this company forward? >> thank you for your question. the problem with health care and expenses have increased so much especially against any other expense in my business. you have to understand as i pointed out as we put our personal assets for collateral i don't have the luxury of being wrong in my assumptions. when there are these costs and i feel they are unknown in addition to that i have no choice but to be -- take much less risk. maybe not to buy another presser or hire an extra employee until

i absolutely have to have them. it forces me to be more conservative on how we invest in the business. >> thank you. mr. buchanan is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to ask a question. i get asked this a lot back home. and the ranking member mentioned that. power in the world can you add 32 to fifty-two million people with free or highly subsidized health care and think even though there's a third party out there saying the deficit will reduce the deficit, where are they coming up with this information other than in washington? >> on the substance i do not believe this reduces health-care costs if you that many to the pool they will use more health care services and health care costs will go up.

with regard to the estimate of budgetary impact of the bill by -- it does its job under the rules the budget act imposed. my gripe is with the drafters of the law to use the budget act to make sure they have the answers they wanted even though it was in defiance of economic common sense. >> i was chairman of the florida chamber and our little chamber, 25 businesses locally. this is the biggest issue in the last 20 years. this isn't something that happened in the last couple years. everyone is challenge to. i don't understand. if people get out and talk to businesses in their community being in business 30 years myself and not a career politician i can tell you this is drowning a lot of businesses. one of the largest private employers in our region's health care costs he told me when top

$1 million. maybe he has 400 or 300 employees. if that is not job killing, is point to me, they don't like that term but when your premiums are going up, the ceo round table mentioned health care costs for a family of four, $10,000 in corporate america. the next ten years with this health care bill being considered is going to go from $10,000 to $30,000. i was in another small business and was not there to talk to them about private pharmacies. he said by the way, i want to show you this and he brought out his bill. he got an increase of couple weeks ago. another 23% increase. everybody is going up 30% year. my experience is you get a bill and it is 28% and you start working toward getting it down to 18 and cut benefits and have employees a portion of it.

i think ranking member mentioned our expenses will go up. i don't see the offset any where. i think this is a $1 trillion large entitlement going forward and does nothing for small businesses in the country and however you look at it, personnel expends used to be 20% of the payroll. 20% of what you paid someone. today there's a general feeling u.n. the salary or benefit but can't have both. that is what is driving a lot of things up here. you had mentioned about being in the printing business and i was in it for a lot of years. how much has your cost gone up in the last five years. six or ten years. the last week in years the

renewal for existing policy has never been less than 12% or as high as 49%. we are faced with the task of re-evaluating what new policy we have to implement to provide coverage to the point that we are able to provide a plan we pay 100% of the premium cost to our employees. ..aoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoaoao

>> as i laid out in my testimony, there's only a couple of outcomes. number one, they need attacks. they were probably go out of business. number two, they take it out of employee cost. lower wages, fewer jobs. and number three you passed onto consumers in the form of higher prices. >> thank you. the gentleman's time has expired. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to respond first to earlier remarks. what you described is unsustainable. exact situations which you described. between 2007 and the passage of health reform, i have a small business advisor, and the increase in their health cost was between, on average, 28 to 40% a year. health care reform or as some on

the other side would like to refer to it, obamacare. and they say with such love. you can't sustain those numbers. i don't mean you personally. we can't. and those businesses, 60% of them are no longer doing any business. they are done. the primary cause of those businesses closing their doors, the primary cause, there are other causes, is what they paid in their premiums. and i want to talk to you, mr. olivo, fellow jersey guy, what's interesting, i've read all of it about what you say because i came in a few minutes late. but i want you to think about this. 95% of businesses are exempt from employer responsibility requirements. i just want to start with that.

now, i think there's a possibility, i'm not saying this is guaranteed or for sure, that it sounds like your carrier might've pulled a fast one on you. and i will tell you why. when they raised your rates and lower tour benefits, by the way, that's not unfamiliar to any of us, and we were a good scapegoat, obamacare was the perfect scapegoat before it even went into effect, we will blame this bill which will become an act on whatever we do this you. you saw what happened in california. a scapegoat. and we expect that. we are all big people. we understand what happens in political debate eric you stated that your insurance carrier informed you that they would be, not be renewing your high

deductible coverage due to the preventive health benefits in the new law are you unaware of the fact that the new preventive benefits don't apply to plans such as yours that are grandfathered? i would ask you -- i ask that rhetorically. i just want you to think about that. and are you aware that the new, the irs rules, permitted high deductible plans to waive the deductible for preventive services even before reform was enacted? you know, i get a charge, i get a big charge out of listening to folks care this thing apart. someone on the panel made the statement in a magazine that the elimination of denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions and the elimination of a lifetime limit, those

things drive up costs. premiums are going to go up in the short run if we don't take into consideration preconditions. this is a battle. there is no question about it. between what the insurance companies want out of this and what the patient really needs, so we can really drive down the cost. we agree. over the last 10 years. premiums have skyrocketed. you and i both agree with that. new jersey guys here. families face bankruptcy due to medical bills. we agree. >> certainly. >> okay. and competition decrease, i go to each state, and insurance industry. the average state is two or three people, companies writing insurance. that's a good situation. not for us, but for somebody else. i haven't heard any response about those kinds of things. and why should you?

got a script, let's follow the script. the number of uninsured individuals grew, that now in one in five young americans under the age of 65 are uninsured. those are the numbers from the kaiser foundation. these conditions are not ideal. nine months after health care reform, i'm proud to say that change is already underway. and i would conclude my remarks that, if health care reform is bad for business, why have over 120 businesses in my state, new jersey, received grants to support groundbreaking biomedical research on pancreatic cancer, brain injury, alzheimer's and more? this money supports jobs. why have 150 employers in my state in roles in the early retiree and reinsurance program, cities like north patterson,

clifton, all in world. even businesses such as johnson & johnson, mercedes-benz are enrolled in the program. >> the children's time has expired. >> i thank the panel for telling us -- >> mr. smith is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you to the panel for sharing your expertise and insights. mr. holtz-eakin, if you could reflect on uncompensated care. is it conceivable that even medicaid would fall into a category that hospital we perceived to be uncompensated care? >> there are two large forms of cost shifting in the insurance industry. want is some uncompensated care, the traditional, someone gets care and has to be covered somewhere. and the second is the shifting from government programs where medicare pays about 70 cents on the dollar relative to private insurers, and medicaid pays even

less, 50 to dep55ding on where u are. and those gaps have to be made up elsewhere as where so those are shipped onto private health care costs. >> and is it your assertion as well that the health care bill does immensely grow the medicaid rolled? >> half of the coverage expansions come through medicaid expansions, 60 million americans we put into the system involves considerable cost shifting onto private insurance, and at present they are twice as likely to go to be ours instead of having that care in a regular setting, and what they can't find, particularly a primary care provider anywhere near the rates of the people can. >> would it be conceivable that any federally initiated medical reliability of reforms that they might preempt some state medical liability laws? >> there is the option a.r.m.s for federal preemption. and so depend on how the law was

written, but we do know that state level experience has shown that a variety of forms have been effectively controlled some of the costs and that he got a strong federal preemption you would have better. >> i say that because i am nervous that nebraska might lose its rather optimal scenario, given its medical liability. [inaudible] >> duly noted. and i appreciate the perceptive shared here, many of my constituents who have said they have held up hiring employees, strictly because of the unknowns contained in the health care bill. so with that with the interest of time i will go back. thank you. >> thank you very much. mr. shock is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i.t. will be brief. i of questions for the business

owners. last year the president said his major focus in 2010 would be jobs. in 2011 last night at the stadium he said his major focus will be jobs. so as to employers i'm kind of curious, specifically with regard to how the health care bill is going to affect jobs, particularly those opportunities for young people in america who rely on part-time employment through their high school and college years to supplement their income to pay for education which the president talked about last night being so important to america's competitiveness in getting long-term gainful employment for their futures. scott womack come you mentioned that you have 800 employees, and i'm wondering if you have studied this bill which it sounds like you have, the effect on what this will mean for your ability to hire part-time employees, considering the bill

really, from what i'm hearing from my employers in my district, almost innocent devices doing away with the part-time employment and really consolidation of the number of employees you have. is that what you are found, or how juicy if this bill is included as it stands now will affect the employment opportunities you can provide? >> well, thanks for the question. actually it incentivizes moving people from full-time status to part-time status. that part-time and hourly job market right now is actually saturated with people, people who are not working. you know, the reality is we'll be looking to get people under that 30 our threshold where ever we can. so i don't see it helping at all. >> of the 45 employees who are full-time that you offer health insurance to, how many of those 45 take your health insurance?

>> that would be my company. currently out of those 45, i believe is approximately 30 take the coverage. >> do you know the other 15, do they not taken because their spouse or someone else offers -- >> that is correct. no one in my company is uninsured. >> that's not so bad that 30 out of 45 seem to think your health care is a preference and using the term in the bill is adequate coverage. >> yes. their biggest complaint would be, is the cost of the premiums on the family side, but the coverage is great. they feel it is fair. >> do you know if your health care coverage you offer will meet the minimum standard in the new law for adequate health care coverage? >> the coverage that we offered in 2010 will not. we've already been notified of that because of how preventive care is treated. >> how much do your agents or your third party administrators suggest, how much will your

insurance premiums increase to meet the new standard? >> we just got her premium increases the other day. a 12% increase in premium but also a significant increase in how emergency room visits are treated. it's much more costly to go to the emergency room. significantly more. >> so what will the cost on average before you? >> for an individual cost per premium in the coming year will be approximately $280 per month per individual. >> having looked up when the bill is fully implemented in four years, what it will cost for you to be able to provide that minimum adequate health care coverage as specified by the laws? >> i have no way of computing that at this point. >> i would ask for your third party administrator to do that. i'm sure they are doing that. so thank you very much for your comments here today. >> thank you. mr. kind is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i want to thank our panelists for the testimony. mr. chairman, from my perspective i think today's discussion is very healthy and i would encourage you to hold more hearings in regards to the affordable care act because they're so believe after that with the passage of accountable care act, the affordable care act that some of the discussion and, and it doesn't. i think we'll be judged ultimately in this congress and future congresses that working hard to find what working in health care system and what isn't and making adjustments along the way. so getting testimony like this and feedback in regards to the shortfalls in which all of us are trying to accomplish i think it's going to be helpful. there's been a lot of discussion in regard to job creation and what the affordable care act means in that regard. let's recall, we have had 11 consecutive months a private sector job growth in this economy since the passage of the accountable care act. we've had 1.1 million new private-sector jobs that have been created. over 207,000 of that is in the health care industry alone.

i don't know how many of you saw recent forbes article that's been in the "forbes" magazine but a recent article highlights how small business tax credits in reform law are helping small employers deliver health care coverage to their employees. according to forbes, look at the facts, insurance companies are reporting a significant increase to small businesses offering health care benefits to their employees. for example, unitedhealth group the nation's largest health insurer added 75,000 new customers working in businesses with fewer than 50 employees in the last year. coventry health care, a large provider of health insurance to small businesses added 115,000 new workers in 2010 representing an 8% increase. blue cross blue shield of kansas city, largest health insurer in kansas city reports an astounding 58% increase in the number of small businesses purchasing coverage in their area since april 2010. repeal of the affordable care act as my colleagues last week voted for it would entail the

largest tax increase in small businesses in our nation's history. 16,000 small businesses in western wisconsin alone will see their taxes go up to our today benefiting from these tax credits under the affordable care act. over 4 million small businesses nationwide are taking advantage of the tax credit so they can better afford health care coverage for their employees. what's ironic, and mr. levi, appreciate your testimony here today, but the exchange we're setting up for small businesses and for family farmers and individuals was based on a shot previous years that ended up the creation of a in exchange for small businesses finally with complete transparency so, you know, what the costs and benefits will be, coupled with tax credits is something that small businesses have been calling for four years. it's part of this bill right now. i think ultimately we will be judged on whether this works or not depending on whether we have

the ability to bring costs down. here's another bipartisan idea that is in the bill. we have to change the way we pay for health insurance in this country. it's as simple as that. the current fee for service under medicare is all based on volume. this is crazy. right now we have institute of medicine study, two-year study as part of the reform bill that cost on them to change to a fee for value reimbursement system. they will present an actual plan to the administration to implement. this is something that newt gingrich has been talking about for years, that doctor frist is still talking about today, tommy thompson when he was at hhs and told me that if we do one thing or health care reform, change the way we pay for it starting with medicare. whatever we do in medicare will drive the private health insurance market. it goes even beyond that. health insurance companies for an east coast to west coast have been calling for payment reform for years. large providers which are models of health care delivery systems

highly integrated cord needed patient focus on intermountain to mail the cleveland clinic to gunderson, who marshaled have been calling for this very thing. that we finally have the tools to accomplish. we start with accountable care organizations, the innovation center, telling providers we want you to be creative, we want you to innovate, we want you to deliver high quality care at a better cause. this is what we need to drive health care system, but ultimately we stick with a fee-for-service system under nation. we will never be able to keep up we finally have the ability not

that will be affordable to businesses large and small, and individuals throughout this country. >> mr. lee is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank our panelists for being here. i can't help but be a little skeptical after hearing the president's state of union address as well as the first panelists, mr. goolsbee, testimony. when it comes to reality of his health care bill that we're dealing with. last night the president talked about in his speech with a dysfunctionality of our government when he used the example of the interior department charges sam and when in freshwater, but when it's in salt water is the commerce department and if it's -- god

knows where. ironically, and mr. holtz-eakin, is it true that this new health care bill will, in fact, create upwards of 160 new agencies, bureaus and commissions so he is adding to the problem rather than fixing it? >> the exact number has been hard to figure out but that's a safe guess. >> i agree completely. the other point, too, is he brought up the issue of the 1099. it is very apparent in my eyes that this was more or less -- this was put into the bill, if you're a small business owner and you do not have an accurate tax id number, you're on the hook to withhold 20% as a small business owner. again, these are huge costs on someone who's trying to get by day in and day out. and i'm hearing from both mr. womack and mr. olivo come in your mind, this health care bill

is more likely or less like a for you to go out and hire people at this point? >> well, without a doubt it's created a tremendous amount of uncertainty. and its frozen of the credit markets as far as restaurants go. those are just now starting to loosen up. but as we get closer, the applications become more clear. credit markets are going to freeze up. it's going to be harder to borrow money to build a restaurant. the other thing is as i stated earlier, the only way to pay for this in our business is to cut costs. and we are a lean mean industry now. we don't have a lot of fat. you know, the thing that we can control, our payroll, and to minimize the impact of these penalties so that means cutting jobs. it doesn't mean adding jobs. >> we're getting to the tipping point where risk-reward no longer make sense for someone to go out a small business owner

and take a string ago and started business. the other part, maybe i can bring this back to mr. holtz-eakin with regards to medicaid. i have the luxury of living in new york state which as far and away the highest medicaid expenses i think if you compare it next to the input states like florida and texas where their economies are doing relatively better, the same number of citizens living in that state, but literally twice the medicaid expenses. with the passage of this bill ultimately, is it going to increase or decrease the medicaid costs that we are seeing in new york state? >> i think the states are at great risk. they are obligated to honor the expansions under the affordable care act. they may get additional payments from the federal government for that, but they have to pay full freight on any current eligibles who now share up -- show up. i think we will draw out of the woodwork a lot of existing

eligibles and nukes it will have to pick up their full share of the cost. >> at the time where we, to start a new business in new york state, again, someone who is running small business i do see this as a further death knell for the gravesite of what's made this country great. and i would say the same thing deals with the medical device tax. when we are trying to come from manufacturing, where the president spoke again, contradiction of talking about and helping businesses thrive we are not going to go and add a tax on business. again, mr. holtz-eakin, your view that this is going to help our manufacturers, health related device industry compete, it's going to help or hurt them? >> this is an additional cost for device manufacturers on international market. it will hurt their competitiveness. it's also one of many taxes if you just look at pure macroeconomics the evidence is

that discretionary tax increases of exactly this have nothing to do with the business cycle, the evidence of christy romer, the former chairman of the economic advisers is they are three times more detrimental to the economy than equal that spending changes. if you look at this act as a whole from that perspective, the tax increases negative impacts far outweigh any possible benefit. >> thank you. >> the gentleman side has expired. the gentlelady from tennessee, ms. black, will require five minutes. >> thank you. thank you again, panel for being here. looks like i'm the last would have but the audience will still hear this question. and all you can answer this question but i think mr. womack, you particularly talk about health care savings accounts. and continually the administration has claimed the health care law is giving americans more freedom and their health care choices. and in reality this law is going to force many americans to buy a product which is a government t? find health care product. in addition to that, president

obama also promised the american people if they like the current health care insurance that they would be able to keep it. but as we see in the law, it will limit the use of health care savings accounts. and being in the medical field for a number of years, for years now, i think that one of the things that we've seen that has driven the cost of health care up is we've taken the consumer out of the driver's seat. and they're not making choices. and i was very excited about maybe expanding this product because it would give an opportunity to put somebody back in the seat that wants to be in the seat, and would also give more opportunities for different vehicles rather than a set type of insurance that most employers do have an offer to their employees. mr. womack, i think you're the one that mentioned about how the health care savings accounts, and all you can respond, about where you feel that this might help companies if they were given that choice to use those

as compared to being forced into a certain product or certain type of care. >> thank you. i may not million, believe it or not. we were faced with a huge premium increase this last year and i can't remember the number because we were getting and they were so many different numbers but it was in the neighborhood of 30% we decide to go head and looked at an hsa, and we did begin to offer an hsa as an option to our managers. i have my own edge essay story. my wife had an mri order to recently by the hospital. at a cost of $1100. someone said you need to shop at around. so we went out to a diagnostic facility, literally just down the road and got the same procedure for $350. you know, truthfully, i don't know that we would have even thought about that had we not

been using a hsa where we were spending the money out of our account ourselves. that type of story gets told over and over and over in hsa. they're just huge benefit. when you put the individual more in touch with her own spending, they will find ways to control it. and they get to keep that money in the account and roll forward. it's a beautiful plan. it should not be impeded. we shouldn't do anything to have her hsas. thanks for the question. >> i would say very quickly, i have a similar story. we put the health savings accounts in six years ago, and the first year the employees resisted it, did not like it. but over time have grown to appreciate those take care of themselves, have seen their savings accounts grow. and i too have seen what employees have exams or scanning type of tests to be done and were able to go online and

literally save a couple thousands of dollars because they were able to research it themselves and it was an incentive there to do so. >> yes, mr. holtz-eakin. do you have a comic? >> i don't have the business experience, but certainly in the alternative reforms that were envisioned in the debate leading up to affordable care act, one version is to put consumers at the centerpiece of this one-fifth of the economy in the same way they have driven the other four fifths to be the strongest a comment on the planet. and then require insurers and providers to compete, and that's a very different vision that what we see in this law. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> gentlelady yield back. the gentleman from new york. mr. rangel is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and let me take this panel for sharing, especially those who

work every day in dealing with employees. tell me, both as you, and certainly the chamber advocating repeal of the law that the president signed come is that correct? >> yes, it is. >> and you don't have a plan that you are recommending. strike that. do you think we're better off off without any changes in the law than to enforce or to amend the existing law? >> i could say from my vantage point, the small business owner, i look at it as action reaction. what congress has passed, i've seen far more significant negative reaction to any positive that this will bring to

my employees. >> i can understand that, but my question, and i don't have any experience at all in hiring employees, is that as a businessman, and i know you can't speak really on this issue, mr. womack, but for yourself and your visitors, you would rather see the government just stay out of it rather than to amend or try to correct the existing law, is that your position? >> i guess i've gotten used to the government being in the middle of things and i don't say that sarcastically. we anticipate some sort of change. >> do you have -- i'm concerned that if we just stop this, all of your employees one way or the other cover but some type of health insurance? >> i don't believe so. >> you do have employees that are uninsured that you would want to see in church, as anybody would, right?

>> absolutely. the problem is -- >> you have any idea as to how you would want to ensure these people that are uninsured, other than what has been recommended and passed by the congress? >> no. and the reason is very simple. you know, we're talking about more money than is available. we don't have the money. >> and so, listen, the problem we are facing is sharp differences of opinion here. the national business group on health indicates that, that they don't think they can get a better solution to the problem in our lifetime, during our lifetime, if they get repeal or get it, we will have to start all over again and we will be worse off. and so, i think generally speaking every nation truly

believes that access to health care is important for the strength and security of the country, and that our workforce should be better educated, and be exposed to preventive care and health care. you want that. you are just saying you can't afford it. >> absolutely. >> well, one way or the other a government is going to make certain that it is affordable. we consider that as a national obligation and goal, all industrialized countries do it, not because of compassion, but even in the question of competition we do believe that educated workforce and a healthy workforce is more productive. i can understand how you cannot afford to do what basically you would like to do, but you just can't leave those people out there hanging that have no insurance at all.

we find out that personal lives and families are shattered, bankruptcies, not because of you, and not because of the employee that faces serious illness. so if you wanted to help them, and i truly believe you do, it doesn't help the family to say hey, my boss is great, he just can't afford to help me out in this crisis, known. i believe a lot of people disagree, but i truly believe we have an obligation to at least give access to health care, one way or the other. and if you don't like this way, i would be believe you have some type of an obligation as businesspeople that have the experience that we don't have, generally speaking, not just to lead these people out there hanging. and to say that no insurance is better than what we have come i don't really think that's a

legitimate -- i don't think it's fair to us to say all the things we have done wrong and not have any positive suggestions how we can take care of those employees that you want to take care of. >> mr. rangel, and this is a dilemma that's been discussed for years, and so, you know, i don't take any offense to your comment. >> the gentle this time is expired if we can sum it up very quickly. >> the problem is in a nutshell, the only solution, if you ask employers in our industry, i want to speak for my industry, if you speak of employers to pick up that burden now, it's a crushing complete disruption of our industry, and we can't turn on a dime. >> the gentleman's time has expired. i want to thank mr. holtz-eakin for testifying. i understand you have a previous engagement you need to go to, too late for. >> that's correct, mr. chairman.

>> if any of our mirrors have any further questions for him they can submit that in writing. >> i would be delighted and apologize for having to leave. >> yes, the gentleman is recognized. >> before you go, mr. holtz-eakin, i'm going to send to you some inquiries about the form, and i would like very much if you could respond. >> i would be happy. >> you're a sister organization, as i understand it, of the american action network. >> that is correct. >> let me just finish. i want to tell him what i'm singing. i was told he would be here until noon. and so as i said, i think your

website and that of the network says your sister organizations -- >> yes. >> and we know the action of the network -- >> if the gentleman conclude. >> doctor holtz-eholtz-eakin has indicated that he will respond by letter. >> i want to let him know in advance. >> the gentleman from michigan will have his inquiry answered. >> okay. so i just want you to know so it doesn't take you by surprise, i'm going to ask you if you will reveal the sources of the income of the forum. will you do that? >> i will comply with the bylaws of the forum and with the u.s. tax laws. i am an attorney and i will get your question, look at them -- >> the gentleman will respond -- the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia,

mr. price will require for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i apologize for not being here earlier, and i'm sorry or that mr. holtz-eakin has to leave, but i wanted to just make a comment about some of the taxes in the provisions that are stifling the innovation. the medical device tax, as we all know when you tax something you get less of it. and in a medical device tax i believe in many believe that that increase in taxation that will significantly decrease innovation and affect remarkably high-paying jobs that have wonderful benefits to our society, and i think that that's a direction we want to look at. the estimates are that 2.3% increase will be passed onto consumers either directly or indirectly also. but i appreciate mr. olivo, mr. womack being here. and i want to talk more about the consequences may be mr. lee,

if you want to talk about your business yourself, this bill has all sorts of requirements and stipulations and mandates that every single business of this country, employer in this country has to look at. how much time have you spent in trying to make certain that you're going to be able to comply, what kind of cost to make certain you will be able to comply? and what incentives is the bill providing you that might not be necessarily beneficial to your business? >> i have personally spent hours of time, i could better spend managing my business reading the health care bill. i haven't read it in its entirety, but interpreting it and using the resources i have with business organizations in trying to interpret how it's going to affect me. your question was as far as exactly -- >> what have you determined? how is it going to affect you speak was just at every level.

just my concerned about hiring new employees, the cost that goes into hiring an employee, it's not just his weight. the health care costs are such an integral component of what it costs me, when that is unknown and as always legislation hanging out there, it makes me more conservative and say maybe i don't need that employee at this point in time. >> said the continued uncertainty and potential rules and regulations that will be passed on leave you less able to expand your business or to hire new employees come is that an accurate statement? >> without a doubt. >> mr. womack, my sense has always been that there are some perverse incentives within the bill itself that make it so that employers look at the situation and say it's going to cost me more to provide health coverage for my employees, why should i do that? should i just let them fall into the exchange. are you hearing from that from your members? i wonder if you might expand. >> absolutely.

again, we can't afford the coverage, so we are absolutely going to have to look at the penalties. we have a real concern that our insurance company that we have talked to are not going to allow us to continue to offer coverage to our salaried staff based on rules very similar to 401(k) rules regarding highly compensated employees. so that means that really do a whole other avenue, you know, we either offer insurance to everyone or drop it for everyone. we have 50 families on health insurance now in our company, and it's an important part of what we offer as a benefit package. >> so the statement we heard throughout this whole discussion, if you like what you have you can keep it may not necessary be true in your business? >> absolutely. >> would you expand or to have any thoughts on the incentives for other businesses, small businesses to move individuals,

their employees, from the coverage that they currently have to the exchange? >> well, you know, i measure that penalty really at $2800, $2000 is not tax deductible. you have to count on the taxes to pay the penalty. i cannot imagine in the boardrooms across the u.s. that people are looking at $15,000 remains for employers or $2800. very quickly you do the math and you ought to drop that coverage. it may not be just that simple math. and maybe some sort of an event where you have an issue with an interest company or you have a 40% rate increase, and that's finally, enough is enough. >> aren't you in the real world obliged to drop that coverage? because your competitors will do so and you are at a competitive disadvantage? >> i would say that offering insurance is a significant

benefit that helps make us more competitive. we always want to offer the insurance. we just can't afford it. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from kansas, ms. jenkins, is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. on a panel before you, we had the chairman of the council of economic advisers, dr. goolsbee, testified. and during his testimony, i noted that he said this, the affordable care act has already begun to help small businesses become more competitive by making health insurance more accessible and more affordable. mr. olivo, you're a small businessman. could you give me an example of how the act has helped you, has already begun to help you become more competitive? >> unfortunately, i could not give you an example.

all i can tell you is that our existing insurance which employees like the coverage is no longer available, and our insurance premiums have continued to rise at double-digit percentage for the coming year. >> if they haven't, in fact, already begun, can you give me an example of how you will see, how you expect them in the future to cause you to have a more competitive health insurance that is accessible and affordable plan? >> i don't see how it's going to help us come offer a plan that is more competitive. my concerned with the exchange is, is that they are not true exchange in the form of competition. they are still heavily mandated types of policies. so there's not real true competition leading and residing, working in new jersey, i believe it's the third highest insurance rates in the nation. we've had guaranteed access,

community rate since 1993, and i can tell you when that law was instituted, i've been running the country since 1988, i have seen a direct correlation with our health care costs beginning to rise from when that guaranteed access was put into place. so i just don't see anything that's going to make the premiums less expensive. >> okay. also, in dr. goolsbee is testimony, he said this, the affordable care act can be a significant benefit to the job market by easing the burden of health care costs on small businesses. so once again as a small businessman i was hoping you could tell us that approximately how many jobs that you be able to create, thanks to the savings that you will incur? >> and i can say for my company specifically with 45 employees, we are not eligible or any sort

of tax credit at which he i believe was referring. >> thank you. mr. womack, i was home in my district last week, and visited several major employers who have over 50 employees. and there was a consistent message i was receiving this day that they were frustrated with the regulations coming about due to this bill. and one particular that they mentioned was that they were being required to provide lactation rooms if they employed more than 50 employees. and several of them were concerned, they had multiple locations, one location only had three men working at it. if they were required to provide a lactation room for those three men, because overall, their

employees totaled more than 50. i just wonder if you have any concerns about this particular regulation or others within this bill? >> i do know. thank you for informing me of that regulation. i wasn't aware of that, and, of course, no surprise? there are so many things buried in the law that we don't seem to be aware of the. i don't know how to react to that one in particular, but later got all the little things on and on creates commits amount of uncertainty and quite frankly, depression amongst the business community, just wondering how we're going to cover that all. >> is there any under -- estimated cost for your business to meet all of these? i guess if you didn't know about this one, you probably don't know about others to really adequately estimate --

>> we're looking at that big bill. and we are not counting the small ones right now. the big bill is frightful enough. >> okay. if the affordable act isn't getting it done for you, the republicans had an alternative bill and we are toward reforms expanded, sfa, fha's, access pools, what other ideas do you have for us to? >> the gentlelady's time is expired. i recognize the ranking member, mr. levin for five minutes. >> thank you very much. and we really appreciate your coming. i regret dr. holtz-eakin had to leave. and i'm sending him a letter today, and since this was a public hearing, i will make that letter public. and i expect him to give us an

expeditious response. but again, i very much respect your different views. everybody brings different experiences, and we need to tap into them. so let me ask you, mr. womack, how many employees do you have? >> approximately 900. >> and how many of them have insurance? >> about 50. >> and all of the 50, are they in a certain category? the? >> they are either salaried management people or office staff. >> so none of your employees who are not in management or in office staff have health insurance through their work of? >> that's correct. >> you would be required to provide health insurance under this new law of? >> direct. or pay the penalty. >> or pay the penalty.

so your 800 or so are part of the 50 million who have no health insurance in this country? >> that's correct. >> have you inquired into what the cost would be to ensure the? >> yes. i have run those numbers many times. >> and you find it too expensive? >> it's much more than we earn. >> and so, therefore, is trying to get control of health care costs will would be potentially helpful to you in terms of having your employees covered? >> absolutely. the problem is the number has grown to his eyes were even if you cut in half, which is not going to happen, but even if you got that number in half it's beyond our beyond our ability to pay. >> how many of them, do you know, are covered by some kind of a public program?

>> i have no idea. >> do you know what percentage are women? >> not off the top of my head, nose or. >> just roughly. >> i'm going to guess roughly half. >> do you know what happens when they get ill? >> they go seek treatment and you know, local provider, and they get treatment. >> how do you know to get treatment? >> we hear the stories. >> you don't have any systematic way of knowing? >> no. >> do they go to emergency rooms? >> probably, or their local doctor. >> and they go to local doctor who doesn't charge them anything? >> no. they go to a local doctor who does charge them something. >> what is the average wage of your non-salaried, nonoffice

employees? >> it's approximately $9 an hour. >> okay. mr. olivo, you have a high deductible plan? >> that is correct. >> what is the deductible? >> it very. i mean, well, roughly within $100 i would say the current deductible for an individual is $1500, and for family it is $3000. >> so they pay the first 1500? >> that is correct. >> or 3000. >> correct. >> i have no further questions. >> the gentleman yields back. i know recognized for five minutes the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulson. >> thank you mr. kildee. let me thank both you for taking the time to coming to ensure your small business background and experiences, go through a pretty lengthy hearing.

isolate a touch of something because i know mr. holtz-eakin last night the president said we needed a nation of innovators and leaders. during the speech he reminded us of what it takes to compete for jobs and industries. and as entrepreneurs i can appreciate that especially. but he did say and i agree we need to out innovate, out educate and out of the rest of the world program to make america the best place on earth to do business. there is one american history i have to mention because it's a minnesota successor as one that's the innovation and growth and health care field, medical devices. we heard about that, medical technology industry. that's an industry that employs about half a million individuals and routinely revolutionizes patient care. and for joint health care law doesn't let a new $20 billion tax innovation on this industry. i will call that one company, boston scientific which employs more than 5000 individuals in my home state of minnesota has asked me that tax will cost the

company an additional $100 million a year and up to 2000 jobs. it will also cause substantial cutbacks in the research and development budget which is the origin that we are all this innovation comes from that the president talked about in his speech last night. knowing that 62% of the medical technology industry in small businesses, small businesses like yourselves. you took an idea, took the risk, started it out. i just really worried that we are killing an industry that is going to be very difficult to jumpstart and bring back your, we can't afford to lose it. and so just when we have to keep that innovation here, i had to make the comment because mr. goolsbee mentioned earlier one of the benefits of that tax is a part of the legislation was going to basically allow millions of patients now to access these devices and features. i think the reality is we look at now in massachusetts which was the model option, or modeled

upon the legislation was bill. there was no increase in device utilization at all. this was i think suggested it i want to follow up with you with the health savings account and flex spending account portion as because we know in health care institute new caps on popular flexible spending accounts, fs a's, the individual use. and health care savings accounts or purchases of over-the-counter medications without a doctors prescription. you mentioned earlier about as an employer what some of those results would be cut or some of the detriments of the changes in why would mean billy got 10 million americans that use fsas and 35 million americans using fsas -- hsas and fsas. dissipation perspective. you are employed. this is a small business that wants to have an additional option. am a patient perspective what

does that offer some ideas for your employees rather than just the employer? >> i said before we've had the health savings account for six years, and i have witnessed how it has improved my employees incentive to better manage not only their health, but how they choose to go about obtaining health care. as i said before also, the first year was very rough in the sense that beat these people were raised on hmos and they did not like having to they wanted $50 initially to go to a doctor. but over time as they see the health savings account start to build up and they see if i take better care of myself i can get off his medication and now i save money, it is certainly improve how they go about purchasing the health care. >> mr. womack, do you want to comment as well? >> i think that anytime he that

you allow people to accumulate money in an account like an hsa for the purpose of spending on their extensive, it becomes a huge incentive for them to really manage all those low-cost. sometimes those little hidden costs can be significant. and just, you know that when you have the money in your account you get to keep it, you have a very big incentive to manage your costs. >> and, mr. guerre, thank you for the testament. i just want to comment i have talked to many small companies, they feel like they've had the rug pulled out from underneath them. they will have to make a huge adjustment now as the law has been change. i would rather see us have an expansion of hsas and fsas to control costs. i yield back, mr. guerre. >> i thank the gentleman. at this point everyone in the

committee has gone through inquiring. haven't acquired of this panel, we will leave that open. [inaudible] >> i am aware. the gentleman from california would be recognized after i inquire. mr. olivo, you currently indicated you have 45 employees, and prior to the recession you had 54 employees. and i assume, like most businesses, you would like to grow your business. but under the democrats health care law, if you have less than 50 employees, you are not subject to the employer mandate tax. will that have an impact on your decision to hire more workers? >> without a doubt it will. it will put me in the position

that not only questioning whether i should expand, or slow down the rate at which i expand to make me consider, but also puts me in a position that once i reached the 50 employee mark and they even need to provide health care or pay a penalty, as we mentioned previously, the penalty currently is less than my premium. and, unfortunately, that is a scenario i will have to look at. >> i might mention i was talking to an employer in my own district in redding, california, who is in the same situation, that he had about 45 employees, and just knowing that made a difference when he was going to go or not. you also mention in your testimony you currently provide health benefits to your employees, and that you paid 100% of the premium for employers who choose high deductible plans. you also contribute to these employees health savings accounts. could you elaborate further on

the benefits of pairing a high deductible plan with a health savings account, and what would be the impact on you and your employees if this kind of coverage is no longer available under obamacare? >> that is something with the savings that we been able to gain with the reduced premiums from the health savings account. we have been able to contribute certain years to our employees accounts, which really helps them going towards paying that deductible. so there are some years that not only are we picking up the cost of the premium, but we are picking up approximately two-thirds of the costs towards their deductible. so for all intents and purposes their first thousand dollars is covered under the plan. i reduce a health savings account have just been a huge benefit to us toward managing the escalating premium costs. i would sit in say that's the sole answer, but without a doubt

if we did not have the ability to offer health savings account for the past six years, i would not be able to pay anywhere close to 100% of my employees premiums. >> i thank the gentleman. i now recognize the gentleman from california, mr. thompson, for five minutes to inquire. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just want to point out a 9-dollar employees under best case scenarios is making around $15,000 a year. and i don't care where you go for your health care, on $15,000 a year, chances are you fall under that category of uncompensated care. so it's not being done -- it's not being paid for out of pocket and it's not being provided for free. it is factored into what is driving up costs for your soured employees, for everyone else who buys a policy, or anyone else

who pays out of pocket. mr. chairman, i would like to submit for the record a letter that i have that i just got a copy of it. it's from 275 economists from all over the country, including three nobel laureates, for council of economic advisers, a former cbo chief, and to john bates clark prizewinners. and the letter states speedaisspeedaish without objection the letter will be put in the record. >> i just want for the folks you know, it says that we write to convey our strong conclusion that leading inflation, the patient protection and affordable care act of 2010 will significantly strengthen our nation's economy over the long haul, and promote more rapid economic recovery in the immediate years ahead. also, mr. chairman, i would like to point out a letter that the secretary of health received, an entity that you're very familiar

with, i believe as we get some benefits from this, the calpers organization in our home state of california. which is the nations largest nonfederal government purchaser of health care. and in the later they say, and ago, they believe that key elements of the national health care reform represent a fundamental and positive shift in the way health care will be purchased and delivered into the united states. together, they will dramatically shape the future of health care in our country, and ultimately benefit everyone, closed quote. they say that more specifically that the provisions regarding retired folks in 2011, that they will save approximately $200 million based on the reimbursement rate to more than 115,000 early retirees, their spouses and their surviving

spouses, and their dependents. they have also submitted written testimony as well, in which they discuss that this year they will spend $6.7 billion on health care benefits for 1.3 million active and retired state and local government employees and their families. further testified that the overall structure of the law which focuses on constraining the skyrocketing cost of health care in our country while providing quality and ensuring health coverage for tens of millions of uninsured, some of those, those $9 our employees who cannot buy of care, who fall into the uncompensated health care costs that the rest of us all pay for is the right policy prescriptions for this group. the largest nonfederal government purchaser of health care in the country, its members, and our country at

large. i would also ask for unanimous consent to submit a copy of this letter for the record, mr. chairman. >> without objection. >> thank you. and i yield back the bowels of my time. >> the gentleman yield back. recognized for five minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman, ethic you both for taking time away from your families and your businesses to come here and provide us with perspective from where you sit. your testimony, your verbal testimony earlier reminded me of discussions i had with local constituents, both small businesses and restaurant owners and retailers. in fact, a restaurant owner operator said to me perplexed, we are did 30 hours come from in federal law? full-time is always 40 hours and suddenly it's a 30 hours. mr. womack, he had 900 employees. i hope that you reconsider and

come to ohio, we can change this piece of legislation. i'm from central ohio. my first job was at mcdonald's so i understand the perspective of the restaurant business. when i was working at mcdonald's, a number of the people i worked with were under the age of 21, were on the parents policy. i was as a 16 euro. the number of the adults were women who had coverage through their spouse. so my question to you is, and i have to come is how many employees now do you have that will be impacted by this new regulatory framework of 30 hours at the time come if you could answer that. and how me, i'm sure it's a guess at this point since you don't have the figures in front of you, employees that you have better teenagers at your restaurant, or college age students, who have coverage through their parents? are maybe a spouse who has coverage through another spouse. >> i think my best guess, and it

is purely a guess on the numbers, but my best guess is about 20, 25% of our staff are under the age of 20, or 21, and substantial number our employees are people who are second owners, bring in a second income into the family. and we know just anecdotally, especially our service staff, they are the second owner and they have, you know, their spouse has coverage elsewhere. >> so, and correct me if i'm wrong, you have a number of people who are already covered, whether they be teenagers working at first job or a spouse with insurance and they are the second owner. these costs, additional costs on to your business will create a situation where some point in time you'll have to choose whether or not the person gets a raise, whether or not they get other benefits, or whether or not you hire somebody?

>> sure, absolutely spent how many people could you hire in a higher -- in ohio if this law had been passed? what was the projection unit before this law became, this bill became law? >> are playing here is to open 12, 13 more restaurants in ohio, in central ohio. >> thanks for the good news. >> and we think that, you know come if we have to cease development, unit him if there is no changes and we had to stop development, you are looking at 260-300 full-time jobs and hundreds of part-time jobs. and then there's also the construction and all the other things outside of our company. >> mr. olivo, your testimony brought home a call i got right after the election from a constituent. he was on his cell phone screaming at me, regarding a meeting that he just came out of with his tax lawyer and his tax accountant. he had 51 employees, and they

were giving him a briefing on the new health care lives of other regulations. and the gist of the if you can figure out over the next year how to get under 50, did not have to comply with this new regulation, or our recommendation is to put all your employees if you're still over 50 in the government exchange rather than continue to private health care you provided today. which obvious he goes against the premise of the debate which if you like what you have you can keep it, or that is isn't a bill that disincentivize is entrepreneurs from creating more jobs. and why he was young and he was with ohio's him unchecked unemployment over 10% come he is getting advice he should not hire more people, but how to higher less people. or put people in the government exchange, which you didn't want to do. but from a competitive

perspective and cost of doing business and trying to survive as a business, i think you talked about it already but can you share with us as an entrepreneur how frustrating it is for you, whether it is a state regulation or federal regulation, inhibit your ability to project long-term growth and how to grow your business rather than figuring out how to abide by all these new rules, what that does to your spirit as a doctor been? >> not just. no, just to give you an idea, we purchased a new piece of equipment. they were fixed payment. i will have the luxury of going back to my bank and saying my expenses are more, my health care costs are more than expected. i have to make those payments. i have to leave myself a margin in which my calculations may not be exact. when there is this much unknown regarding health care law, it really causes me to be much more conservative. it's affecting how much i am willing to invest into the company and grow it.

and delicate a better understanding of what's happening. >> i would like to submit for the record, if i may, a letter dated january 18, 2011, from 239th economists, and they write, just one sense, we believe patient protection and affordable care act is a threat to u.s. businesses and will place a crushing debt burden on future generations of americans. >> without objection. i just want to ask a simple question of both of you are we've heard testimony today, some of it very technical, just on balance, does this health care legislation help you create jobs and help you grow your business is, or does it make it harder for you to grow jobs and expand your business is? >> from my point of view, what my concern is that i know many on this committee want to provide health care coverage for everybody and say how i would

lead to some that i would not provide health care coverage for. my fear is an employer is going saying i had to eliminate your position because i can't afford your position anymore. that's what my concern is. >> all right. mr. womack? >> the reality is it just gives business people to death. anytime you have this level of fear and uncertainty, we quit, we quit growing. we tightened up. you know, we have to have a reserve. we can't go out to the edge financially and then suddenly have $5 for gasoline our commodity prices go through the roof and have no margin, no cushion to survive. so just makes it more and more conservative, and that means training, pure and simple. >> thank you both but i think at this time all members present had a chance to acquire of this panel. i want to thank you both very much for your thoughtful

testimony, and for the effort you put into provide livelihoods and prosperity to employees that you have. i know the difficult responsibility that is that you carry around every day. so i want to thank you for taking the time away from those endeavors to be here helping enlightened this committee. and with that, this hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> i need to say for the record i philosophically have always been proposed a taxpayer dollars being used for political advocacy of any kind. >> in the house of a, any

taxpayer financing of presidential campaigns and party conventions. follow the entire debate and the final to vote online with c-span congressional chronicle with timelines and transcripts of every house and senate session. congressional chronicles at c-span.org/congress. >> our live coverage of the u.s. senate gets underway momentarily. the senate meeting today to consider a number of changes to senate operating rules. those rules will range from filibusters to amendment considerations to the ability of senators to secretly block legislations. votes on those little oceans will take place this evening. senators will pause today at 12:30 p.m. and recess for lunch meetings and will continue those debates on several. live coverage now of the u.s. senate here on c-span2.

the chaplain, dr. barry black, l lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, we lift our heartso you, the giver of wisdom and strength. guide our lawmakers through the deliberations of this day. give them wisdom to work for jue and to advance your kingdom on earth. may they set a course for this nation that unites people in dedication to truth and righteousness. lord, empower them to meet today's joys

with gratitude, its difficulties with fortitude, and its duties h fidelity. teach them to toil and to ask for nothing more than to know they're pleasing you. we pray in your merciful name. amen. the presiding officer: please jn me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clek will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., january 27, 2011.

to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable tom udall, a senator from the state of new mexico, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader or his designee. mr. reid: following leader remarks the senate will begin en bloc consideration of several resolutions to change senate rules. there will be up to eight hours of debate. prior to a series of stacked roll call votes in relation to the resolutions. the senate will recess from 12:30 to 2:15 to allow for a caucus. it is my understanding democrats and republicans will be holding meetings today during that hour. if all time is used the series of votes will begin around 8:00 p.m. tonight. however, we expect time to be yielded back so votes can begin earlier. senators will be notified if and when time is yielded back and when the votes are expected to begin. mr. president, s. 192 is at the desk and due for second reading.

the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill. the clerk: s. 192, a bill to repeal the job-killing health care law and health-care related provisions in the health care, education and reconciliation act of 2010. mr. reid: mr. president, i would object to further proceedings with respect to this legislation. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. reid: it's my understanding now, mr. president, as soon as the clerk announces the order for the day that the eight hours will begin to run. is that right, mr. president? the presiding officer: that is correct. the majority leader is correct. under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions which the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 8 amending the standing rules of the senate to provide for cloture to be

invoked with less than a three-fifths majority after additional debate. s. res. 10 to improve the debate and consideration of legislative matters and nominations in the senate. s. res. 21 to amend the standing rules of the senate to provide procedures for extended debate. s. res. 28 to establish as a standing order of the senate that a senator may -- that a senator publicly disclose a notice of intent to objection to any measure or matter. s. res. 29 to permit the waiving of the reading of an amendment if the text and adequate notice are provided. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader or his designee. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the clerk begin calling a quorum call -- calling a quorum and the time be equally divided. mr. president, if there are quorum calls during this debate, i would ask the time be equally

divided to both sides during those quorum calls? the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

you. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: it is my understanding we have more reporting to be done by the clerk on matters that will come before the senate. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the clerk will report the two amendments that are in order. the clerk: the senator from new mexico, mr. udall, proposes amendment number 1 to s. res. 10 and the senator from oregon,

mr. merkley, proposes number 2 to s. res. 21. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that the prior order from the chair be put in place again and there be a quorum call that would begin now and the time charged equal. equally. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. reid reid: i ask consent thl of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent because of the delay here that the -- the recess not start until 1:00 rather than 12:30 today. i ask consent. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: and i appreciate very much the courtesy of my two friends, the distinguished senator from new mexico, mr. udall, and my dear friend from oregon, mr. merkley, for being understanding. we had some word changes. you know, we're all tied up on words and so